This study demonstrates the influence of religious practices on job engagement in employees, suggesting work ethics play a key role.
Comprehensive human resource practices are increasingly recognized as strategic mechanisms for enhancing job engagement. Religiously oriented approaches offer distinct advantages, as they align with employees' intrinsic beliefs and motivations, thereby framing work as an expression of spiritual commitment. However, the effects of each dimension of religious human resource practices on employee job engagement, as well as the role of individual-level factors such as work ethics, remain underexplored. The present study investigates the influence of four key dimensions of religious human resources practices which include religious recruitment and selection, training and development, remuneration and compensation, and performance appraisal, on employee job engagement. Furthermore, this study introduces religious work ethics as a moderating variable in the relationship between religious training and development and employee job engagement. A total of 418 respondents were surveyed, and the data were analysed using partial least squares structural equation modelling. Findings indicate that all dimensions of religious human resource practices exert a positive and significant effect on employee job engagement. Moreover, religious work ethics were found to significantly moderate the relationship between religious training and development and employee job engagement. Theoretically, this research contributes to the growing body of literature in organizational psychology by providing empirical support for the integration of religious values within human resource frameworks. Practically, the study offers actionable insights for top management to design contextually relevant strategies based on predetermined dimensions that foster deeper employee engagement.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nasution et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: