From Learning to Engagement: Exploring Pathways to Job Engagement Among Higher Education Faculty

Higher education intuitions are instrumental in developing skilled human capital, fostering innovation and contributing in national growth. Realization of these objectives largely depends on highly engaged faculty members who are emersed in the pursuit of learning and growing. To examine the predictors of faculty engagement, data was collected from 222 higher education faculty members of India. PLS-SEM through Smart PLS was used to analyse the proposed relationship. The results showed a positive significant relationship between job engagement, learning goal orientation, perceived organizational support, and use of emotion, where, learning goal orientation landed as the most influential predictor factor. The findings reveal that organisational and personal factors both are instrumental in faculty engagement. The results provide significant implications for higher education institutions that seek to enhance faculty engagement and improve teaching standards to meet the future global demands

Job engagement, Learning Goal Orientation, Perceived Organisational Support, Emotional Intelligence

1. Aiken, L. S., West, S. G., & Reno, R. R. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. sage. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2007). The job demands‐resources model: State of the art. Journal of managerial psychology, 22(3), 309-328. https://doi.org/10.1108/02683940710733115 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Balducci, C., Schaufeli, W. B., & Fraccaroli, F. (2011). The job demands–resources model and counterproductive work behaviour: The role of job-related affect. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 20(4), 467-496. https://doi.org/10.1080/13594321003669061. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Bonaiuto F, Fantinelli S, Milani A, Cortini M, Vitiello MC, Bonaiuto M (2022), "Perceived organizational support and work engagement: the role of psychosocial variables". Journal of Workplace Learning, Vol. 34 No. 5 pp. 418–436, doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/JWL-11-2021-0140 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Chin, W. W. (1998a). Commentary: Issues and opinion on structural equation modeling. MIS Quarterly, 22(1), 7–16. https://www.jstor.org/stable/249674. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Cho, G., Hwang, H., Sarstedt, M., & Ringle, C. M. (2020). Cutoff criteria for overall model fit indexes in generalized structured component analysis. Journal of marketing analytics, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41270-020-00089-1 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Choudhary, N., & Jain, S. (2025). A systematic literature review to explore the antecedents of employee engagement among remote workers. Journal of work-applied management, 17(1), 50-66. https://doi.org/10.1108/JWAM-11-2023-0136. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Cohen, J. (2013). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences: Academic press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Demerouti, E., Bakker, A. B., Nachreiner, F., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2001). The job demands-resources model of burnout. Journal of Applied psychology, 86(3), 499. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.86.3.499 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Dweck, C. S., & Leggett, E. L. (1988). A social-cognitive approach to motivation and personality. Psychological review, 95(2), 256. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Eisenberger, R., Cummings, J., Armeli, S., & Lynch, P. (1997). Perceived organizational support, discretionary treatment, and job satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(5), 812–820. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1037/ 0021- 9010. 82.5. 812. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Eisenberger, R., Shanock, L. R., & Wen, X. (2020). Perceived Organizational Support: Why Caring About Employees Counts. Social Science Research Network, 7(1), 101–124. https://doi.org/10.1146/ANNUREV-ORGPSYCH-012119-044917. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Eisenberger, R., Stinglhamber, F., Vandenberghe, C., Sucharski, I. L., & Rhoades, L. (2002). Perceived supervisor support: Contributions to perceived organizational support and employee retention. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 565–573. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021‐9010.87.3.565. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(3), 382–388. https://doi.org/ 10.1177/ 002224378101800313. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Geisser, S. (1974), “A predictive approach to the random effect model”, Biometrika, Vol. 61, pp. 101-107. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Gold, A. H., Malhotra, A., & Segars, A. H. (2001). Knowledge management: an organizational capabilities perspective. Journal of Management Information Systems, 18(1), 185–214. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Green Jr, P. I., Finkel, E. J., Fitzsimons, G. M., & Gino, F. (2017). The energizing nature of work engagement: Toward a new need-based theory of work motivation. Research in Organizational behavior, 37, 1-18. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Guerra Muñoz, M. E., Romero Ramirez, R. T., & Zuluaga Guerrra, F. D. (2024). Emotional intelligence, job satisfaction, and work engagement at a public university. In A. Hamdan (Ed.), Technological innovations for business, education and sustainability. Emerald Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/978-1-83753-106-620241015. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2011). PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 19(2), 139–152. https:// doi. org/ 10. 2753/ MTP10 69- 66791 90202. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Hair, J. F., Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., & Mena, J. A. (2012). An assessment of the use of partial least squares structural equation modeling in marketing research. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 40(3), 414–433. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/s11747- 011- 0261-6. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Henseler, J., Hubona, G., & Ray, P. A. (2016). Using PLS path modeling in new technology research: Updated guidelines. Industrial Management and Data Systems, 116(1), 2–20. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-09-2015-0382. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Janssen, O., & Van Yperen, N. W. (2004). Employees' goal orientations, the quality of leader-member exchange, and the outcomes of job performance and job satisfaction. Academy of management journal, 47(3), 368-384. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Jin, M. H., & McDonald, B. D. (2017). Understanding Employee Engagement in the Public Sector: The Role of Immediate Supervisor, Perceived Organizational Support, and Learning Opportunities. The American Review of Public Administration, 47(8), 881–897. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074016643817. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Kaur, R., & Randhawa, G. (2024). How to ameliorate employee engagement among government school teachers? Empirical evidence. International Journal of Educational Management, 38(6), 1630-1648. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-09-2023-0484 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Kurtessis, J. N., Eisenberger, R., Ford, M. T., Buffardi, L. C., Stewart, K. A., & Adis, C. S. (2017). Perceived organizational support: A meta-analytic evaluation of organizational support theory. Journal of management, 43(6), 1854-1884. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Lan, T., Chen, M., Zeng, X., & Liu, T. (2020).) The Influence of Job and Individual Resources on Work Engagement Among Chinese Police Officers: A Moderated Mediation Model. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 497. https://doi.org/10.3389/FPSYG.2020.00497. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Law, K. S., Wong, C. S., & Song, L. J. (2004). The construct and criterion validity of emotional intelligence and its potential utility for management studies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(3), 483–496. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.89.3.483. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Malathi, M., & Padhy, P. C. (2024). Perceived organizational support for the employee engagement of MSMEs with dual mediating effects of innovative work behavior and emotional intelligence. Multidisciplinary Reviews, 7(10). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Mehta, P., & Kaur, H. (2025). Investigating the relationship between perceived organisational support and employee engagement in public universities: Moderating impact of gender and designation. International Journal of Public Administration, 48(4), 280-298. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Mori, K., Adi, N. P., Odagami, K., and Nagata, T. (2024). Bridging perceived organizational support with learning motivation and work engagement: the mediating role of focus on opportunity. J. Occup. Health 66:uiae024. https://doi.org/10.1093/joccuh/uiae024. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5),879–903. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Reynell van der Ross, M., Olckers, C., & Schaap, P. (2022). Engagement of Academic Staff Amidst COVID-19: The Role of Perceived Organisational Support, Burnout Risk, and Lack of Reciprocity as Psychological Conditions. Frontiers in Psychology, 13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.874599,4 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. Rozkwitalska, M., Basinska, B. A., Okumus, F., & Karatepe, O. M. (2022). The effects of relational and psychological capital on work engagement: the mediation of learning goal orientation. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 35(3), 616-629. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOCM-07-2021-0222. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. Schaufeli, W. B. (2015). Engaging leadership in the job demands resources model. The Career Development International, 20, 446-463. https://doi.org/10.1108/CDI-02-2015-0025. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

