A survey measuring employee’s inclusion in Malaysia

1.1 Theoretical gaps

Because there is no universal agreement on inclusion theory in the published literature (Jejeniwa, Mhlongo, & Jejeniwa, 2024; Madera, Yang, Wu, Ma, & Xu, 2023), this study suggests a comprehensive approach to operational and sociocultural factors of inclusion. Furthermore, no research has been done to date on employee inclusion, inclusive leadership, psychosocial capital, and meaningful engagement in relation to employee inclusion.

The research bridges the theoretical gaps by being one of the pioneer study in Malaysia that investigates employee’s inclusion im a diverse multi-racial working environment post-COVID-19 pandemic. This study performs a holistic evaluation on employee’s psychological capital and awareness in determining employee’s inclusion at workplace. The study is important in building significant connections between meaningful engagement, inclusive leadership and.

The emergence of multicultural organizations gave rise to the concept of inclusion (Okatta, Ajayi & Olawale, 2024). Inclusion is also still being researched, even though it is openly discussed in practice. There is no consensus on what constitutes inclusion. It is limited for some to include disabled students in school environments (Park, Park, & Shryack, 2024).

2.1 Employee’s inclusion

Employee inclusion in an organization refers to creating a working environment where all employees feel valued, respected, and empowered to contribute fully to their jobs, regardless of their diverse backgrounds Okatta, Ajayi & Olawale, 2024). Organizations with a diverse workforce encourage employee’s inclusion through constructive conflict-resolution processes (Baumeister et al., 2002). These processes can help employees explore conversations with brainstorming sessions and various views (Moon, 2018). Employee’s inclusion at workplace have continued to evolve over time, with greater job involvement of employees with different education, socio-economic status, religion, marital status\,values, personality, and skills (Heitner, Kahn, & Sherman, 2013).

2.2 Awareness of inclusion

Awareness of inclusion refers to the subjective belief that we are effective in the lives of others (Okatta, Ajayi & Olawale, 2024). As a result, when others notice one’s presence and validate one’s actions, the individual perceives and interprets that they matter. Attention, importance, and dependence are the three dimensions of the awareness of inclusion (Im & Chung, 2023).

The feeling that one commands the interest or notice of another person is the recognition of one’s own presence (Im & Chung, 2023).

Previous research has found that employee’s inclusion in an organization is predicted by awareness of inclusion, and commitment and engagement are linked to organizational behaviour (Mor Barak, 2018). By examining perceptions of inclusion and meaningful engagement, researchers can develop approaches that consist of the overall organisational environment and culture that purposefully facilitate greater integration of the organisation with the communities and society it serves (Mor Barak, 2015; Okatta, Ajayi & Olawale, 2024).

2.3 Inclusive leadership

Inclusive leadership is concerned with the relationship that exists between leaders and followers to achieve a goal, in which diversity of thought and perspective is actively sought, valued, and incorporated into the discussion and decision. Leaders must advocate for and represent the diverse needs and values of their followers (Madera, Yang, Wu, Ma, & Xu, 2023). Leaders will create space for followers to feel safe, respected, and appreciated so that they can contribute fully without having to suppress or sublimate their identity (Okatta, Ajayi & Olawale, 2024). By removing barriers that cause exclusion and marginalization, it broadens members to think beyond assimilation strategies or organizational demography to empower and participate in activities (Park, Park, & Shryack, 2024).

Inclusive leadership has an impact on inclusion. Valuing others for their individuality enables the exchange of varied viewpoints, which results in diverse viewpoints being incorporated into decision-making as well as problem-solving processes (Sabharwal et al., 2019). Allowing employees, a voice and involvement in decision-making demonstrates a delegation of power which not only nurtures a feeling of belonging but also generates value in various voices and points of view (Mor Barak, 2018; Sabharwal et al., 2019). It is widely accepted to include uniqueness in the definition of inclusion; experts of this framework believe that employees do not need to surrender their distinctive characteristics to become valued members of the in-group (Mor Barak, 2015). Employees will have the assumption that their special contributions are appreciated and that they are motivated to participate fully because of this (Mor Barak, 2015). Inclusion is the major factor to innovativeness in heterogeneous workgroups since it fulfils employee’s need for uniqueness (Moon, 2018).

