Predictors of Work Engagement among Non-Teaching Personnel of A Private Higher Education Institution

Predictors of Work Engagement among Non-Teaching Personnel of A Private Higher Education Institution

Resty L. Picardo, DM, JD, MAN; Ivy Marie Embong; Paula Jean B. Bo-oc; Mary Jen B. Sameon; and Minerva E. Nicolas, EdD

Gullas College of Medicine, Inc

DOI: https://doi.org/10.51244/IJRSI.2025.120700198

Received: 16 July 2025; Accepted: 22 July 2025; Published: 19 August 2025

ABSTRACT

Work engagement is vital for companies and workers.  It creates a productive, profitable workplace.  Engaged workers are more productive, committed, and innovative, improving job satisfaction, turnover, and business results. There appears to be a limited study where work engagement is being predicted by personal characteristics among non-teaching personnel in a higher educational institution. This quantitative research made use of the descriptive, correlational (predictive) design to assess whether the personal characteristics predict work engagement of the non-teaching personnel in the Gullas College of Medicine, Inc. for the first quarter of quarter of 2025. Findings of the study revealed that majority of the respondents were belonging to the 18 to 35 years old age group while over half of the respondents were females and  majority of the respondents were single while over one third were married. Majority of the respondents were Catholics and were college graduates and just over one third of the respondents were medical education staffs. Just over half of the respondents had served the organization for one to three years. Overall, the respondents had a very high work engagement. In terms of vigor, dedication, and absorption, they were rated as very high. The personal characteristics of age, sex, marital status, religion, highest educational attainment, position, and years of experience did not predict work engagement. In conclusion, work engagement is not influenced by the personal characteristics of age, sex, marital status, religion, highest educational attainment, position, and years of experience. This means that work engagement can still be high no matter what the age, sex, marital status, religion, highest educational attainment, position, and years of experience of the person. In order to address the findings of the study a work engagement sustenance plan is proposed.

Keywords: Cebu City; Descriptive, correlational (predictive) design; Non-teaching personnel; Work engagement.

INTRODUCTION

Work engagement is a way to quantify how devoted and committed a person is to their job and the organization they work for. Employee engagement is not constant; it will fluctuate over time as an employee progresses through their time with the firm. Williamson (2024) asserts that when employees look forward to going to work each day and feel secure in the significance and value of their roles to the organization, engagement levels are high. Employees are more productive and eager to learn more when they have a clear idea of what they are supposed to be doing and find fulfillment in their work. They are aware of their place in the organization, how their work affects success as a whole, and they believe their opinions matter. They are confident that their employer will listen to them if they have an issue.

In a medical institution, the personnel is generally classified as academic (teaching staff) and non-teaching (administrative and support staff). While it is clear that the academic staff has a direct line of communication with the important stakeholders, such as students and parents, the non-teaching staff contributes enough support to improve the overall standard of service performance.  For instance, several bodies, including Human Resources, Medical Education Unit, Finance and Accounting, IT, Registrar, Student Affairs, Guidance, and Facilities, among others, are entrusted with vital goals required for the efficient delivery of academic issues. Work performance within the non-teaching personnel would involve the output of their designated work that caters to the improvement of the organization’s working environment. As stated, in non-teaching personnel in an organization, it involves tasks that would overlook the overall status or environment of the workforce and the workplace.

According to an Asian study, young employees’ general level of work engagement was mediocre. Male employees were more devoted and energetic than female employees. Greater dedication and absorption were shown by older employees and those with more work experience. There were notable variations in work engagement between age and work experience groups. The study emphasizes how crucial demographic characteristics are to young Vietnamese workers’ job satisfaction. To increase employee engagement and productivity, organizations should implement customized strategies that support new hires, cater to gender-specific needs, and capitalize on the experience of seasoned workers (Do & Phamb, 2024). Employee engagement was demonstrated locally by the findings of the Ramos et al. (2022) study. The degree of engagement among the employees does not significantly differ based on their department, gender, or position. Age and years of service have an impact on engagement, with the older and longer an employee has worked for the university, the higher their level of engagement.

