


































Humanitas: Indonesian Psychological Journal  

Vol. 19 (2), August 2022, 87-100 
ISSN:  2598-6368(online); 1693-7236(print)                                                                 

        humanitas@psy.uad.ac.id                                                               https://doi.org/10.26555/humantias.v19i2.45 

Work engagement among millennial employees: The role of 

psychological capital and perceived organizational support 

Nabila Ayu Gumilang, Indrayanti  

Faculty of Psychology, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Indonesia 
Corresponding author: indrapsi@ugm.ac.id  
  

 

Introduction 

Millennial employees never stop being talked about, given their vital role in today's 
workforce. Today's majority of working-age organizations are filled with millennials with all 
their distinctive characteristics, such as they have to deal with the superiority of the previous 
generation, global challenges, rapid technological advances, and digitalization in the 
workplace. Previously, Robbins and Judge (2019) conveyed that all of those changes would 
lead to situations of uncertainty, complexity, and even ambiguity. According to Central 
Statistics Agency (BPS), in 2018, the millennial generation was 88 million people or 
equivalent to 33.75%, followed by generation Z at 29.3%, generation X at 25.74%, and the 
combined generation of baby boomers and veterans at 11.27%. This number shows the high 
contribution of the millennial generation in shaping the structure of the current productive 
age population, of which 67.02% are productive age population and 50.36% are a millennial 
generation (Susanti, 2020). This condition is then called the demographic bonus. Mulyati et 
al. (2019) added that by 2020 the millennial generation would begin to dominate 75% of the 
workforce in Indonesia.  

Millennials undoubtedly can be an opportunity, but they can also be a challenge for 
organizations in Indonesia. Research conducted by Nielson Indonesia and the IDN Research 
Institute in 2019 stated that the millennial generation would be male and female between 21 

ART ICLE  INFO  

 

AB ST R ACT  

 

Article history 

Received November 25, 2021 

Revised July 2, 2022 

Accepted July 5, 2022 

 Millennials, who have several values, perspectives, and habits 
different from previous generations, have dominated the profile of 
workers in Indonesia. Challenges and changes in the company require 
millennials to be engaged in their work. This study aimed to 
determine the work engagement of millennial employees through the 
role of psychological capital and perceived organizational support. 
The research participants were 225 millennial employees with a 
minimum working period of six months. The work engagement scale 
(UWES-17), Psychological Capital Questionnaire (PCQ), and 
Perceived Organizational Support Scale were used to collect the data. 
This research was conducted using quantitative methods and analyzed 
by multiple regression analysis. The results show that psychological 
capital and perceived organizational support simultaneously 
contribute to work engagement among millennial employees. 
Independently, psychological capital and perceived organizational 
support significantly predict work engagement. These findings 
indicate both personal factors and situational factors are needed to 
achieve work engagement. Thus, the finding represents the existence 
of positive psychological movement on work engagement through the 
lens of the psychological process mechanism at work.    

 

 
Keywords 

millennial; 

perceived organization support; 

psychological capital; 

work engagement. 

 

 

https://doi.org/10.26555/humantias.v19i2.45
mailto:indrapsi@ugm.ac.id


88   

               ISSN 2598-6368 (online) / ISSN 1693-7236 (print) 
  

Gumilang & Indrayanti (Work engagement among millennial employees: The role of…) 

to 36 years old in 2020, divided into two categories: junior millennial (1992-1999) and senior 
millennial (1984-1991). The millennial generation are employees with positive personalities 
(Ramli & Soelton, 2019), high self-efficacy in their work abilities (Andrea et al., 2016; Howe 
& Strauss, 2007; Smith & Nichols, 2015), and high optimism (Howe & Strauss, 2007; 
Kowske et al., 2010) make them have good resilience (Akhir & Hamid, 2017). The millennial 
generation has nine main behaviors: internet addiction, cashless, intelligent and fast work, 
likes traveling, multitasking, indifference to politics, likes to share, low ownership of goods, 
and low loyalty  (Utomo et al., 2019). 

The current challenges in industries are complex and varied, from the availability of 
talent, technological advances, and diversity to the generation gap (Robbins & Judge, 2018). 
However, today’s challenge is not only to retain talented employees but also to make 
employees engaged with their work. The behavior of individuals in organizations who feel 
engaged and fully involved in their work activities is called work engagement. Work 
engagement is a positive mental state of employees toward their work, characterized by vigor, 
dedication, and absorption (Bakker, 2011; Bakker & Demorouti, 2014; Schaufeli, 2012). 
Kinicki and Fugate (2018) argued that positive employee behavior would significantly relate 
to individual and organizational consequences, such as job performance.  

Work engagement is considered one of the highest concepts related to employee 
performance. Employees who are engaged in their work have some positive behavior, such 
as being more productive, generating new ideas and initiative, being more diligent, and not 
wasting much time on useless things to support the achievement of organizational goals 
(Holbeche & Matthews, 2012). The contribution that employees make to the organization is 
crucial. Organizations have no choice but to engage employees, not only in their bodies but 
also in their souls, to produce suitable output (Storey et al., 2019). Nikhil and Arthi (2018) 
stated that organizational success is determined by employees' contributions who have a high 
level of work engagement, the primary key to positive organizational behavior (Robbins & 
Judge, 2018). Employees with high work engagement will use their resources within 
themselves, such as optimism, self-efficacy, and active coping style, to help them manage 
and influence their work environment more successfully (Bakker & Demerouti, 2008).  

Specifically, the millennial generation's low loyalty makes them tend to move around 
like fleas (Gallup, 2016). A survey conducted by Dale Carnegie Indonesia in 2016 found that 
only 25% of the millennial workforce in Indonesia is in the fully engaged category. Moreover, 
Rigoni and Nelson (2016) conducted Gallup research and found that less than a third of 
millennial generation employees fully engage with their work. Robbins and Judge (2018) add 
that low employee engagement has become a concern for most world organizations, where 
only 17%-29% of employees have a high engagement in their work. Employees with low 
work engagement will exhibit behaviors such as; withdrawing from the work environment, 
skipping work, providing minimal effort, quickly experiencing fatigue, harming 
organizational productivity, and high employee turnover rates (Holbeche & Matthews, 2012; 
Nikhil & Arthi, 2018).  