35. Schaufeli, W. B., & Bakker, A. B. (2003). The Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES). Unpublished manuscript, Department of Social & Organizational Psychology, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

36. Schaufeli, W. B., & Bakker, A. B. (2010). Defining and Measuring Work Engagement: Bringing Clarity to the Concept. In A. B. Bakker, & M. P. Leiter (Eds.), Work Engagement: A Handbook of Essential Theory and Research (pp. 10-24). New York: Psychology Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

37. Schaufeli, W. B., & Salanova, M. (2007). Efficacy or inefficacy, that’s the question: Burnout and work engagement, and their relationships with efficacy beliefs. Anxiety, Stress, & Coping, 20(2), 10615800701217878 177–196. https://doi.org/10.1080. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

38. Schaufeli, W. B., Salanova, M., González-Romá, V., & Bakker, A. B. (2002). The measurement of burnout and engagement: A confirmatory factor analytic approach. Journal of Happiness Studies, 3(1), 71–92. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015630930326. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

39. Schaufeli, W. B., Shimazu, A., Hakanen, J., Salanova, M., & DeWitte, H.(2019). Anultra-short measure for work engagement: The UWES-3 validation across five countries. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 35(4), 577–591. https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/ a000430. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

40. Stone, M., 1974. Cross-validatory choice and assessment of statistical predictions. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Methodological), Vol. 36, pp. 111-133. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2517-6161.1974.tb00994.x. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

41. VandeWalle, D. M. (1997). Development and validation of a work domain achievement goals instrument. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 8, 995–1015. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164497057006009. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

42. Vasumathi, A., & Sagaya, M. T. (2017). The impact of emotional intelligence on work life balance: an empirical study among the faculty members' performance in the private universities at Tamil Nadu, India. International Journal of Services and Operations Management, 27(3), 293-323. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJSOM.2017.084437. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

43. Wong, C.-S., & Law, K. S. (2002). The effects of leader and follower emotional intelligence on performance and attitude: An exploratory study. The Leadership Quarterly, 13(3), 243–274. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1048-9843(02)00099-1. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

44. Zahoor, N., Donbesuur, F., Christofi, M., & Miri, D. (2022). Technological innovation and employee psychological well-being: The moderating role of employee learning orientation and perceived organizational support. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 179, 121610. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

45. 刘欣, & Li, X. (2025). Perceived Organizational Support, Emotional Labor, and Professional Identity in Preschool Teachers: Moderating Role of Psychological Capital. International Journal of Sociologies and Anthropologies Science Reviews, 6(6), 85–94. https://doi.org/10.60027/ijsasr.2026.8221. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Assessment of the Role of Artificial Intelligence in Repositioning TVET for Economic Development in Nigeria
• Teachers’ Use of Assure Model Instructional Design on Learners’ Problem Solving Efficacy in Secondary Schools in Bungoma County, Kenya
• “E-Booksan Ang Kaalaman”: Development, Validation, and Utilization of Electronic Book in Academic Performance of Grade 9 Students in Social Studies
• Analyzing EFL University Students’ Academic Speaking Skills Through Self-Recorded Video Presentation
• Major Findings of The Study on Total Quality Management in Teachers’ Education Institutions (TEIs) In Assam – An Evaluative Study