【正文】 rred to as an “engagement gap” that is costing US businesses $300 billion a year in lost productivity (Bates, 2021。 Harter et al., 2021。中文 3219 字 本科畢業(yè)論文（設(shè)計(jì)） 外文翻譯 外文題目 Antecedents and consequences of employee engagement 外文出處 Journal of Managerial (7):p600619 外文作者 Alan M. saks. 原文 ： Antecedents and consequences of employee engagement Alan M. Saks. In recent years, there has been a great deal of interest in employee engagement. Many have claimed that employee engagement predicts employee outes, anizational success, and financial performance (. total shareholder return) (Bates, 2021。 Baumruk, 2021。 Richman, 2021). At the same time, it has been reported that employee engagement is on the decline and there is a deepening disengagement among employees today (Bates, 2021。 Johnson, 2021。s job. However, there is evidence that one39。 Richman, 2021。 selves to their work roles。 in disengagement, people withdraw and defend themselves physically, cognitively, or emotionally during role performances” (p. 694). Thus, according to Kahn (1990, 1992), engagement means to be psychologically present when occupying and performing an anizational role. Rothbard (2021, p. 656) also defines engagement as psychological presence but goes further to state that it involves two critical ponents: attention and absorption. Attention refers to “cognitive availability and the amount of time one spends thinking about a role” while absorption “means being engrossed in a role and refers to the intensity of one39。s attitude and attachment towards their anization. Engagement is not an attitude。s formal role performance rather than extrarole and voluntary behavior. Engagement also differs from job involvement. According to May et al. (2021), job involvement is the result of a cognitive judgment about the need satisfying abilities of the job and is tied to one39。s (1990) model, May et al. (2021) found that meaningfulness, safety, and availability were significantly related to engagement. They also found that job enrichment and role fit were positive predictors of meaningfulness。 and resources available was a positive predictor of psychological availability while participation in outside activities was a negative predictor. The other model of engagement es from the burnout literature which describes job engagement as the positive antithesis of burnout noting that burnout involves the erosion of engagement with one39。s (1990) and Maslach et al.39。s (2021) description of engagement as a twoway relationship between the employer and employee. One way for individuals to repay their anization is through their level of engagement. That is, employees will choose to engage themselves to varying degrees and in response to the resources they receive from their anization. Bringing oneself more fully into one39。s actions. It is more difficult for employees to vary their levels of job performance given that performance is often evaluated and used as the basis for pensation and other administrative decisions. Thus, employees are more likely to exchange their engagement for resources and benefits provided by their anization.. In summary, SET provides a theoretical foundation to explain why employees choose to bee more or less engaged in their work and anization. The conditions of engagement in both Kahn39。s (2021) model can be considered economic and socioemot