Employees in work environments who perceive their performance as a reflection of a higher power, such as their supervisor or the organization, feel as if they matter to their supervisor or the organization. Finally, dependence is defined as the belief that others rely on us (Simons et al., 2015). Employees can perceive success when others rely on their work or are a part of the team’s achievement. Employees can perceive they matter when others rely on their work or are a part of a team accomplishment because they are held accountable to the team and are expected to do their part and come through for the group. Madera, Yang, Wu, Ma, and Xu (2023) expands on the concepts of ego extension which is overlooked in his later work. The feeling that others are proud of another’s accomplishments or saddened by their failures is referred to as ego extension (Madera, Yang, Wu, Ma, & Xu, 2023). Ego extension is an increase in importance. Others become invested in one’s successes and failures when they care about their needs, thoughts, and behaviours.

2.4 Psychosocial capital

Researchers have also discovered psychosocial capital at different levels, including the individual (micro), the organisation as well as the society or the community (macro) (Gardner, Love, & Waller, 2023). Individually, social capital emphasizes interpersonal relationships.

According to Heitner, Kahn, and Sherman (2013), social capital in the workplace can be used in three ways: obligations and expectations, information flow, and uncertainty. Obligations and expectations are dependent on the working environment’s trust to expand relationships and resources (Ince, 2023). To provide a foundation for action, information must flow through the network structure. To achieve group efficacy, the presence of norms and sanctions must coexist to reduce the risk of uncertainty (Heitner, Kahn, & Sherman, 2013).

In social and psychological descriptions of inclusion, the concept of a feeling of belonging is an essential element of agreement. The fundamental need to belong, according to Baumeister and Leary, refers to the desire for individuals to establish interpersonal relationships with the others, which resulted in the desire to belong to social groups (Im & Chung, 2023). According to Madera, Yang, Wu, Ma, and Xu (2023), belonging happens when a person has frequented pleasant interactions with others that occur inside the sense of a long-term and stable framework of concern for the welfare of others.

Psychosocial capital is a key motive for employees perceived organisational membership, according to Gardner, Love, and Waller (2023). In an organisational context, a feeling of belonging is defined as the extent to which a worker sees themselves as one of the “in-groups” instead of the “out-group”. The in-group is the organization’s insiders, and treating employees differently inside this group generates the view that certain employees are more valuable to the organisation. Employees’ perceptions of out-group members, in contrast, are more expendable (Park, Park, & Shryack, 2024).

A lack of psychosocial capital has an adverse effect on cognitive processes and affects consciousness (Baumeister et al., 2005). Based on the literature, focusing solely on belongingness raises the risk of conformity and assimilation, especially among members of minority groups who feel compelled to conform to be accepted at work (Ince, 2023). Employees that engage in conforming behaviors are at odds with the values or demographics of the organisation or their work team. Individually, this will frequently result in emotional tiredness and a desire to leave. Furthermore, hostile work environments to diverse perspectives, behaviors, or beliefs; perceptions or minority status; and collectivism are the origin of unification and uniformity (Moon, 2018).

2.5 Meaningful engagement

The work engagement approach recognizes engagement as a psychological state, but it has also begun to examine engagement as the inverse of burnout to create a continuum of workplace well-being (Jejeniwa, Mhlongo, & Jejeniwa, 2024), where burnout was defined as tiredness, cynicism, and inefficacy, whereas engagement was described as energy, involvement, and satisfaction, as well as efficacy (Okatta, Ajayi & Olawale, 2024).

Meaningful engagement is an important concept that has been overlooked in the inclusion literature. Park, Park, and Shryack (2024) applies meaningful engagement by empowering oppressed groups and reducing discriminatory beliefs and practices among those with greater privilege and power (Kenny et al., 2018). Consciousness is made up of experiences that shape people’s behavior and attitudes as they encounter various circumstances, situations, or conditions. Employee behaviors are influenced by various levels of awareness of one’s own experience, policies, biases, and the behavior of others.

Employees with a high level of inclusive consciousness are expected to want to improve and maintain a sense of meaningful engagement for others. Inclusion necessitates deliberate choices and actions, which result in the ability to increase inclusion for others through meaningful engagement (Sabharwal et al., 2019). It influences how managers interact with employees in addition to making conscious choices and implementing decision-making processes. Simmons and colleagues discovered in a recent study that leaders who promote meaningful engagement can retain employees and interact in ways that go beyond the avoidance of discrimination and bias (Simons et al., 2015). As a result, meaningful engagement can be defined as being aware of mutual interaction concepts and practices at the workplace, as well as how they influence individual attitudes and behaviors (Brimhall & Mor Barak, 2018).