Previous research shows that personal resource is one of the driving factors of employee 
engagement (Constantini et al., 2017). A personal resource is a positive self-evaluation that 
relates to resilience and refers to an individual's ability to control themself and impact their 
environment  (Hobfoll et al., 2003). The personal resource includes self-efficacy, optimism, 
and emotional stability (Schaufeli, 2012). Later, some personal resources of millennials 
would foster the achievement of organizational goals (Akhir & Hamid, 2017; Andrea et al., 
2016; Howe & Strauss, 2007; Kowske et al., 2010; Ramli & Soelton, 2019; Smith & Nichols, 
2015). Some personal resources are self-efficacy, optimism, and resilience, which relate to 
understanding psychological capital (Luthans et al., 2007). Therefore, psychological capital 
is often categorized as a personal resource because it has a similar concept (Luthans et al., 
2007; Nikhil & Arthi, 2018) that would increase positive work-related outcomes such as 
engagement and well-being (Constantini et al., 2017).  



Humanitas: Indonesian Psychological Journal 89 

 

 

Gumilang & Indrayanti (Work engagement among millennial employees: The role of…) 

   

Psychological capital is a relatively new concept in organizational behavior and is part 
of the positive psychology movement (Kinicki & Fugate, 2018). Sweetman and Luthans 
(2010) argued that psychological capital could encourage employees' intrinsic motivation 
and, therefore, can trigger a crucial component in developing employee work engagement. 
Luthans et al. (2007) defined psychological capital as a positive self-condition with hope, 
efficacy, resilience, and optimism characteristics. The psychological capital dimension has a 
high stability level over a long time. However, the dimension of psychological capital has the 
capability and flexibility to develop, so it can be said that psychological capital is not like a 
psychological construct that tends to be relatively stable and difficult to change (Constantini 
et al., 2017). Furthermore, Luthans et al. (2007) prove that the components of the 
psychological capital dimension will be more accurately measured together than when each 
component stands alone. 

The dimensions of psychological capital indicate a conceptual relationship with work 
engagement (Sweetman & Luthans, 2010). Employees who believe in their ability to master 
tasks and can understand well their work context (efficacy) are optimistic about what will 
happen to them (optimism), have high hopes (hope), and are resilient when faced with 
challenges (resilience) would internalize themselves to achieve organizational goals without 
experiencing distraction (absorption), investing their efforts to achieve goals (vigor), and have 
a high identification of what they do (dedication) (Sweetman & Luthans, 2010). High 
psychological capital values in employees can increase the potential values of employees. By 
then, employees will be more flexible and easier to adapt to dealing with various things when 
meeting their work demands, so psychological capital has a role in stimulating employee 
work engagement (Avey et al., 2010; Constantini et al., 2017; Joo et al., 2016; Simons & 
Buitendach, 2013). 

The role of psychological capital is considered a significant predictor of various links 
to employee performance outcomes. Each dimension can optimize employee potential to help 
organizational performance (Paek et al., 2015). However, psychological capital that has a 
positive relationship to work engagement is not alone in generating employee work 
engagement (Ilvonda & Faraz, 2020; Indrianti & Hadi, 2012; Rara, 2019; Wardani & Anwar, 
2019). According to Schaufeli and Bakker (2004), in their JD-R model theory, work 
engagement is not only influenced by personal resources, in this case, psychological capital, 
but also job resources. 

Further, Schaufeli (2012) conveyed that job resources are defined as some functional 
aspects of the job to achieve work goals, reduce job demands, or stimulate personal growth 
and development (e.g., job control, performance feedback, and social support from 
colleagues). Later on, Kinicki and Fugate (2018) identified key drivers of work engagement 
that consist of two factors, personal factors (personality, positive psychological capital, 
human and social capital) and situational factors (job characteristics, leadership, 
organizational climate, and environment stressor). Due to the context of millennials, they 
need a supportive and trusting relationship with the manager and a positive climate at work 
to feel engaged (Christian et al., 2011). Thus, in this study, perceived organizational support 
is assumed to represent an individual’s perception of the existence of social support at work. 

Perceived organizational support is a form of job resource (Tan et al., 2020). Perceived 
organizational support is an employee's perception of how the organization provides support 
to employees and the extent to which the organization is prepared to assist when employees 
need it (Rhoades & Eisenberger, 2002). Matoori (2017) research found a positive and 
significant relationship between psychological capital and perceived organizational support 
and work engagement. 



90   

               ISSN 2598-6368 (online) / ISSN 1693-7236 (print) 
  

Gumilang & Indrayanti (Work engagement among millennial employees: The role of…) 

Perceived organizational support is an external factor influencing employee motivation 
at work (Kolodinsky et al., 2018). When employees receive support from the organization, 
employees will have a sense of obligation to reciprocate the support; not only that, but 
employees will also feel part of the organization, so there is an incentive to play a more active 
role in the organization (Rhoades & Eisenberger, 2002). The basic concept of perceived 
organizational support is a reciprocal relationship between the giver and the recipient 
(Rhoades & Eisenberger, 2002). Perceived organizational support can increase employee 
work engagement (Bano et al., 2015; Dai & Qin, 2016; Mufarrikhah et al., 2020; Mujiasih, 
2015; Tan et al., 2020). When organizations provide support to their employees, indirectly, 
the organization has met the socio-emotional needs of employees (Rhoades & Eisenberger, 
2002). Employees who feel support from the organization will feel that the organization 
values their contributions and cares about their welfare (Robbins & Judge, 2018), especially 
millennials who are hungry for feedback and like interpersonal relationships with their co-
workers (Smith & Nichols, 2015). 

