ArticleHeliyon2025
Measuring enablers and indicators of employee engagement: Internal validity of the Flow@Work engagement survey.
Article in Heliyon, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Workplace ostracism and job performance: revisiting the limits of employee engagement in addressing workplace exclusion.Scientific reports · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Employee engagement remains a growing interest in the academic research literature and especially in the practitioner-industry mainstream literature and practice. Despite the increase in literature on constructs of and associations between enablers and indicators of employee engagement, the empirical examination of employee engagement measures offered by the mainstream practitioner-industry market has received little attention. The study redresses this shortcoming by examining the internal construct validity and reliability of the Flow@Work Engagement Survey (FWES) as applied to a global aggregated cross-sectional data set of (N = 39 310) clients. We further employed structural equation modelling and relative weight analysis to assess the extent to which the proposed FWES engagement enabling working conditions functioned as predictors of the measure's employee engagement indicators on a randomly selected data subset of (n = 3000) clients. The study established the internal convergent and discriminant validity and reliability of the FWES. The findings contributed new insights to the engagement research literature by revealing the nature and relative importance of different engagement enablers in predicting employee willingness and commitment as indicators of organisational employee engagement. Practically, the study uncovers opportunities for future engagement research and well-informed employee engagement measurement and intervention planning in industry.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.