Varying studies have different findings of the different personal characteristics influencing work engagement. Thus, the need to validate these findings, if these are true also to the locality. It had been observed that in the study where the study will be conducted there are several records of resignations and contracts being ended which are reflections of low levels of work engagement. As some instances, work engagement cannot really be assessed as there was no baseline information about this. The need to establish this baseline information is the primary reason for the conduct of this study in order to develop a work engagement enhancement plan that will introduce specific activities that can be incorporated in the staff development plan. Further, the conduct of this study is aligned with the eight sustainable development goals of decent work and economic growth. The researchers are hopeful that this work will be completed with the vision of producing an output plan that greatly contributes to the growth of the organization through improvement in the work engagement among non-teaching employees.

Research Objectives

The study aimed to assess whether the personal characteristics predict work engagement of the non-teaching personnel in the Gullas College of Medicine, Inc. for the first quarter of quarter of 2025.

The study specifically answered the following queries:

1. What was the personal characteristics of the non-teaching personnel in terms of:

1.1 age;

1.2 sex; and

1.3 marital status;

1.4 religion;

1.5 highest educational attainment;

1.6 position; and

1.7 years of experience?

2. What was the extent of engagement among non-teaching personnel in terms of:

2.1 vigor;

2.2 dedication; and

2.3 absorption?

3. Which personal characteristics predicted work engagement of the non-teaching personnel?
4. What work engagement sustenance plan was proposed based on the findings of the study?

Statement of Null Hypothesis

Ho: The personal characteristics do not predict the work engagement of the non-teaching personnel.

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES

Work Engagement. The results of the study showed that organizational performance in higher education is significantly and favorably impacted by vigor, dedication, and absorption. The results of the study also show that the degree of employee involvement affects how well study institutions perform. By focusing on the context of Ethiopian public universities, this study offers a novel viewpoint on the connection between employee engagement and organizational performance. This clarifies the unique dynamics and challenges that these institutions face. Additionally, by examining the connection between organizational performance and employee engagement, the study contributes to the existing body of knowledge while providing insightful recommendations for improving performance in Ethiopian public universities. According to a bootstrapping mediation analysis, meaningfulness’s impact on performance was explained by work engagement. Additionally, the relationship between meaningfulness and engagement was negatively moderated by task interdependence. This study addresses requests for researchers to investigate the significance of meaningfulness in the public sector and to pinpoint the major and situational drivers of work engagement (Khusanova et al., 2021).

No matter their age, sex, length of service, or job level, employees exhibit high levels of work engagement, according to a study by Arcadio et al. (2023). Nonetheless, there is a notable disparity in the degree of work engagement between the vigor dimension and the length of service variable. This demonstrates how their performance is impacted by their level of activity, regardless of how long they have worked for the company. Additionally, a noteworthy distinction was discovered between the job level variable and the dedication dimension. This indicates that some employees’ motivation at work is influenced by their position or level of employment. Therefore, the other variables mentioned did not show any significant differences. The study also found that regardless of age, sex, length of service, or job level, employees have a high organizational commitment. This finding suggested that workers are more dedicated to their work. Employee dedication also demonstrates that the business supports their professional objectives, which enhances organizational performance. Additionally, the study discovered a strong correlation between organizational commitment and work engagement. There is a correlation between employees’ organizational commitment and their overall level of work engagement. It was discovered that organizational commitment and work engagement were inseparable.

Higher levels of workplace well-being, employee development, and employee retention were linked to higher levels of employee engagement, which in turn led to higher levels of employee satisfaction, according to research findings by Sypniewska et al. (2023). The findings demonstrate how employee engagement mediates the relationship between employee satisfaction, retention, development, and workplace well-being. The findings of the Tugade (2023) study showed a moderate level of organizational commitment among employees, along with high levels of work engagement and job satisfaction. There was a significant correlation between employee work engagement and age, position, and monthly salary. Employee engagement rises with age, status, and pay. The degree of employee engagement and job satisfaction were also found to be significantly and strongly positively correlated. Practice-related implications are provided. According to the Cuyos (2023) study, employees have a high level of work engagement with their supervisors because they view them as personable and accessible. Regarding the team, they concurred that they are treated with dignity by their coworkers. They concurred that the organization’s vision and goals are crucial, and they see positive outcomes from their work in terms of their jobs. Additionally, it was discovered that the majority of work engagement components significantly affect the work performance sub-variables.