Thus, it seems clear that referring to personal resources and job resource factors that 
affect work engagement, psychological capital, and perceived organizational support are 
considered to affect employee work engagement jointly. Therefore, this study examines how 
psychological capital and perceived organizational support will jointly affect work 
engagement in millennial employees. Psychological capital and perceived organizational 
support represent personal and situational factors that should be examined simultaneously. 
This study would like to figure out the contribution of four components of psychological 
capital and two aspects of perceived organizational support to provide a profound portrayal 
of Indonesian millennial employees. Even though Luthans et al. (2007) conveyed that all 
components should be measured together than each component standing alone. Finally, the 
context of study in millennials also becomes added value since this specificity is essential 
considering that Indonesian employees' demographic posture is currently being flooded with 
millennial employees with all their characteristics and uniqueness. Furthermore, the 
organization can use the study result as a consideration in human resource policy-making 
regarding work engagement in millennial employees, particularly in Indonesia.  

Method 

Research Design 

The research was conducted using a quantitative approach. A survey method that uses attitude 
tendencies or opinions from a particular population sample (Creswell, 2014) was applied in 
this study.  

Participants 

The population of this study is Indonesian millennial employees who work permanently in 
many institutions in Indonesia. The study used the convenience sampling technique and 
proposed the characteristic of the respondents as follows. Firstly, permanent employees born 
in 1980 – 2000 are millennials (Howe & Strauss, 2000). Secondly, those who have worked 
for at least six months assumed new employees are experiencing a stage of exploration in 
their career and likely have practiced psychological experience during their working life 
(Super, 1980).  

Table 1 shows the demographic data of 225 millennial employees in Indonesia with an 
age range of 22 – 37 years (mean = 28; SD = 3.75). Most of the research participants were 
female, with 154 employees (68.4%), and most of the participants had worked for more than 
three years, as many as 125 employees (55.6%). A total of 183 employees (81.3%) have 



Humanitas: Indonesian Psychological Journal 91 

 

 

Gumilang & Indrayanti (Work engagement among millennial employees: The role of…) 

   

completed their last education at the Bachelor's level, and most work in the private sector, as 
many as 146 employees (64.9%). 
 

Table 1  

Demographic Data 

Category Description Frequency Percentages 

Gender Female 154 68.4% 

Male 71 31.6% 
Tenure 6 month – 1 year 13 5.8% 

1 – 2 years 74 32.9% 
2 – 3 years 13 5.8% 

 3 years 125 55.6% 

Educational Background Diploma 1 1 0.4% 
Diploma 3 11 4.9% 
Diploma 4 5 2.3% 
Bachelor 183 81.3% 
Master 25 11.1% 

Work sector Private 146 64.9% 
State Owned Enterprises 39 17.3% 
Civil servant 30 13.3% 

Professional 10 4.4% 

Instruments 

Data was collected online through Google Forms, shared via LinkedIn private messages and 
WhatsApp group forwarding messages. Data were collected by using a Likert scale with five 
alternative answers. This research involves three variables: work engagement as a dependent 
variable, psychological capital, and perceived organizational support as the independent 
variables.  

Work engagement is a positive state that employees feel when working, indicated by 
vigor, dedication and absorption. The Indonesian version of the Utrecht Work Engagement 
Scale (UWES-17) as the scale compiled by Schaufeli et al. (2006), which consists of 17 items, 
was used to measure work engagement. The UWES is on a Likert scale with five answer 
choices, ranging from 1 = very dissatisfied to 5 = very appropriate. The Indonesian version 
of UWES-17 has an item discrimination power between .557-.843 and a Cronbach's Alpha 
value of .950. The higher the score obtained by the individual indicates that the individual 
has a high level of work engagement, and vice versa. 

Psychological capital is a positive psychological condition characterized by efficacy, 
optimism, hope, and resilience. Psychological capital was measured using the Psychological 
Capital Questionnaire (PCQ) adapted from the Psychological Capital Questionnaire (PCQ) 
scale previously developed by Luthans et al. (2007) and consists of 16 items (Fithria, 2018). 
The PCQ scale is on a Likert scale with five answer choices, ranging from 1 = very dissatisfied 
to 5 = very appropriate. The PCQ scale has an item discrimination power of .427-.880 and a 
Cronbach's Alpha value of .930. The higher the score obtained by the individual indicates a 
high level of psychological capital and vice versa. 

Perceived organizational support is an employee's view of the organization regarding 
the extent to which the organization values employee contributions (appreciation for 
employee contribution) and provides support and care for welfare, including rewards, 
training, promotions, and wages (the organization's concern for the welfare of employee). 
Perceived organizational support is measured using a scale developed by Purwaningrum et 
al. (2020), based on Eisenberger et al. (1986), which consists of 16 items. The perceived 
organizational support scale is a Likert scale with five answer options, ranging from 1 = very 



92   

               ISSN 2598-6368 (online) / ISSN 1693-7236 (print) 
  

Gumilang & Indrayanti (Work engagement among millennial employees: The role of…) 

dissatisfied to 5 = very appropriate. The perceived organizational support scale has an item 
discrimination power between .497-.862 and a Cronbach's Alpha value of .904. The higher 
the score obtained by the individual indicates a high perceived organizational level and vice 
versa. 

Data Analysis 

Multiple regression analysis with SPSS software was applied to data analysis. Regression 
analysis was used to see whether the predictor variables could predict the criterion variables. 
Regression analysis will produce an R2 value which indicates the proportion of variance of 
the criterion variables that the predictor as a whole can explain, and a β value indicating the 
role of each predictor. 

Results 

The result of the regression analysis shows that psychological capital and perceived 
organizational support were both able to explain 47.9% of the variation in work engagement 
(R2=.479; F(2, 222)=109.907; p<.001) (see Table 2). Psychological capital significantly 
predicts work engagement (β=.507; p<.001), and perceived organizational support also 
predicts work engagement (β =.292; p<.001). Partially, each variable contributes as much as 
32.5% for psychological capital and 15.4% for perceived organizational support to work 
engagement. 
 

