Fun times: the relationship between fun and workplace engagement
| Published date | 04 April 2016 |
| Pages | 332-350 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/ER-03-2014-0027 |
| Date | 04 April 2016 |
| Author | Barbara Plester,Ann Hutchison |
| Subject Matter | HR & organizational behaviour,Industrial/labour relations |
Fun times: the relationship
between fun and
workplace engagement
Barbara Plester and Ann Hutchison
Department of Management and International Business,
University of Auckland Business School, University of Auckland,
Auckland, New Zealand
Abstract
Purpose –The idea of workplace fun seems positive, straightforward and simple but emerging
research suggests a surprising complexity and ambiguity to this concept. Drawing on recent literature
and empirical data, the purpose of this paper is to use three different forms of workplace fun: managed,
organic and task fun to examine the relationship between fun and workplace engagement.
Design/methodology/approach –Using an ethnographic approach, the qualitative data originated
from four different New Zealand organizations, within different industries. Organizations included a law
firm, a financial institution, an information technology company and a utility services provider. Data for
this study were collected from semi-structured interviews with a range of participants in each company.
In total 59 interviews were conducted with approximately 15 originating from each of the four organizat ions.
One full-time month was spent within each company experiencing the everyday life and behaviours at all
levels of each organization. The specific focus of the research is organizational culture and humour and
during analysis findings emerged that linked to engagement, fun, disengagement and the concept of flow.
Findings –This paper offers exploratory findings that suggest some specific connections between
the concepts of fun and engagement. Empirical connections between these concepts are not currently
apparent in either engagement or fun research, yet the data suggest some firm associations between them.
The exploratory findings suggest that some forms of workplace fun offer individual employees a refreshing
break which creates positive affect. Participantsperceive that such affect results in greater workplace and
task engagement. Additionally the data show that some people experience their work tasks as a form of
fun and the authors link this to a specific form of engagement known as “flow”(Csikszentmihalyi, 1975;
Moneta, 2010). The authors suggest an organizational-level effect, where workplace fun creates enjoyment
which stimulates greater overall engagement with the team, unit or organization itself. Conversely the data
also suggest that for some people managed or organic fun (see Plester et al., 2015) creates distraction,
disharmony or dissonance that disrupts their flow and can foster disengagement.
Practical implications –The ambiguityand complexity in the relationshipbetween these concepts is
an emerging topicfor research that offers a variety of implicationsfor scholars and practitionersof HRM
and organizational behaviour. The authors contend that workplace fun potentially offers practitioners
opportunities for fostering a climate of high engagement which may include most employees and thus
create additional workplace benefits. Additionally through highlightingemployee reactions to different
types of fun we suggestways of avoiding employee disengagement, disharmony and cynicism and the
associated negative effects.
Originality/value –The conceptof fun is not empirically linked with currentengagement research and
the authors assert that workplace fun is an important driver of employee engagement. The authors
identityengagement at the individualtask level and further extend engagementresearch by emphasizing
that fun has the potentialto create engagement at the team, unit or organizational level. Thesediffering
levels of engagement have not thus far been differentiated in the extant literature.
Keywords Engagement, Fun, Organization, Flow
Paper type Research paper
Employee Relations
Vol. 38 No. 3, 2016
pp. 332-350
©Emerald Group Publishing Limited
0142-5455
DOI 10.1108/ER-03-2014-0027
Received 19 March 2014
Revised 15 October 2014
27 January 2015
Accepted 9 March 2015
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/0142-5455.htm
The authors would like to thank Professor Peter Boxall for his guidance in the early stages of
developing this paper. The authors also would like to thank the two anonymous reviewers for
their suggestions and encouragement and similarly Editor Dennis Nickson for his guidance.
332
ER
38,3
Introduction
Intuitively, having fun and enjoying oneself at work would seem to foster or create
greater workplace engagement –yet the concept of fun has not been strongly
empirically linked with current engagement research and literature. From an empirical
study into workplace humour, fun and organizational culture, we provide exploratory
data that link the concepts of fun and engagement. Specifically, this paper addresses
the research question:
RQ1. What is the relationship between the concepts of fun anengagement in
organizational contexts?
Our qualitative data gathered from four different New Zealand organizations, suggest
that the relationship between fun andengagement is significant, and ourexploration into
the relationship extends current engagement models by proposing that fun influences
engagement at two distinct levels. First, using the concept of flow (Csikszentmihalyi,
1991, 1996) we suggest that fun can increase employee engagement with their actual
work task or role; and second we suggest that experiencing fun at work can increase
employees’camaraderie and enjoyment which enhances engagement with the overall
organization or work team.
However, adopting a cautious approach, we also warn that fun is complex, not easily
created, and cannot really be delivered as a “package”to employees. As conceptions
of workplace fun are socially constructed between organizational members and
boundaries are implicitly understood by socialized employees (Plester, 2009) we need to
understand fun as a multi-layered concept that is simultaneously collective whilst
being also experienced in an individual and personal way. Drawing on recent fun
research that theorizes fun as a tripartite model including organic, managed and task
fun (see Plester et al., 2015) we extend current research by developing the link betw een
workplace fun and engagement. Using the conceptions of fun presented by Plester et al.
(2015) we focus upon the forms of fun created by task absorption (or flow) which we
empirically link to workplace engagement. We compare task fun to fun that is
specifically organized or “managed”(Plester et al., 2015) and discuss the implications
that this has for the notion of engagement. This paper presents evidence suggesting
that when fun is perceived as forced it can create dissonance, distraction and foster
disengagement with the organization, work tasks or both. Our contribution in this
paper is in explicating the relationship between workplace fun and engagement.
Therefore we extend earlier conceptions of fun by assert ing that task fun
achieved through flow, creates specific forms of engagement that are beneficial to an
organization. Additionally, we show that organic fun is enjoyed by many employees
and offers a refreshing break that fuels re-engagement with work tasks but warn that it
can also distract other engaged employees. And finally we present the novel idea that
“managed or forced”fun although enjoyable to some employees, can also cause some
employees to disconnect or disengage from their organization and tasks.
Fun
There is little consensus regarding the meaning of “fun”(Blythe and Hassenzahl, 2003)
because what is fun (and/or funny) to an individual may be just as easily considered
offensive, demeaning and/or sillyto a different person. The term fun isoften confounded
with the concepts of humour, laughter, funny and joking, but is, in fact, a distinct but
overlapping concept. For example, while humour is said to occur when amusing stimuli
are contextuallyappropriate (Zillman and Cantor,1976), and a reaction such as a smileor
333
Fun and
workplace
engagement
To continue reading
Request your trial