Profile of Respondents. Putting together a diverse team can seem like a difficult task, according to the Workhuman Editorial Team (2025). Making progress and advancements requires time, money, and resources. One of the many advantages of creating a more inclusive, equitable, and diverse workplace is that it can significantly increase the productivity of your business. According to respondents in a Forbes study, having a diverse workforce increased their productivity. Diverse workers contribute a variety of perspectives, working habits, and problem-solving abilities. The organization can boost performance, enhance workflow, and develop better solutions with the help of this abundance of knowledge.

Predictors of Work Engagement. According to the findings of Sudibjo and Riantini’s (2023) study, the best predictor of teachers’ work engagement is meaningful work. Furthermore, the best indicator of teachers’ meaningful work is their perception of organizational support. However, the direct correlation between teachers’ work engagement and perceived organizational support, as well as between servant leadership and teachers’ work engagement, has a greater impact than the role of meaningful work as a mediator in this study. Schools must thus give teachers the best support possible and make sure they can understand their work and see how it contributes to their high level of work engagement.

The findings of Gozon and Yango’s (2023) study demonstrated a multiple correlation between the respondents’ levels of retention, academic performance, and work engagement. The independent variable (degree of work engagement) was highly predicted. The R square value demonstrated that the variability of the dependent variable (retention level) can be explained by independent variables (work engagement and academic performance). The results of Sharma and Rajput’s (2021) study showed that respondents’ levels of engagement were above average. The findings indicated that age, marital status, designation, and employment status all significantly impacted the degree of work engagement. However, there was no discernible variation in work engagement according to years of experience, gender, or educational background. Age and years of service do not correlate with work engagement, according to Maake’s (2025) correlation analysis. In a similar vein, work engagement appears to be unaffected by education. The findings of John and Manikandan’s (2022) study showed that demographic factors such as type of school and length of teaching experience significantly affect work engagement. Indeed, a key component of employee motivation, job satisfaction, and performance is work engagement. As a result, it is crucial for any organization to identify its employees. The factors that predict work engagement have been the subject of several studies, most of which involved teaching staff. Research on assessing the variables that predict work engagement among non-teaching employees in educational institutions is scarce.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Design. This quantitative study made use of the descriptive, correlational (predictive) research design. The descriptive design was used in determining the personal characteristics of the non-teaching personnel as well as their work engagement. The correlational (predictive) design was used in assessing whether the personal characteristics predict work engagement of the non-teaching personnel.

Environment. The study was conducted in Gullas College of Medicine, Inc. The college was established to respond to the call for more physicians to serve the medical and health needs of the country. GCM, Inc. envisions becoming a top medical school and home of globally-competent and compassionate physicians dedicated to excellence and service to communities worldwide. The Gullas College of Medicine is a legacy of excellence and a beacon of hope for the future of medicine. The college is committed to providing its students with the highest quality education and training, so that they can become compassionate and competent physicians who will serve the people of the world.

Respondents. Respondents of the study were the non-teaching personnel of the institution. Currently, there were 150 non-teaching personnel. However, actual data gathering only comprised of 112 non0teaching personnel as some already resigned and some declined to participate with a retrieval rate of 75 percent.

Sampling Design. There was no sampling that will be instituted instead a complete enumeration will be done. All those who qualify based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria will be invited to participate in the study.

Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria. Included were non-teaching personnel of the institution who are at least three months employed regardless of age, sex or gender, religion, educational attainment, position, and years of service. Lastly, only those who provide voluntary consent will be able to participate in the study. There are no exclusion in the study for as long as the employee complies with the inclusion criteria.

Instrument. This study utilized a two-part questionnaire. Part one determined the personal characteristics of the non-teaching personnel. Part two of the instrument was an adopted standard questionnaire-The Utrecht Work Engagement Scale by Schaufeli and Bakker (2004). It is a 17-item instrument composed of three dimensions, namely: vigor (6 items), dedication (5 items), and absorption (6 items) It is answered using a seven-point Likert scale where 0 is never, 1 is almost never (a few times a year), 2 is rarely (once a month or less), 3 is sometimes (a few times a month), 4 is often (once a week), 5 is very often (a few times a week), and 6 is always (every day). The mean scale score of the three UWES subscales is computed by adding the scores on the particular scale and dividing the sum by the number of items of the subscale involved. A similar procedure if followed for the total score. Hence, the UWES, yields three subscale scores and/or a total score that range between 0 and 6. The internal consistency of the three scales of the UWES was good. That is, in all cases values of Cronbach’s alpha are equal to or exceed the critical value of .70 (Nunnaly & Bernstein, 1984 as cited in Schaufeli & Bakke, 2004). Usually values of Cronbach’s alpha for the scales range between .80 and .90 (Salanova et al., 2000 as cited in Schaufeli & Bakke, 2004; Salanova et al., 2001 as cited in Schaufeli & Bakke, 2004; Demerouti et al., 2001 as cited in Schaufeli & Bakke, 2004; Montgomery et al., 2003 as cited in Schaufeli & Bakke, 2004; Salanova et al., 2003a as cited in Schaufeli & Bakke, 2004; Schaufeli et al., 2003 as cited in Schaufeli & Bakke, 2004; Salanova et al., 2003b as cited in Schaufeli & Bakke, 2004).

Data Gathering Procedure. The study initially sought approval from the VP-Operations, Dean of the College of Medicine, and Human Resource Office. Following the approval, the study was forwarded to the Ethics Committee of the School for ethical approval. Once a notice to proceed was released, data gathering followed. A face-to-face intercept was utilized. All non-teaching employee were recruited based on the criteria and were asked to answer the questionnaire. This was done until all non0teachig employees were recruited. Data were then collated and subjected to statistical treatment. All data were presented in tables along with the interpretations, implications, and supporting literature and studies. All soft copies of the data were permanently deleted at the end of the study.

Statistical Treatment of Data. Frequency distribution and Simple Percentage were used to determine the personal characteristics of the respondents. Mean score and Standard were used to determine the work engagement of the respondents. Multiple Linear Regression was used to assess whether the personal characteristics predict the work engagement of the respondents.

Ethical Considerations. The study was submitted to the ethics committee for ethical approval prior to data gathering.

Presentation, Analysis, And Interpretation Of Data

Table 1 Personal Characteristics of the Non-Teaching Personnel

Personal characteristics	f	%
Age
18 to 35 years old	75	67.00
36 years old and above	37	33.00
Sex
Male	48	42.90
Female	64	57.10
Marital Status
Single	73	65.20
Married	39	34.80
Religion
Catholic	103	92.00
Protestant	2	1.80
Seventh Day Adventist	3	2.70
Others (Baptist, Unificationism, Santa Iglesia Filipiniana, and Born again Christian)	4	3.60
Highest Educational Attainment
High School Level	7	6.20
High School graduate	5	4.50
College Level	13	11.60
College Graduate	76	67.90
Post Graduate Level	9	8.00
Post Graduate Degree Holder	2	1.80
Position
Accounting Staff	7	6.20
Administrative Staff	22	19.60
Assistant of Quality Management Office	1	.90
Facilities and Maintenance Staff	14	12.50
Human Resource Specialist	3	2.70
Information Technology Staff	4	3.60
Laboratory Staff	7	6.20
Library Staff	3	2.70
Marketing Staff	3	2.70
Medical Education Unit Staff	35	31.20
Prefect of Discipline	1	.90
Registrar Staff	6	5.40
Student Academic Support Center Staff	1	.90
Visa Staff	5	4.50
Years of Experience
Below one year	23	20.50
One to Three Years	61	54.50
Four to Six Years	12	10.70
Seven to Nine Years	5	4.50
Ten Years and Above	11	9.80

Note: n=112.

The table shows that in terms of age, majority of the respondents were belonging to the 18 to 35 years old age group while the remaining over one third were belonging to the 36 years old and above age group. In terms of sex, over half of the respondents were female while the remaining almost half were males. In terms of marital status, majority of the respondents were single while over one third were married. In terms of religion, majoriry of the respondents were Catholics while the remaining few were distributed from being a Protestant, Seventh Day Adventist, and other religions (Baptist, Unificationism, Santa Iglesia Filipiniana, and Born again Christian). In terms of highest educational attainment, majority of the respondents were college graduates while few were at the college level. Few of the respondents were distributed at being in the post graduate level, being in the high school level, high school graduates, and post graduate degree holders.