Table 2  
Result of Multiple Regression 

Variables 

Unstandardized 

Coefficient 

Standardized 

Coefficients Beta  

F t 

B Standard Error    

Constant .964 4.349  101.907   .222 

Psychological Capital .694   .075 .507  9.303 

Perceived Organizational Support .295   .055 .292  5.349 

Note: all variables have p<.01 with R=.692 and 𝑅2=.479 

 

Furthermore, each aspect of psychological capital and perceived organizational support 
was elaborated to see its contribution to work engagement. Table 3 shows the results of 
multiple regression analysis on the psychological capital variable and shows that only the 
aspect of optimism contributes significantly to work engagement.  
 

Table 3 
Result of Multiple Regression of Aspect of Psychological Capital toward Work Engagement 

Variables 

Unstandardized Coefficient Standardized 

Coefficients Beta  

t p 

B Standard Error    

Constant 1.575 4.407  .357 .721 

Hope   .846   .454 .169 1.861 .064 

Efficacy -.075   .359 -.016 -.208 .835 

Resilience .503   .358 .111 1.404 .162 

Optimism 2.418   .338 .492 7.157   <.001** 

Note: **for p<.001 

R=.688; 𝑅2=.473; F(4,220)=49.429; p<.001 
 



Humanitas: Indonesian Psychological Journal 93 

 

 

Gumilang & Indrayanti (Work engagement among millennial employees: The role of…) 

   

Meanwhile, the perceived organizational support variable shows that only the aspect of 
the organization's concern for employees' welfare contributes significantly to work 
engagement Table 4 shows the results of multiple regression of each aspect of perceived 
organizational support on work engagement. 
 
Table 4 
Result of Multiple Regression of Aspect of Perceived Organizational Support toward Work 
Engagement 

Variables 

Unstandardized Coefficient Standardized 

Coefficients Beta  

t p 

B Standard Error    

Constant 32.351 3.239  9.989 <.001** 

Appreciation     .166   .171 .097   .972      .332 

Organization’s concern   1.012   .221 .457 4.571 <.001** 

Note: **for p<.001 

R=.540; 𝑅2=.292; F(2,222)=45.684; p<.001 
 
Additional analysis using a t-test was performed to enrich the study's results. The results 

showed that there was a significant difference in work engagement between males and 
females (t[223] = 2.52; p < .05) (see Table 5). Male (M=64.20; SD=10.23) had higher work 
engagement than female (M=60.53; SD=10.11). In more detail, which aspects of work 
engagement have the most role in male and female, it was found that only aspects of vigor 
(t[223] = 2.78; p < .01) and dedication (t[223] = 2.52; p < .05) different, while absorption was 
not different (t[223] = 1.53; p>.05). Male (M=22.47; SD=4.18) had higher vigor than female 
(M=20.88; SD=3.89), and male (M=19.90; SD=3.57) had higher dedication than female (M= 
18.62; SD=3.54) 

 
Table 5 
Result of t-test Analysis of Work Engagement on Gender 

Variable/aspect   Group  N  Mean  SD  t   df p 

Work engagement            2.52  223 .01* 

  Male   71   64.20   10.23        

    Female   154   60.53   10.11        

Vigor           2.78  223 .01* 

  Male   71   22.46   4.18        

    Female   154   20.88   3.89        

Dedication           2.52  223 .01* 

  Male   71   19.90   3.57        

    Female   154   18.62   3.54        

Absorption           1.53  223      .13 

  Male   71   21.83   3.68        

    Female   154   21.04   3.58        

Note: *for p<.05 

Discussion 

The results show a significant simultaneous effect between psychological capital and 
perceived organizational support on work engagement in millennial employees. The research 



94   

               ISSN 2598-6368 (online) / ISSN 1693-7236 (print) 
  

Gumilang & Indrayanti (Work engagement among millennial employees: The role of…) 

findings show that psychological capital and perceived organizational support can 
simultaneously predict 47.9% of work engagement in millennial employees. This result is in 
line with research conducted by Alessandri et al. (2018) on 420 employees, whereby the more 
psychological capital, the higher work engagement, which can predict employee 
performance. Also, Lorente et al. (2014) found that psychological capital as personal 
resources, according to the JD-R model concept, can increase employee intrinsic motivation 
and produce work engagement. 

Work engagement is closely related to intrinsic motivation, including feelings of 
enthusiasm and a high level of activity, as it has benefits and meaning for him (Nerstad et al., 
2013). It confirms the statement of Sweetman and Luthans (2010) that conceptually 
psychological capital characteristics correlate with work engagement. In this study, 
psychological capital acts as a personal resource that can increase employees' intrinsic 
motivation at work, triggering engagement in millennial employees.  

Moreover, the presence of psychological capital contributes to the high work 
engagement of millennial employees (Sutrisno & Parahyanti, 2018). Luthans et al. (2007) 
stated that the components of psychological capital could theoretically actualize individual 
potential, especially in the workplace. Furthermore, the dimensions of psychological capital 
will build each other into resources and capital for each individual that can lead to work 
engagement and broaden employees' perspectives on their work environment (Sweetman & 
Luthans, 2010).  

Perceived organizational support is a situational factor that can be felt by the presence 
of organizational concern and appreciation for employee contributions. The central concept 
in perceived organizational support is reciprocity or a reciprocal relationship. Employees who 
have a good perception of the organization will have a feeling of having to reciprocate the 
treatment of the organization; furthermore, employees will feel part of the organization, and 
therefore there is an incentive to play an active role in the organization (Eisenberger et al., 
1986). Employees with a good perception of organizational support feel that the organization 
provides support, fairness, and care for the welfare of employees and appreciates their 
contribution to the organization, as well as fulfilling employee socio-emotional needs such as 
self-esteem. These feelings foster a sense of belonging to the organization and encourage a 
high contribution to the organization (Rhoades & Eisenberger, 2002). In line with the above 
argument, workplace interactions that result in work engagement behavior are reciprocal 
relationships between employees and organizations, as stated in the concept of social 
exchange theory (Yin, 2018). 

