MEANINGFUL WORK AND EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT ON EMPLOYEES: A META-ANALYSIS

Some of previous published research has shown a correlation between meaningful work and employee engagement. However, there is no research that reveals how true r and size effect are from the correlation of the two variables. This meta-analysis aims to measure the correlation between meaningful work and employee engagement by considering the effect size. The total sample of this research is 5281 people from 10 studies who are a significant positive correlation with employee engagement at a high level with 95% CI (0.681; 1.004). Furthermore, the result show that good in heterogeneity test and there was no publication bias,


INTRODUCTION
Company or organization is an open system where a company can't be separated from the its surrounding environment, both internally and externally.Human resources is one of the main element of internal environment of the organization (Samsudin, 2005).This element is carry out the function and duty to reach the organization's or company's goals.Laksmita (in idntimes.com, 2019) was say that by the change of organizational culture and this new era (globalization 4.0), there are some criteria that makes employe stay to work or loyal to one organization or company, like high loyalty, love the jon, has high integrity, and has critical ability.Goes along with it, there are some criteria also that must be have by the fit company, like has clear vision and mission.Care about the employee's status, has open communication with the employee and has health environment physically and mentally (Kessler Executive Search, 2020).
Good employee and good company create two sides relation between it called as engagement (Robinson, Perryman, & Hayday, 2004).Marwan (in linkedin.com, 2019) said that employee and company like a coin's side that engaged each other two reach the goals.Employee engagement is something that can make the employee will to give the best and more for their workplace.Alfes, et. al., (2010) said that there are three component pf employee engagement, intellectual engagement, affective engagement, and social/behavioral engagement.
Why this is important is because employe engagement nowdays is the trend consent by the top-performing companies (Oehler, 2015).Leaders from top company also see employee engagement is main aspect which become the company's responsibilities and function as good barometer forwards (Domicelj and Vartak, 2013).
Dale Carnegie Indonesia (2017) held the research to measure the employee engagement status in 1200 Indonesian employee from 6 big city, Jakarta, Surabaya, Bandung, Makasar, Balikpapan, and medan, was found that only 1 from 4 employee who surely work and engaged to the job.Oehler (2015) said that from gross domestic product and engagement trends graphic, the employee engagement could help country's economic level.
Albrecht, Green, dan Marty (2021) through the research was found that meaningful work has strong correlation employee engagement.Other strong correlation between meaningful work and employee engagement also has been found in bank employee (Ahmed, Majid, Al-Aali, dan Mozammel (2018).
Meaningful work is individual perception from the employee about the jobs, where it is useful and important to do (Rosso, et. al., 2010).Other definition about employee engagement is employee's experiences and feeling that the job is clear, fit with the skills and abilities, and give benefit to the employee and also the company (Steger, et.al., 2012).
The purpose of this meta-analysis is to measure the effect size of the correlation between meaningful work and employee engagement.Furthermore, in the meta-analysis, it will also see the symmetry or not about the distribution of scores, and if there any publication bias.

Protocol Design
This meta-analysis study was conducted to determine the true-r score and effect size of various study about meaningful work and employee engagement.The search for the study carried out until 2022, however the relevant studies only 2011-2021 because one of other reason.The study selection was carried out through several stages, namely identification, screening, and eligibility.Studies selection was conducted using PRISMA 2020 (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews) (Page et. al., 2020).

Search Strategy
Searching process for relevant study based on major sources by Google Scholar register and Research Gate.The keyword used are "meaningful work" and "employee engagement".

Inclusion Criteria
The basic criteria used in this meta-analysis are (1) quantitative studies, (2) involving meaningful work as the independent variable and employee engagement as the dependent variable, and (3) using English and Indonesian in the text.Exclusion Criteria Several criteria were not includes in the research for this meta-analysis, such as (1) letters to editors, (2) undergraduate and master thesis studies, and (3) other gray literature like procedings.Another consideration is statistical result that don't generate r, t, F, or R2 score, or using Chi-Square are not used as the studies involved in this meta-analysis.