In terms of position, just over one third of the respondents were medical education staffs while few were administrative staffs. The remaining respondents are spread from among the positions of Facilities and Maintenance staff, Accounting staff, Laboratory staff, Registrar staff, Visa staff, Information Technology staff, Human Resource Specialist, library staff, marketing staff, prefect of discipline, assistant of Quality Management Office, and Student Academic Support Center Staff. In order for a school to run different positions have to filled, this data implies that indeed in schools, there several positions that needs to be filled-in for it to be able to provide the needed service as an educational institution. In terms of years of experience, just over half of the respondents had served the organization for one to three years while almost a quarter had served for less than a year. Few had served the organization for four to six years and very few had served for seven to nine years and ten years and above.

The profile suggest that the school is characterized by a manpower that is so diverse. In modern times, this is the usual characteristics of an organization where it is composed of diverse individuals coming from different backgrounds and different personal characteristics. This indicates that individuals from diverse backgrounds have equal opportunities to contribute to and progress within the workforce. Putting together a diverse team can seem like a difficult task, according to the Workhuman Editorial Team (2025). Making progress and advancements requires time, money, and resources. One of the many advantages of creating a more inclusive, equitable, and diverse workplace is that it can significantly increase the productivity of your business. According to respondents in a Forbes study, having a diverse workforce increased their productivity. Diverse workers contribute a variety of perspectives, working habits, and problem-solving abilities. The organization can boost performance, enhance workflow, and develop better solutions with the help of this abundance of knowledge.

Table 2 Extent of Work Engagement among the Non-Teaching Personnel

Dimensions	Mean score	SD	Interpretation
Vigor	4.73	.862	Very High
Dedication	5.06	1.01	Very High
Absorption	4.47	1.01	Very High
Grand mean	4.75	.811	Very High

Note: n=112.

Legend: Parametric Score and Interpretation. A score of 0.00 – 0.86 is extremely low (never), 0.87 – 1.72 is very low, 1.73 – 2.58 is low (almost never, a few rimes a year), 2.59 – 3.44 is moderate (rarely, once a month or less), 3.45 – 4.30 is high (often, once a week), 4.31 – 5.16 is very high (very often, a few times a week), and 5.71 – 6.00 is extremely high (always, every day).

Overall, the respondents had a very high work engagement. An extremely high level of work engagement shows that an employee has a strong emotional and intellectual bond with their job and company. High levels of passion, commitment, and concentration follow, which boost output, add to the company culture, and encourage people to go above and beyond. Similar findings were made by Arcadio et al. (2023), who discovered that workers of all ages, sexes, job levels, and lengths of service exhibit high levels of work engagement.

In terms of vigor, this was rated as very high. Supporting this finding, the respondents believed that very often they felt bursting with energy, felt strong and vigorous, and when they get up in the morning, they felt like going to work. Moreover, they believed that very often they can continue working for very long periods at a time, they were very resilient, mentally, and always persevere, even when things do not go well. This implies that employees had very high levels of energy and mental toughness at work. In terms of dedication, this was rated as very high. The respondents believed that very often they found the work that they did full of meaning and purpose, they were enthusiastic about their job, their jobs inspires them, they were proud on the work that they do, and that their job was challenging. This implies that employees have strong feelings of purpose, zeal, inspiration, and pride in one’s work are all components of dedication. Lastly, in terms of absorption, this was rated as very high. Respondents believed that very often believed that time flies when they were working, forget everything else around them when working, they felt happy when they were working intensely, and they were immersed in their work. Additionally, they believed that very often they got carried away when they were working and that it was difficult to detach themselves from their job. This implies that employees had very high levels of sensation of being completely focused and contentedly absorbed in one’s activities is known as absorption.

According to the Cuyos (2023) study, employees have a high level of work engagement with their supervisors because they view them as personable and approachable. Additionally, Tugade’s (2023) study revealed a high degree of employee work engagement. Both individual and organizational success depend on employee engagement at work. Higher performance, better retention rates, and a more positive work environment are all results of engaged employees being more dedicated, productive, and satisfied with their jobs. On the other hand, low engagement can lead to a drop in overall organizational performance, higher absenteeism and turnover, and decreased productivity.