The findings of this research further emphasize that the psychological capital possessed 
by millennial employees needs to be juxtaposed with the organization's treatment of them in 
the form of concern and appreciation for their performance. Both of these things need to be 
addressed positively by the organization to foster enthusiasm and work dedication for 
millennial employees to positively enjoy every activity at work. Many peculiarities of 
millennials need to be facilitated in the workplace so that their potential is more optimal, such 
as high social needs where they like interpersonal relationships in their work environment. In 
addition, millennials also like openness in communication. They are happy with the 
appreciation and consistent feedback outside of the official assessments given by the 
organization periodically (Stanimir, 2015). 

Furthermore, millennials also need challenges at work and desire to develop skills 
(Smith & Nichols, 2015). If employees perceive the organization as being able to provide 
these facilities, millennials will display more and their best abilities in helping to achieve 
organizational goals (De Hauw & De Vos, 2010). The existence of employees' perceptions of 
good organizational support will make them bond with their work activities, where they will 
devote their most extraordinary energy but still feel happy about their work. This finding also 
supports the empirical study of Mufarrikhah et al. (2020) on 300 permanent and non-
permanent employees in Indonesia, resulting in perceived organizational support positively 



Humanitas: Indonesian Psychological Journal 95 

 

 

Gumilang & Indrayanti (Work engagement among millennial employees: The role of…) 

   

affecting employee work engagement in organizations. The higher the employee's attachment 
to work, the higher the effectiveness of employees in the organization. Therefore, 
organizations need to provide support to employees who also have psychological capital to 
achieve work engagement. 

Luthans et al. (2007) state that bringing all components of psychological capital at once 
rather than individually should need more attention. This study found that only the optimism 
component of psychological capital contributes to work engagement. Optimism is the 
component that needs to be considered by management since it could be ups and downs 
according to a particular situation. The more millennial employees become optimistic, the 
higher work engagement. Thus, the organization should provide a work environment that 
makes employees feel optimistic. Following the research finding, the organization's concern 
for employee welfare might be the choice to contribute to work engagement. The more 
organizations provide welfare, the higher the work engagement of millennial employees. As 
it turns, engagement from millennial employees tends to arise from organizational support in 
the shape of the support and care for welfare, including rewards, training, promotions, and 
wages, rather than appreciation for employee contribution. In short, it could be concluded that 
appreciation for employee contribution could not directly affect work engagement among 
millennial employees. However, an organization should still consider it as the default practice 
that should be implemented at work by considering that appreciation is one of the needs of 
millennials in the workplace. As a management implication, organizations need to support 
employees, especially millennials, through HR practice programs that provide awareness to 
them to implement their psychological capital in responding to work situations consistently. 

In addition, the organization must accompany the emergence of this psychological 
capital and support from the organization in the form of concern and appreciation for the 
millennials' performance. Organizations must be sensitive that millennial employees who 
need feedback must be ensured to get feedback on their work. Millennial employees also need 
flexibility in their work, so organizations need to be level-headed, discussing flexibility 
opportunities openly with millennial employees. With the presence of this support, the hope 
that springs up, the self-confidence that grows strong, the resilience that is built firmly, and 
optimism for the future will genuinely manifest into a millennial employee who is full of 
enthusiasm at work, full of dedication, and always enjoys his work. Ultimately, work 
engagement would arise due to the simultaneous relationship between psychological capital 
and organizational support. 

The results of this study indicate differences in work engagement by gender, where 
males have a higher level of work engagement than females. It is in line with the results of 
previous research by Banihani et al. (2013), which stated that gender affected work 
engagement where males had a higher level of work engagement than females. A similar 
study conducted by Mache et al. (2014) also shows that men have a significantly higher work 
engagement than females. However, this finding is inconsistent with the results of research 
by Gulzar and Teli (2018) on 123 respondents, which showed that females had higher 
engagement levels than men. These differences in findings indicate a study that leads to a 
cultural context. The significantly higher work engagement of males in Indonesia is due to 
culture and customs in Indonesia, in which males play an important role as the family head 
and in family income so that their level of work engagement will tend to be higher if compared 
to with female (Wardani et al., 2020). In particular, each aspect of work engagement was re-
elaborated and yielded information that, in the context of this research, the difference between 
males and females lies in the aspect of vigor and dedication. In contrast, there is no difference 
between the two in the absorption aspect. Male are more enthusiastic and show dedication in 



96   

               ISSN 2598-6368 (online) / ISSN 1693-7236 (print) 
  

Gumilang & Indrayanti (Work engagement among millennial employees: The role of…) 

their work compared to females. Therefore, the assumption of gender roles in Indonesian 
culture above makes sense in the context of this research.  

The limitations of this study are the unproven aspects of psychological capital as a 
driver of engagement, in contrast with the results of previous studies that the four aspects of 
psychological capital consisting of hope, efficacy, resilience, and optimism are critical in 
generating engaged behavior (Constantini et al., 2017; Grover et al., 2018; Joo et al., 2016; 
Simons & Buitendach, 2013). It may be caused by the variety of participants from 
organizations such as public servants, private companies, state-owned enterprises, and 
professionals. Moreover, online data collection means that the researcher does not have 
complete control over the understanding of the subject, even though instructions for 
processing have been included. Future research needs to address the limitation of this study 
to genuinely portray the role of psychological capital and perceived organizational support 
on the emergence of engaged behavior, including notions to examine only one organizational 
context or several organizations with similar HR practices and the work environment. Further 
investigation is also needed regarding the limitation of this study. It is essential to explore 
whether the limitation is related to Indonesian culture or whether optimism is individually the 
keyword for other psychological aspects.  

Conclusion 

This study further confirms the role of psychological capital and perceived organizational 
support on work engagement in millennial employees. Specifically, in the context of 
millennial employees, this study framework can confirm that hope, self-efficacy, resilience, 
and optimism for the future need to be accompanied by support from the organization to 
enable them to carry out their work with vigor, dedication, and absorption. However, during 
elaborating on aspects of psychological capital, where if done individually, only the optimism 
aspect contributes significantly to work engagement, although the contribution value is 
smaller than when it involves all aspects in the model. In addition, the aspect of optimism 
seems to dominate the model, even on aspects of perceived organizational support. Therefore, 
HR practitioners need to be more concerned with optimism in the contribution of personal 
and situational factors to work engagement among millennials. 

Acknowledgment 

The authors acknowledge the Faculty of Psychology, Universitas Gadjah Mada, for the 

research grant for this study.  

Declarations  

Author contribution. NAG and II design the study, collect, analyze the data and discuss the 
result before submitting it; afterward, the revision is under II’s responsibility as a 
corresponding author.  

Funding statement. RTA Grant funded this study from the Faculty of Psychology, 

Universitas Gadjah Mada (No.5388/UN1/FPSi/UP4/PT.02/2021) 
Conflict of interest. The authors declare no conflict of interest. 
Additional information. No additional information is available for this paper. 

References 

 

Akhir, R. M., & Hamid, N. R. (2017, October 18-20). Gen Y in workplace: An exploratory 

study. [Paper Presentation]. The 7th Annual International Conference (AIC). Banda 



Humanitas: Indonesian Psychological Journal 97 

 

 

Gumilang & Indrayanti (Work engagement among millennial employees: The role of…) 

   

Aceh 

Alessandri, G., Consiglio, C., Luthans, F., & Borgogni, L. (2018). Testing a dynamic model 

of the impact of psychological capital on work engagement and job performance. The 

Career Development International, 23(1), 33–47. https://doi.org/10.1108/CDI-11-

2016-0210 

Andrea, B., Gabriella, H. C., & Timea, J. (2016). Y and Z generations at workplaces. Journal 

of Competitiveness, 8(3), 90–106. https://doi.org/10.7441/joc.2016.03.06 

Avey, J. B., Luthans, F., & Youssef, C. M. (2010). The additive value of positive 

psychological capital in predicting work attitudes and behaviors. Journal of 

Management, 36(2), 430–452. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206308329961 

Bakker, A. B. (2011). An evidence-based model of work engagement. Current Directions in 

Psychological Science, 20(4), 265–269. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721411414534 

Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2008). Towards a model of work engagement. Career 

Development International, 13(3), 209–223.  

Bakker, A. B., & Demorouti, E. (2014). Job demands-resources theory. In P. Y. Chen, & C. 

L. Cooper. In Work and wellbeing: A complete reference guide (pp. 37–64). John Wiley 

& Sons, Inc. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118539415.wbwell019 

Banihani, M., Lewis, P., & Syed, J. (2013). Is work engagement gendered? Gender in 

Management, 28(7), 400–423.  

Bano, S., Vyas, K., & Gupta, R. (2015). Perceived organizational support and work 

engagement: A cross generational study. Journal of Psychosocial Research, 10(2), 

357–364. 

Christian, M. S., Garza, A. S., & Slaughter, J. E. (2011). Work engagement: A quantitative 

review and test of its relations with task and contextual performance. Personnel 

Psychology, 64(1), 89–136. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2010.01203.x 

Constantini, A., Paola, F. D., Ceschi, A., Sartori, R., Meneghini, A. M., & Fabio, A. D. 

(2017). Work engagement and psychological capital in the Italian public 

administration: A new resource-based intervention programme. SA Journal of 

Industrial Psychology, 43(0), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.4102/sajip.v43i0.1413 

Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative & mixed methods 

approach. (4th ed.). Sage. 

Dai, K. L., & Qin, X. Y. (2016). Perceived organizational support and employee 

engagement: Based on the research of organizational identification and organizational 

justice. Open Journal of Social Sciences, 4(12), 46–57. 

https://doi.org/10.4236/jss.2016.412005 

De Hauw, S., & De Vos, A. (2010). Millennials’ career perspective and psychological 

contract expectations: Does the recession lead to lowered expectations? Journal of 

Business and Psychology, 25(2), 293–302. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-010-9162-9 

Eisenberger, R., Huntington, R., Hutchison, S., & Sowa, D. (1986). Perceived organizational 

support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71(3), 500–507. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-

9010.71.3.500 

Fithria, W. S. (2018). Psychological well being pada pekerja ditinjau dari psychological 

capital, workplace spirituality, dan work-life balance [Psychological wellbeing among 

workers in terms of psychological capital, workplace spirituality, and work-life 

balance]. [Master Thesis, Universitas Gadjah Mada]. University Repository. 

http://etd.repository.ugm.ac.id/penelitian/detail/166051 

Gallup. (2016). How millennials want to work and live. Gallup, Inc. 

https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/CDI-11-2016-0210/full/html
https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/CDI-11-2016-0210/full/html
https://www.cjournal.cz/index.php?hid=clanek&cid=227
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0149206308329961
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0963721411414534
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/9781118539415.wbwell019
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2010.01203.x
https://sajip.co.za/index.php/sajip/article/view/1413
https://www.scirp.org/journal/paperinformation.aspx?paperid=72914
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10869-010-9162-9
https://psycnet.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037%2F0021-9010.71.3.500
https://psycnet.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037%2F0021-9010.71.3.500
http://etd.repository.ugm.ac.id/penelitian/detail/166051


98   

               ISSN 2598-6368 (online) / ISSN 1693-7236 (print) 
  

Gumilang & Indrayanti (Work engagement among millennial employees: The role of…) 

Grover, S. L., Teo, S. T., Pick, D., Roche, M., & Newton, C. J. (2018). Psychological capital 

as a personal resource in the JD-R model. Personnel Review, 47(4), 968–984. 

https://doi.org/10.1108/PR-08-2016-0213 

Gulzar, S., & Teli, M. R. (2018). Gender and work engagement: A study of academic staff 

in higher education. Arabian Journal of Business and Management Review, 8(2), 1–3. 

