Data_Sheet_3_Bottom-Up Interventions Effective in Promoting Work Engagement: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.docx

Background: Promoting work engagement is of interest to organizations across sectors due to the associated positive outcomes. This interest warrants research on the evidence of work engagement interventions. Intervention research increasingly advocates a bottom-up approach, highlighting the role of employees themselves. These workplace interventions often encourage employees to identify, develop, and make use of workplace resources. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to investigate the effectiveness and potential underlying mechanisms of these bottom-up, resource-developing interventions.
Method: Systematic searches were conducted in the online databases Web of Science, Academic Search Complete, Business Source Ultimate, PsycInfo, PsycArticles, SCOPUS, and Google Scholar. Publication year range was 2000–2020. Eligibility criteria were defined using PICOS. To be eligible for the systematic review, the intervention study identified had to aim at promoting working individuals’ work engagement by developing workplace resources from bottom-up. Work engagement had to be measured using the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale. The systematic review included one-, two-, or multiple-armed – randomized or non-randomized – intervention studies with various study designs. Further, a meta-analysis was conducted on a sub-set of the studies included in the systematic review. To be eligible for the meta-analysis, the studies had to be two- or multiple-armed and provide the information necessary to compute effect sizes.
Results: Thirty-one studies were included in the systematic review. The majority reported that overall work engagement increased as an effect of the intervention. The evidence regarding the sub-components of work engagement was scattered. Potential underlying mechanisms explored were intervention foci, approach, and format. Dimensions of satisfaction and performance were identified as secondary outcomes. Participant experiences were generally described as positive in most of the studies applying mixed methods. The meta-analysis showed a small but promising intervention effect on work engagement (24 studies, SMD: −0.22, 95% CI: −0.34 to −0.11, with I2=53%, indicating moderate inconsistency in the evidence).
Conclusion: The synthesized evidence suggests that bottom-up, resource-developing interventions are effective in the promotion of work engagement. The meta-analysis suggests that focusing on strengths use or mobilizing ego resources and adopting a universal approach increase intervention effectiveness.

背景：鉴于工作投入（work engagement）可带来诸多积极成果，各行业组织均高度重视员工工作投入的提升，这种关注也使得开展工作投入干预措施有效性的相关研究具有必要性。现有干预研究愈发倡导自下而上的实施路径，强调员工自身的主体作用，此类职场干预通常会引导员工识别、开发并利用职场资源。本系统综述与元分析旨在探究这类自下而上式资源开发型干预措施的有效性及其潜在作用机制。
方法：本研究通过Web of Science、Academic Search Complete、Business Source Ultimate、PsycInfo、PsycArticles、SCOPUS及Google Scholar等在线数据库开展系统检索，检索文献的发表年限限定为2000年至2020年。采用PICOS原则确定纳入与排除标准。纳入本系统综述的干预研究需满足以下条件：以自下而上的方式开发职场资源，以此提升在职个体的工作投入；且工作投入的测量需采用乌得勒支工作投入量表（Utrecht Work Engagement Scale）。本系统综述纳入了多种研究设计的单组、两组及多组干预研究，涵盖随机对照与非随机对照研究。此外，本研究对系统综述纳入的部分研究开展了元分析，纳入元分析的研究需满足：为两组或多组设计，并提供可用于计算效应量的必要数据。
结果：本系统综述共纳入31项研究，其中绝大多数研究表明，干预措施可有效提升个体的总体工作投入，但针对工作投入各维度的研究结果较为分散。本研究探讨的潜在作用机制包括干预聚焦点、实施路径与干预形式，同时将满意度与工作绩效确定为次要结局指标。在采用混合研究方法的多数研究中，参与者的干预体验均被描述为积极正向。元分析结果显示，该类干预对工作投入具有小幅但颇具潜力的积极效应（共纳入24项研究，标准化均数差SMD=-0.22，95%置信区间CI：-0.34~-0.11，I²=53%，表明研究证据存在中等程度的异质性）。
结论：综合现有证据表明，自下而上式资源开发型干预措施可有效提升员工工作投入。元分析结果进一步显示，聚焦于优势利用或调动自我资源，并采用普适性实施路径的干预方式，可提升干预效果。