Quantitative analysis finds psychological capital and role clarity significantly boost work engagement in staff, suggesting actionable insights for institutions.
This study examines the relationship between psychological capital and role clarity with work engagement among staff at the Global English Educational Institution. Grounded in the Job Demands–Resources (JD-R) framework, psychological capital is conceptualized as a personal resource comprising self-efficacy, hope, optimism, and resilience, while role clarity represents a job resource reflecting employees’ understanding of responsibilities and expectations. A quantitative cross-sectional design was employed, involving 77 staff members, including teaching and administrative personnel, using a total sampling approach. Data were collected through standardized self-report questionnaires and analyzed using multiple linear regression. The findings indicate that psychological capital and role clarity are both significantly associated with work engagement (p < 0.05). Psychological capital demonstrated a stronger statistical contribution compared to role clarity. Simultaneously, both variables explained 43.9% of the variance in work engagement, indicating a moderate level of explanatory power. These results suggest that both personal and job resources are relevant factors linked to employees’ engagement levels. However, given the cross-sectional design and reliance on self-report data, the findings should be interpreted as correlational rather than causal. The study is also limited to a single institutional context, which may restrict generalizability. Overall, this study provides empirical support for the JD-R framework within an educational service setting and highlights the potential relevance of strengthening psychological capital and clarifying work roles, while emphasizing the need for further longitudinal and multi-context research.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Aziz et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: