FREE SHIPPING over $40
OVER 9000 FIVE-STAR REVIEWS
5% OFF ALL SUBSCRIPTIONS
100% HAPPINESS GUARANTEE
Analyze Diet
0
Home / Equine Research Bank / Front Vet Sci / Engage and enjoy-investigating predictors of employee engage...
Frontiers in veterinary science2023; 10; 1036388; doi: 10.3389/fvets.2023.1036388

Engage and enjoy-investigating predictors of employee engagement and work satisfaction in equine veterinary professionals.

Abstract: Individuals working in the field of veterinary care are regularly affected by their profession. High levels of responsibility to often provide life-saving health care to animals combined with having to manage owners' expectations and irregular working hours can cause considerable levels of work-related stress among professionals in equine veterinary practice. On the positive side, research also shows that working in the veterinary profession can have a positive impact on personal wellbeing and feelings of fulfillment. A limited number of studies has investigated work satisfaction and engagement among veterinarians across the globe, and none specifically in the equine veterinary work field. The aim of the current study was to identify relevant predictors of employee engagement and work satisfaction in relation to demographic and work environment related factors in the equine veterinary profession. Unassigned: A cross-sectional study design was used to investigate work satisfaction and employee engagement among equine veterinary professionals from the UK, the US and the Netherlands using an online survey. Unassigned: Results suggest that levels of work engagement and satisfaction in the veterinary profession may be gauged using four factors. These factors encompass Pride and purpose (the extent to which personal core values align with the mission of the employer, i.e., the veterinary practice), Company culture and relationship with management (the manner in which staff members interact with each other and the management), Working conditions and compensation (formal employment conditions relating to responsibilities and rewards and levels of collegiality) and Team culture and learning possibilities (encouragement to pursue personal and professional growth). Unassigned: Findings underline the importance of being particularly mindful of inexperienced colleagues, those with demanding family commitments and, where feasible, of providing employees with a modicum of autonomy in order to ensure a satisfied equine veterinary workforce.
Copyright © 2023 Elte, Acton, Martin, Nielen, van Weeren and Wolframm.
Get Full Text
Publication Date: 2023-02-15 PubMed ID: 36876013PubMed Central: PMC9975571DOI: 10.3389/fvets.2023.1036388Google Scholar: Lookup
The Equine Research Bank provides access to a large database of publicly available scientific literature. Inclusion in the Research Bank does not imply endorsement of study methods or findings by Mad Barn.
LinkedInCopy
  • Journal Article

Summary

This research summary has been generated with artificial intelligence and may contain errors and omissions. Refer to the original study to confirm details provided. Submit correction.

This research paper examines factors that influence job satisfaction and engagement among professionals in the equine veterinary field, using data collected via an online survey from professionals in the UK, US, and the Netherlands.

Study design and data collection

  • The study uses a cross-sectional design, a type of observational study that analyzes data collected from a population, or a representative subset, at one specific point in time. This design is frequently used in research to understand the prevalence of certain characteristics or behaviors in a defined population.
  • Data was collected through an online survey targeted at equine veterinary professionals based in the UK, the US, and the Netherlands. However, the paper doesn’t provide details about the survey’s distribution or exact content.

Prediction of job satisfaction and engagement

  • The research aimed to predict factors that lead to job satisfaction and engagement among these professionals. ‘Engagement’ in this context refers to enthusiasm for and commitment to work, which often leads to better performance and outcomes.
  • Four potentially predictive factors were identified: Pride and purpose, Company culture and relationship with management, Working conditions and compensation, and Team culture and learning possibilities.
  • ‘Pride and Purpose’ reflects the alignment between personal values and the values of the veterinary practice. A high degree of alignment can foster a sense of personal and professional achievement and satisfaction.
  • ‘Company Culture and Relationship with Management’ refers to the interactions between staff and their superiors. A healthy company culture that encourages open communication and respect can lead to higher engagement at work.
  • ‘Working Conditions and Compensation’ takes into account job responsibilities, rewards, and the general atmosphere among colleagues. Fair compensation and good working conditions can help reduce work-related stress and increase satisfaction.
  • ‘Team Culture and Learning Possibilities’ represents the opportunities for personal and professional growth within the team. Supportive team environment and chances for continuous learning can enhance job satisfaction and engagement.

Conclusions and Recommendations

  • Based on the findings, the authors stress the need to support less experienced colleagues and those managing family commitments, suggesting that providing a certain degree of autonomy may lead to higher job satisfaction in the veterinary workforce.
  • However, the study does not offer specific recommendations on how to enhance or address each factor to improve job satisfaction and engagement in the equine veterinary field. It merely highlights the importance of these factors in predicting job satisfaction and engagement.