Meaningful engagement is important to because of its obvious benefits to an organization, which include productivity improvements, lower costs associated with lower turnover rates, as well as stronger customer connections (Park, Park, & Shryack, 2024). A higher level of employee engagement leads to higher quality work and enhances organisational commitment, resulting in a lower rate of turnover. Employees are more likely to go beyond for the organization (Thompson et al., 2015).

Based on the literature reviews above, the following research questions and research hypotheses were formed and evaluated in this study:

Research questions

RQ1: Is there a relationship between the awareness of inclusion and employee’s inclusion in Malaysia?

RQ2. Is there a relationship between inclusive leadership and employee’s inclusion in Malaysia?

RQ3. Is there a relationship between psychosocial capital and employee’s inclusion in Malaysia?

RQ4: Is there a relationship between meaningful engagement and employee’s inclusion in Malaysia?

Hypothesis

H1: There is a positive relationship between awareness of inclusion and employee’s inclusion in Malaysia.

H2: There is a positive relationship between inclusive leadership and employee’s inclusion in Malaysia.

H3: There is a positive relationship between psychosocial capital and employee’s inclusion in Malaysia.

H4: There is a positive relationship between meaningful engagement and employee’s inclusion in Malaysia.

Research framework, which was developed based on literature reviews of the most recent research, was exhibited in Figure 1 below.

Figure 1. Research Framework.

3.1 Ethics clearance

Ethical clearance was approved from the Multimedia University Ethics Committee before the survey questionnaire was distributed to the respondents of this research (Ethical approval number: PD20220284). Written informed consent was obtained from all respondents before their data and response were collected with an assurance of data anonymity and data confidentiality.

Ethics statement (Approved date: 20 September 2022)

MMU respects your privacy and is committed to protecting your personal data.

3.2 Instrument and scale

The survey included five items measuring employee’s inclusion, five items measuring awareness of inclusion, five items measuring inclusive leadership and five items measuring meaningful engagement. All questions in the survey were measured using 5-point Likert scales, denoted by 1: strongly disagree, 2-Disagree, 3-Neither Agree or Disagree, 4-Agree and 5-Stongly agree.

3.3 Pre-test and pilot study

The survey was pretested by two academics and two industry experts from small and medium enterprises to validate the consistency of the survey items. Based on the reviews of the two academics and two industry experts, amendments were made to the format, questions, and instructions to improve the ease of understanding of the survey items. Thereafter, a pilot study was conducted in which surveys were distributed to 100 employees in Klang Valley Malaysia.

3.4 Sampling method and sample size

Purposive Sampling technique was being used in this research. A total of 300 employees who worked in small and medium enterprises in Klang Valley for at least 2 years were selected as respondents. Respondents were approached face-to-face for data collection. A question “How many years have you been serving your organization?” were asked and only respondents who worked in small and medium enterprises in Klang Valley for at least 2 years were selected as the respondents.

3.5 Data collection

From 15 October 2022 to 14 April 2023, data collection for this study was conducted to examine factors affecting employee’s inclusion in Malaysia. Klang Valley region was selected as the target region for this research as Klang Valley Klang Valley, is the economic heartbeat of Malaysia. Klang Valley contributes a substantial portion of Malaysia’s GDP, driven by a diversified workforce, who worked in manufacturing, technology, and service small and medium enterprises. The purpose of this research and the meaning of each question in the survey were clearly explained to the respondents before the start of data collection. Over a six-month period of data collection, out of three hundred participants approached, 204 agreed to participate in this research.

3.6 Data analysis

Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) software was used to analyze the survey responses’ results. Descriptive statistics were used to determine the frequency of demographic data. This study used Cronbach’s alpha to evaluate the reliability and determine the internal consistency. Multiple regression was the primary statistical test used to analyze the outcomes of research questions 1, 2 3, and 4. Multiple regression analysis is used to analyze data in this research as it allows researchers to assess the strength of the relationship between the dependent variable (Employee’s Inclusion) and several predictor variables (awareness of inclusion, inclusive leadership, psychosocial capital, and meaningful engagement).