Hobfoll, S. E., Johnson, R. J., Ennis, N., & Jackson, A. P. (2003). Resource loss, resource 

gain, and emotional outcomes among inner city women. Journal of Personality and 

Social Psychology, 84(3), 632–643. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.84.3.632 

Holbeche, L., & Matthews, G. (2012). Engaged: Unleashing your organization’s potential 

through employee engagement. Jossey-Bass. 

Howe, N., & Strauss, W. (2000). Millennials rising: The next great generation. Vintage 

Books. 

Howe, N., & Strauss, W. (2007). The next 20 years: How customer and workforce attitudes 

will evolve. Harvard Business Review, 85(7–8), 41–52. 

Ilvonda, L. F., & Faraz. (2020). Urgensi modal psikologi dalam membangun keterikatan 

kerja karyawan penambangan [The urgency of psychological capital on building the 

work engagement among mining employees]. Motiva Jurnal Psikologi, 3(1), 10–18. 

https://doi.org/10.31293/mv.v3i1.4796 

Indrianti, R., & Hadi, C. (2012). Hubungan antara modal psikologis dengan keterikatan kerja 

pada perawat di instalasi rawat inap Rumah Sakit Jiwa Menur Surabaya [The 

relationship between psychological capital and work engagement among nurses in the 

inpatient installation of Menur Psychiat. Jurnal Psikologi Industri Dan Organisasi, 

1(2), 110–115. 

Joo, B. K., Lim, D. H., & Kim, S. (2016). Enhancing work engagement: The role of 

psychological capital, authentic leadership, and work empowerment. Leadership & 

Organization Development Journal, 37(8), 1117–1134. https://doi.org/10.1108/LODJ-

01-2015-0005 

Kinicki, A., & Fugate, M. (2018). Organizational behavior: A practical, problem-solving 

approach (2nd ed.). McGraw-Hill Education. 

Kolodinsky, R. W., Ritchie, W. J., & Kuna, W. A. (2018). Meaningful engagement: Impacts 

of a “calling” work orientation and perceived leadership support. Journal of 

Management and Organization, 24(3), 406–423. https://doi.org/10.1017/jmo.2017.19 

Kowske, B. J., Rasch, R., & Wiley, J. (2010). Millennials’ (lack of) attitude problem: An 

empirical examination of generational effects on work attitudes. Journal of Business 

and Psychology, 25(2), 265–279. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-010-9171-8 

Lorente, L., Salanova, M., Martínez, I. M., & Vera, M. (2014). How personal resources 

predict work engagement and self-rated performance among construction workers: A 

social cognitive perspective. International Journal of Psychology, 49(3), 200–207. 

https://doi.org/10.1002/ijop.12049 

Luthans, F., Youssef, C. M., & Avolio, B. J. (2007). Psychological capital: Developing the 

human competitive edge. Oxford University Press. 

https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195187526.001.0001 

Mache, S., Vitzthum, K., Wanke, E., A, D., Klapp, B. F., & Danzer, G. (2014). Exploring 

the impact of resilience, self-efficacy, optimism and organizational resources on work 

engagement. Work, 47(4), 491–500. https://doi.org/10.3233/WOR-131617 

Matoori, H. H. (2017). Investigating the relationship between psychological capital and 

perceived organizational support with work engagement among nurses. Iranian Journal 

of Psychiatric Nursing, 5(2), 45–51. https://doi.org/10.21859/ijpn-05027 

Mufarrikhah, J. L., Yuniardi, M. S., & Syakarofath, N. A. (2020). Peran perceived 

https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/PR-08-2016-0213/full/html
https://psycnet.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037%2F0022-3514.84.3.632
http://ejurnal.untag-smd.ac.id/index.php/MV/article/view/4796
https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/LODJ-01-2015-0005/full/html
https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/LODJ-01-2015-0005/full/html
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-management-and-organization/article/abs/meaningful-engagement-impacts-of-a-calling-work-orientation-and-perceived-leadership-support/9E39ACB091CA20C2D94E7AC6975D4B8C
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10869-010-9171-8
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ijop.12049
https://academic.oup.com/book/26255?login=false
https://content.iospress.com/articles/work/wor01617
http://ijpn.ir/article-1-944-en.html


Humanitas: Indonesian Psychological Journal 99 

 

 

Gumilang & Indrayanti (Work engagement among millennial employees: The role of…) 

   

organizational support terhadap work engagement karyawan [The role of perceived 

organizational support on employee work engagement]. Gadjah Mada Journal of 

Psychology, 6(2), 151–164. https://doi.org/10.22146/gamajop.56396 

Mujiasih, E. (2015). Hubungan antara persepsi dukungan organisasi (perceived 

organizational support) dengan keterikatan karyawan [The relationship between 

perceived organizational support with employee engagement]. Jurnal Psikologi Undip, 

14(1), 40–51. https://doi.org/10.14710/jpu.14.1.40-51 

Mulyati, R., Himam, F., Riyono, B., & Suhariadi, F. (2019). Model work engagement 

angkatan kerja generasi millennial dengan meaningful work sebagai mediator 

{Millenial generation’s work engagement model with meaningful work as mediator]. 

Gadjah Mada Journal of Psychology, 5(1), 34–49. 

https://doi.org/10.22146/gamajop.47964 

Nerstad, C. G. L., Roberts, G. C., & Richardsen, A. M. (2013). Achieving success at work: 

Development and validation of the Motivational Climate at Work Questionnaire 

(MCWQ). Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 43(11), 2231–2250. 

https://doi.org/10.1111/jasp.12174 

Nikhil, S., & Arthi, J. (2018). Perceived organisational support and work engagement: 

Mediation of psychological capital - a research agenda. Journal of Strategic Human 

Resource Management, 7(1), 33–40. 

Paek, S., Schuckert, M., Kim, T. T., & Lee, G. (2015). Why is hospitality employees’ 

psychological capital important? The effects of psychological capital on work 

engagement and employee morale. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 

50, 9–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2015.07.001 

Purwaningrum, E. K., Suhariadi, F., & Fajrianthi. (2020). Participation and commitment to 

change on middle managers in Indonesia: The role of perceived organizational support 

as mediator. Global Business Review, 1–18. 

https://doi.org/10.1177/0972150919892371 

Ramli, Y., & Soelton, M. (2019). The millennial workforce: How do they commit to the 

organization? International Journal of Business, Economics and Law, 19(5), 7–18. 