Data Collection and Analysis
The research and literature was found by using some of keywords from source registers.Then, the studies found were selected independently.The inclusion criteria set before were being the way to sort the literature which are eligible or not, including the considerations of the statistical result.

Data Extraction
Data from literature source found were extracted based on pre-determined criteria.Extraction were also held independently.

Statistical Analysis
The study passed the selection process and was selected and analyzed for the correlation coefficient and number of the participants.Statistical findings in the form of scores in the form of F, d, t or R2 are then converted into r scores.After that, researcher calculate the effect size (z), variance (Vz) and standard error (SEz) where the results are then processed using JASP.The main things to do are to find the calculation of heterogeneity test, summary effect size, forest plot, funnel plot, Eigger's test, and fail-safe N test.

RESULT AND DISCUSSION
Based on the demographic data in Table 1, can be seen that all participants are employee from various country, such as Australia, Pakistan, India, Indonesia, Iran, South Africa, and North Africa.Some studies mention the mean age of participants, and some do not.Although, the age only use as support data and don't used in the meta-analysis calculations, so that's not a problem.The source of the scale used for the twi variables is come from various source.This is happens because of the development of variable costructs in various research settings.
At the ealy-stage search for this meta-analysis found 12 literature.After removing duplicates and considering inclusion and exclusion criteria, there are 10 studies from 7 literatures that considered eligible.The total number of participant are 5281 people.
Table 1.Characteristics of the Studies Used for the Meta-Analysis Figure 1.PRISMA Table 2 shows the result of Q statistic for the heterogeneity test.This meta-analysis use same kind of participant who are all have status as an employee in a company.For all participants, it appears that the 10 studies were heterogeneous (Q = 290.512;p < 0.001).

Table 2. Fixed and Random Effects
Random effect showed a significant positive correlation between meaningful work and employee engagement (z = 10.230;p < .001;95% CI [0.681; 1.004]).The relationship between meaningful work and employee engagement is r = 0.842.Clearer explanation is shown in table 3.This research also look at findings related to the evaluation of publication bias.
Refers to Figure 3, can be considered if the score show there is symmetrical or asymmetrical.However the distribution of scores in the funnel plot sometimes cannot be justified as symmetry or asymmetry.The solution is that other techniques are needed to determine the evaluation of publication bias.This mean that the distribution of scores in the meta-analysis for all sample related to the relationship between meaningful work and employee engagement is symmetrical.Another way related to the publication bias can be found through Fail -safe N. It refers to Table 5, that the score obtained for all participants is 13075 (p <0.01) which is greater than 5K + 10 = 60.This result indicate that there's no publication bias in the metaanalysis stydu of the relationship between meaningful work and employee engagement.
Table 5. File Drawer Analysis for Rosenthal's Formula This findings of this meta-analysis show that the true r score of meaningful work and employee engagement is in high level.This is can be happen because meaningful work can be take a role as the psychological mechanism by which resources influence engagement (Albrecht, Green, & Marty, 2021).Beside that, it might be the case that when employees ecperience support from a supervisor, they view the interaction as part of a formal relationship that is formalized by organizational structure.Rather than as an authentic interaction that contributes to the purpose and meaning of their work.
Employee who experience higher levels of meaningfulness of work are expected to engaged themselves in 'extra-role' behavior willingly.This is also make the employees have perception that offers them a feeling of belongingness and responsibility in whatever they work on.The employee adore their job or work and consider to being part of the organization and show an engagement (Kaur & Mittal, 2020).

CONCLUSION
The practical implication of the findings of this meta-analysis is that a company or an organization should be take a serious consent to the perception of their employee about meaning of their job, help them to find cleare purpose and benefit about the job to themselves and for company so can be build up the engagement feelings.This is useful for HR, HRD, could be other part to bring the employee find their meaning of work so they willing to do more for company's goal.The theoretical implication of this meta-analysis study is that meaningful work as one of the internal antecedents in understanding employe engagement in subsequent research.Besides, the other suggestion is to consider other internal variables, whether it is personality traits, emotional stability, self-regulation, self-management, etc.

Figure 2 .
Figure 2. Forest Plot for Depicting the Screening Process