Table 3 Personal Characteristics Predicted Work Engagement

Variables	B	Std error	Beta	t	p value	Decision	Interpretation
(Constant)	4.471	.530		8.438	.000
Age	-.078	.217	-.046	-.360	.719	Failed to reject Ho	Not significant
Sex	.198	.169	.121	1.170	.245	Failed to reject Ho	Not significant
Marital Status	.086	.222	.050	.385	.701	Failed to reject Ho	Not significant
Religion	.006	.123	.005	.049	.961	Failed to reject Ho	Not significant
Highest Educational Attainment	-.024	.090	-.028	-.264	.792	Failed to reject Ho	Not significant
Position	-.013	.021	-.063	-.624	.534	Failed to reject Ho	Not significant
Years of Experience	.057	.087	.080	.659	.512	Failed to reject Ho	Not significant

Legend: Significant if p value is < .05. If R-squared value < 0.3 is None or Very weak effect size, if R-squared value 0.3 < r < 0.5 is Weak or low effect size, if R-squared value 0.5 < r < 0.7 is Moderate effect size, and if R-squared value r > 0.7 is Strong effect size.

The table shows that the p values for all the personal characteristics were greater than the significant value of .05. These values were interpreted as not significant leading to the decision of failing to reject the null hypothesis. Thus, the personal characteristics of age, sex, marital status, religion, highest educational attainment, position, and years of experience did not predict work engagement. The model summary revealed the following values: R = .168, R Square = .028, Adjusted R Square = -.037, Std. Error of Estimate = .82621, F = .432, Sig. = .880. Therefore, there was no regression model that was created. The finding imply that personal characteristics are not predictors of work engagement. No matter what the personal characteristics of the employee, work engagement can still be high. Beyond simple demographics, a variety of other factors influence the complex psychological state of work engagement. People differ in their motivations, personalities, and values, even within the same demographic group, which causes different levels of engagement. It can be challenging to identify consistent demographic trends in engagement because it can vary depending on circumstances, job roles, and individual experiences in the workplace. Age and years of service do not correlate with work engagement, according to Maake’s (2025) correlation analysis, which supports the findings. In a similar vein, work engagement appears to be unaffected by education. In contrast, Sharma and Rajput’s (2021) study found that age, marital status, employment status, and designation all significantly impacted the degree of work engagement. However, there was no discernible variation in work engagement according to years of experience, gender, or educational background. Additionally, the findings of John and Manikandan’s (2022) study showed that demographic factors such as the type of school and the duration of teaching experience significantly affect work engagement. This finding further means that there are other factors that may predict work engagement and this can be a solid ground for the recommendation where predictors of work engagement can be studied but not limited only to personal characteristics.

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Conclusion. In conclusion, work engagement is not influenced by the personal characteristics of age, sex, marital status, religion, highest educational attainment, position, and years of experience. This means that work engagement can still be high no matter what the age, sex, marital status, religion, highest educational attainment, position, and years of experience of the person. Findings of the study are reflective of the Theory of Work Engagement where employees had a high level of energy (vigor), having strong involved in their work (dedication), and being happily engrossed in their work (absorption). In order to address the findings of the study a work engagement sustenance plan is proposed.

Recommendations. Based on the findings of the study, the following recommendations are given:

Practice. The work engagement sustenance plan will be recommended for use in the school where specific activities therein may be incorporated in the strategic, operational, and staff development plans calling for its revision. A copy of the study will be provided to the Human Resource Department, Center for Research and Innovation and the school administrators. It will also be presented among department heads for dissemination purposes. Other institutions may also adopt the plan as they deemed it appropriate in their respective organizations.

Policy. Internal policies may be crafted to ascertain that work engagement activities become part and parcel in the development of operational plans as well as the staff development plan of the different department of an educational institution.

Education. The study findings can greatly contribute to the body of knowledge on work engagement involving non-teaching personnel. This can provide a reference to support studies on work engagement in different disciplines. As a whole the study can contribute to serve as an educational tool in discussing research design, sampling design, statistical treatment and including ethics in research.

Research. This research work will be published in a refereed international journal in order for the findings to be disseminated. Also, the study will be submitted for a possible oral or poster presentation in the annual research congress in the college or externally in any local or international research congress. Based on the new gaps discovered in the study, the following research titles are also suggested for future research studies.

1. Predictors of work engagement among non-teaching staff of a higher educational institution (in this study predictors will not be limited to personal characteristics but to other factors such organizational and psychosocial factors—such as leadership style, job demands, resources, support systems, and organizational culture—as possible predictors of work engagement);
2. Work engagement among non-teaching staff of a higher educational institution: A parallel mixed method;
3. A correlational study on the factors influencing work engagement among non-teaching staff of a higher educational institution (involving a more diverse sample in terms of age, tenure, and job roles and may also be a longitudinal study); and
4. A study on work engagement among non-teaching staff involving several higher educational institutions.

Work Engagement Sustenance Plan

Rationale

Engaging employees in their work is essential for both organizations and their workforce.  A positive, productive, and profitable work environment is fostered as a result of this element.  Employees who are engaged in their work are more willing to be innovative, committed, and productive, which ultimately results in increased job satisfaction, decreased employee turnover, and ultimately, improved business outcomes. Findings of the study revealed that there was a very high level of work engagement among the non-teaching staff, thus there is a need to sustain this and this is the very reason that this sustenance plan was created.

General Objectives

The primary purpose of this work engagement sustenance plan is to sustain the very high level of work engagement among non-teaching staff of the college.

Areas of Concern	Specific Objectives	Activities	Person’s responsible	Resources	Time Frame	Success Indicators
The need to sustain the very high levels of work engagement among non-teaching staff.	·       To sustain the high level of work engagement among non-teaching staff of the college.	Personally-initiated activities: ·       Read articles or view videos about work engagement. ·       Attend seminars or trainings about increasing work engagement. School-initiated activities: ·       Review, revisit, or revise the already established strategic, operational, and staff development plan to incorporate the different activities introduced in this plan. ·       Re-orientation and revisit of VGMO and Core Values of the school. ·       Continually adopt a communication system using online platforms departmentally and school-wide as well. ·       Promote a culture of appreciation, recognition, and teamwork. ·       Leaders should model engagement, communicate effectively, and be approachable. ·       Offer flexible work arrangements, such as hybrid or remote options, to support work-life balance. ·       Continually conduct recognition and reward of performing employees yearly ·       Strict implementation of the Staff Development Plan (departmental and school-wide) ·       Conduct seminars on Autonomy and Empowerment; Meaningful Work ·       Implement activities that prioritize employee well-being by providing mental health support through creation of a support group or celebrating the mental health week with different activities like the conduct seminar of Work-Life Balance ·       Continually engage employees in the Community Engagement activities such as feeding in the adopted community or medical missions. ·       Periodic evaluation of Employee Engagement Surveys as part of the Continuous Quality Improvement. ·       Continually engage employees in the different committees of the school. ·       Conduct departmental periodic meetings to discuss issues relating to work engagement. ·       Re-assess the level of work engagement six months following the implementation of this plan.	·       Non-teaching Staff ·       Department Heads of the Non-teaching Staff ·       Human Resource Director ·       School Administrators	·       Internet connectivity. ·       Desktops, laptops, tablets, or android phones. ·       Budget for the seminars or training (Php 10,000.00 / activity). ·       Strategic, Operational, and Staff Development Plans. ·       Mission, vision, and core values of the school. ·       Online platforms for communication (Whatsapp or messenger or Google). ·       Recognition and Rewards budget. ·       Instrument to measure work engagement.	·       Starting August of 2025 (start of the school year 2025-2026)	·       Saved articles or videos on work engagement. ·       Certificates of attendance or participation on seminars and trainings on work engagement. ·       Updated Strategic, Operational, and Staff Development Plans. ·       Revised and updated Strategic, operational, and staff development plans. ·       Approved schedule and budget for the recognition and rewards. ·       Approved schedule for medical mission or feeding in the adopted community. ·       Minutes of meetings. ·       Sustained very high levels of work engagement among non-teaching staff.

 REFERENCES

1. Arcadio, A. R., Diola, D. D., & Distor, J. M. S. (2023). Work engagement and organizational commitment of employees in Cavite, Philippines. Psychology and Education: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 8(7), 1-14. http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7905538
2. Bouchrika, I. (2024). Types of research design in 2024: Perspective and methodological approaches. https://research.com/research/types-of-research-design
3. Cuyos, M. M. (2023). Level of work performance and work engagement of employees in the city government of General Santos. International Journal of Advanced Research, 11 (Jan), 644-658. https://doi.org/10.21474/IJAR01/16062
4. Do, T. T., & Phamb, M. T. T. (2024). Exploring work engagement among young workers: The impact of gender, age, and experience. Multidisciplinary Review, 7, e2024194. https://10.31893/multirev.2024194
5. Gede, D. U., & Huluka, A. T. (2024). Effects of employee engagement on organizational performance: case of public universities in Ethiopia. Future Business Journal, 10, 32. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43093-024-00315-7
6. Gozon, J., & Yango, A. (2023). Teachers’ Work Engagement, School Performance, and Teachers’ Retention in Selected Private Schools in the City Schools Division of Santa Rosa, Laguna. Technium Social Sciences Journal, 44, 360-383. https://doi.org/10.47577/tssj.v44i1.8922
7. John, S. P., & Manikandan, K. (2022). Socio-demographic factors in work engagement: A study among upper primary school teachers. The International Journal of Indian Psychology, 10(4). https://doi.org/10.25215/1004.206
8. Khusanova, R., Kang, S.-W., & Choi, S. B. (2021). Work engagement among public employees: Antecedents and consequences. Frontiers in Psychology, 12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.684495
9. Maake, G. (2025). Relationship between demographic groupings, work engagement and performance management systems. South African Journal of Human Resource Management, 23(a2902). https://doi.org/10.4102/sajhrm.v23i0.2902
10. Raja, R., Potter, M. E., & Newland, S. H. (2014). Predictive design of engineered multifunctional solid catalysts. Chemical Communications (The Royal Society of Chemistry), 50(45), 5940-5957. https://doi.org/10.1039/C4CC00834K
11. Ramos, B., Fulong, L., Baptista, G., Sabaulan, J., Ramirez, R., & Taguba, R. (2022). Level of work engagement of employees of a private university in the northern Philippines during the COVID-19 pandemic. International Journal of Research in Human Resource Management, 4, 102-107. https://doi.org/10.33545/26633213.2022.v4.i2b.120
12. Schaufeli, W., & Bakker, A. (2004). UWES – Utrecht Work Engagement Scale. Preliminary Manual. https://www.wilmarschaufeli.nl/publications/Schaufeli/Test%20Manuals/Test_manual_UWES_English.pdf
13. Sharma, U., & Rajput, B. (2021). Work engagement and demographic factors: A study among university teachers. Journal of Commerce and Accounting Research, 10(1), 25-32. http://publishingindia.com/jcar
14. Sudibjo, N., & Riantini, M. G. D. (2023). Factors affecting teachers’ work engagement: The case of private school teachers in Jakarta Metropolitan, Indonesia. REICE. Revista Iberoamericana sobre Calidad, Eficacia y Cambio en Educación, 21(1), 119-137. https://doi.org/10.15366/reice2023.21.1.006
15. Sypniewska, B., Baran, M. & Kłos, M. Work engagement and employee satisfaction in the practice of sustainable human resource management – based on the study of Polish employees. International Entrepreneur and Management Journal, 19, 1069–1100. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-023-00834-9
16. Tugade, G. Y. G. (2023). Employees work engagement: Correlations with employee personal characteristics, organizational commitment and workplace happiness. International Journal of Multidisciplinary: Applied Business and Education Research, 4(1). https://doi.org/10.11594/ijmaber.04.01.14
17. Wiliamson, B. (2024). What is work engagement? LumApps. https://www.lumapps.com/employee-engagement/benefits-of-employee-engagement
18. Workhuman Editorial Team (2025). Cultural diversity in the workplace: What is it and why is it important? Workhuman. https://www.workhuman.com/blog/cultural-diversity-in-the-workplace/