Rara, P. G. (2019). Millennials in the workplace: The effect of psychological capital on work 

engagement with perceived organizational support as mediator. Russian Journal of 

Agricultural and Socio-Economic Sciences, 8(92), 219–226.  

Rhoades, L., & Eisenberger, R. (2002). Perceived organizational support: A review of the 

literature. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(4), 698–714. 

https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.87.4.698 

Rigoni, B., & Nelson, B. (2016, August 30). Few millennials are engaged at work. 

https://news.gallup.com/businessjournal/195209/%20few-millennials-engaged-

%20work.aspx?version=print 

Robbins, S. P., & Judge, T. A. (2018). Essentials of organizational behavior (14th ed.). 

Pearson. 

Robbins, S. P., & Judge, T. A. (2019). Organizational Behavior (18th ed.). Pearson. 

Schaufeli, W. B. (2012). Work engagement. What do we know and where do we go? 

Romanian Journal of Applied Psychology, 14(1), 3–10. 

Schaufeli, W. B., & Bakker, A. B. (2004). Job demands, job resources, and their relationship 

with burnout and engagement: A multi-sample study. Journal of Organizational 

Behavior, 25(3), 292–315. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.248 

Schaufeli, W. B., Bakker, A. B., & Salanova, M. (2006). The Measurement of Work 

https://jurnal.ugm.ac.id/gamajop/article/view/56396
https://ejournal.undip.ac.id/index.php/psikologi/article/view/9797
https://jurnal.ugm.ac.id/gamajop/article/view/47964
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/jasp.12174
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0278431915001012?via%3Dihub
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0972150919892371
https://psycnet.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037%2F0021-9010.87.4.698
https://news.gallup.com/businessjournal/195209/%20few-millennials-engaged-%20work.aspx?version=print
https://news.gallup.com/businessjournal/195209/%20few-millennials-engaged-%20work.aspx?version=print
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/job.248


100   

               ISSN 2598-6368 (online) / ISSN 1693-7236 (print) 
  

Gumilang & Indrayanti (Work engagement among millennial employees: The role of…) 

Engagement With a Short Questionnaire: A Cross-National Study. Educational and 

Psychological Measurement, 66(4), 701–716. 

https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164405282471 

Simons, J. C., & Buitendach, J. H. (2013). Psychological capital, work engagement and 

organisational commitment amongst call centre employees in South Africa. SA Journal 

of Industrial Psychology, 39(2), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.4102/sajip.v39i2.1071 

Smith, T. J., & Nichols, T. (2015). Understanding the millennial generation. Journal of 

Business Diversity, 15(1), 39–47. 

Stanimir, A. (2015). Generation Y–characteristics of attitudes on labour market. 

Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 6(2 S5), 22–28. 

https://dx.doi.org/10.5901/mjss.2015.v6n2s5p22 

Storey, J., Ulrich, D., & Wright, P. M. (2019). Strategic human resource management: A 

research overview. (1st ed.). Routledge. 

Super, D. E. (1980). A life-span, life-space approach to career development. Journal of 

Vocational Behavior, 16(3), 282–298. https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-8791(80)90056-1 

Susanti. (2020, January 7). Sensus penduduk 2020, sensus era digital [2020 population 

census, digital age census]. Retrieved April 2021, from 

https://bandungkota.bps.go.id/news/2020/01/07/15/sensus-penduduk-2020--sensus-

era-digital---.html  

Sutrisno, M. B., & Parahyanti, E. (2018). The impact of psychological capital and work 

meaningfulness on work engagement in generation Y. Advances in Social Science, 

Education and Humanities Research, 139, 53–58. https://doi.org/10.2991/uipsur-

17.2018.9 

Sweetman, D., & Luthans, F. (2010). The power of positive psychology: Psychological 

capital and work engagement. In A. B. Bakker & M. P. Leiter (Ed.), Work engagement: 

A handbook of essential theory and research (pp. 54–68). Psychology Press. 

Tan, L., Wang, Y., Qian, W., & Lu, H. (2020). Leader humor and employee job crafting: 

The role of employee-perceived organizational support and work engagement. 

Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.499849 

Utomo, W. P., Lubis, U. Z., & Sudrajat, S. A. (2019). Indonesia millennial report 2019. Idn 

Research Institute. 

Wardani, L. M. I., & Anwar, M. S. (2019). The role of quality of work life as mediator: 

Psychological capital and work engagement. Humanities & Social Sciences Reviews, 

7(6), 447–463. https://doi.org/10.18510/hssr.2019.7670 

Wardani, L. M. I., Wulandari, S., Triasti, P., & Sombuling, A. (2020). The effect of 

psychological capital on work engagement: Employee well-being as a mediator. Test 

Engineering and Management, 83, 17220–17229. 

Yin, N. (2018). The influencing outcomes of job engagement: An interpretation from the 

social exchange theory. International Journal of Productivity and Performance 

Management, 67(5), 873–889. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPPM-03-2017-0054 

 
 

 

 

  

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0013164405282471
https://sajip.co.za/index.php/sajip/article/view/1071
https://www.richtmann.org/journal/index.php/mjss/article/view/6155
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/0001879180900561?via%3Dihub
https://bandungkota.bps.go.id/news/2020/01/07/15/sensus-penduduk-2020--sensus-era-digital---.html
https://bandungkota.bps.go.id/news/2020/01/07/15/sensus-penduduk-2020--sensus-era-digital---.html
https://www.atlantis-press.com/proceedings/uipsur-17/25899587
https://www.atlantis-press.com/proceedings/uipsur-17/25899587
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.499849/full
https://mgesjournals.com/hssr/article/view/hssr.2019.7670
https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/IJPPM-03-2017-0054/full/html