Cite This Article

APA
Elte Y, Acton K, Martin J, Nielen M, van Weeren R, Wolframm I. (2023). Engage and enjoy-investigating predictors of employee engagement and work satisfaction in equine veterinary professionals. Front Vet Sci, 10, 1036388. https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2023.1036388

Publication

Frontiers in veterinary science
ISSN: 2297-1769
NlmUniqueID: 101666658
Country: Switzerland
Language: English
Volume: 10
Pages: 1036388
PII: 1036388

Researcher Affiliations

Elte, Yteke
  • Department of Clinical Sciences, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands.
Acton, Kate
  • The Royal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies and the Roslin Institute, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
Martin, Jessica
  • The Royal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies and the Roslin Institute, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
Nielen, Mirjam
  • Department of Population Health Sciences, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands.
van Weeren, René
  • Department of Clinical Sciences, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands.
Wolframm, Inga
  • Department of Clinical Sciences, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands.

Conflict of Interest Statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

References

This article includes 58 references
  1. Gardner DH, Hini D. Work-related stress in the veterinary profession in New Zealand.. N Z Vet J 2006 Jun;54(3):119-24.
    doi: 10.1080/00480169.2006.36623pubmed: 16751842google scholar: lookup
  2. Kersebohm JC, Lorenz T, Becher A, Doherr MG. Factors related to work and life satisfaction of veterinary practitioners in Germany.. Vet Rec Open 2017;4(1):e000229.
    doi: 10.1136/vetreco-2017-000229pmc: PMC5623335pubmed: 29018534google scholar: lookup
  3. Hansez I, Schins F, Rollin F. Occupational stress, work-home interference and burnout among Belgian veterinary practitioners.. Ir Vet J 2008 Apr 1;61(4):233-41.
    doi: 10.1186/2046-0481-61-4-233pmc: PMC3113869pubmed: 21851711google scholar: lookup
  4. Liss DJ, Kerl ME, Tsai CL. Factors associated with job satisfaction and engagement among credentialed small animal veterinary technicians in the United States.. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2020 Sep 1;257(5):537-545.
    doi: 10.2460/javma.257.5.537pubmed: 32808895google scholar: lookup
  5. Buchanan T, Wallace JE. Work satisfaction in a rapidly feminized profession: assessing the intersection of gender, parenting and support resources among veterinary doctors.. Sociol Spectr (2020) 40:116–35.
    doi: 10.1080/02732173.2020.1751013google scholar: lookup
  6. Fritschi L, Morrison D, Shirangi A, Day L. Psychological well-being of Australian veterinarians.. Aust Vet J 2009 Mar;87(3):76-81.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1751-0813.2009.00391.xpubmed: 19245615google scholar: lookup
  7. Bartram DJ, Yadegarfar G, Baldwin DS. Psychosocial working conditions and work-related stressors among UK veterinary surgeons.. Occup Med (Lond) 2009 Aug;59(5):334-41.
    doi: 10.1093/occmed/kqp072pubmed: 19482885google scholar: lookup
  8. Reijula K, Räsänen K, Hämäläinen M, Juntunen K, Lindbohm ML, Taskinen H, Bergbom B, Rinta-Jouppi M. Work environment and occupational health of Finnish veterinarians.. Am J Ind Med 2003 Jul;44(1):46-57.
    doi: 10.1002/ajim.10228pubmed: 12822135google scholar: lookup
  9. Mastenbroek NJ, Demerouti E, van Beukelen P, Muijtjens AM, Scherpbier AJ, Jaarsma AD. Measuring potential predictors of burnout and engagement among young veterinary professionals; construction of a customised questionnaire (the Vet-DRQ).. Vet Rec 2014 Feb 15;174(7):168.
    doi: 10.1136/vr.101761pubmed: 24306198google scholar: lookup
  10. Milner AJ, Niven H, Page K, LaMontagne AD. Suicide in veterinarians and veterinary nurses in Australia: 2001-2012.. Aust Vet J 2015 Sep;93(9):308-10.
    doi: 10.1111/avj.12358pubmed: 26313208google scholar: lookup
  11. Stoewen DL. Suicide in veterinary medicine: let's talk about it.. Can Vet J 2015 Jan;56(1):89-92.
    pmc: PMC4266064pubmed: 25565722
  12. Nett RJ, Witte TK, Holzbauer SM, Elchos BL, Campagnolo ER, Musgrave KJ, Carter KK, Kurkjian KM, Vanicek CF, O'Leary DR, Pride KR, Funk RH. Risk factors for suicide, attitudes toward mental illness, and practice-related stressors among US veterinarians.. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2015 Oct 15;247(8):945-55.
    doi: 10.2460/javma.247.8.945pubmed: 26421408google scholar: lookup
  13. Cake MA, McArthur MM, Matthew SM, Mansfield CF. Finding the Balance: Uncovering Resilience in the Veterinary Literature.. J Vet Med Educ 2017 Spring;44(1):95-105.
    doi: 10.3138/jvme.0116-025Rpubmed: 28206842google scholar: lookup
  14. Cake MA, Bell MA, Bickley N, Bartram DJ. The Life of Meaning: A Model of the Positive Contributions to Well-Being from Veterinary Work.. J Vet Med Educ 2015 Fall;42(3):184-93.
    doi: 10.3138/jvme.1014-097R1pubmed: 26075621google scholar: lookup
  15. Wallace JE. Meaningful work and well-being: a study of the positive side of veterinary work.. Vet Rec 2019 Nov 9;185(18):571.
    doi: 10.1136/vr.105146pubmed: 31563892google scholar: lookup
  16. Ashton-James CE, McNeilage AG. A Mixed Methods Investigation of Stress and Wellbeing Factors Contributing to Burnout and Job Satisfaction in a Specialist Small Animal Hospital.. Front Vet Sci 2022;9:942778.
    doi: 10.3389/fvets.2022.942778pmc: PMC9263834pubmed: 35812873google scholar: lookup
  17. Johnson MD, Morgeson FP, Ilgen DR, Meyer CJ, Lloyd JW. Multiple professional identities: examining differences in identification across work-related targets.. J Appl Psychol 2006 Mar;91(2):498-506.
    doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.91.2.498pubmed: 16551201google scholar: lookup
  18. Elte Y, Wolframm I, Nielen M, van Weeren R. Client satisfaction in equine veterinary practice: A structured review and qualitative synthesis.. Vet Rec 2021 Nov;189(10):e640.
    doi: 10.1002/vetr.640pubmed: 34216491google scholar: lookup
  19. Griffiths H. What are some of the key issues for equine veterinarians worldwide?. Improv Vet Pract (2021).
  20. Hanrahan C, Sabo BM, Robb P. Secondary traumatic stress and veterinarians: human–animal bonds as psychosocial determinants of health.. Traumatology (2018) 24:73.
    doi: 10.1037/trm0000135google scholar: lookup
  21. Tannenbaum J. Veterinary medical ethics: a focus of conflicting interests.. J Soc Issues (1993) 49:143–56.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1540-4560.1993.tb00914.xgoogle scholar: lookup
  22. Hartnack S, Springer S, Pittavino M, Grimm H. Attitudes of Austrian veterinarians towards euthanasia in small animal practice: impacts of age and gender on views on euthanasia.. BMC Vet Res 2016 Feb 4;12:26.
    doi: 10.1186/s12917-016-0649-0pmc: PMC4743177pubmed: 26847551google scholar: lookup
  23. Hatch PH, Winefield HR, Christie BA, Lievaart JJ. Workplace stress, mental health, and burnout of veterinarians in Australia.. Aust Vet J 2011 Nov;89(11):460-8.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1751-0813.2011.00833.xpubmed: 22008127google scholar: lookup
  24. Dosek T. Snowball sampling and Facebook: how social media can help access hard-to-reach populations.. PS Polit Sci Polit (2021) 54:651–5.
    doi: 10.1017/S104909652100041Xgoogle scholar: lookup
  25. Kumar V, Pansari A. The construct, measurement, and impact of employee engagement: a marketing perspective.. Cust Needs Solut (2014) 1:52–67.
    doi: 10.1007/s40547-013-0006-4google scholar: lookup
  26. Kumar V, Pansari A. Measuring the benefits of employee engagement.. MIT Sloan Manag Rev (2015) 56:67–72.
  27. R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. (2020).
  28. Allen IE, Seaman CA. Likert scales and data analyses.. Qual Prog (2007) 40:64–5.
  29. Nadler JT, Weston R, Voyles EC. Stuck in the middle: the use and interpretation of mid-points in items on questionnaires.. J Gen Psychol 2015;142(2):71-89.
    doi: 10.1080/00221309.2014.994590pubmed: 25832738google scholar: lookup
  30. Abdi H, Williams LJ. Principal component analysis.. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Comput Stat (2010) 2:433–59.
    doi: 10.1002/wics.101google scholar: lookup
  31. Lê S, Josse J, Husson F. FactoMineR: an R package for multivariate analysis.. J Stat Softw (2008) 25:1–18.
    doi: 10.18637/jss.v025.i01google scholar: lookup
  32. Kassambara A, Mundt F. Package ‘factoextra': Extract Visualize the Results of Multivariate Data Analyses.. (2020).
  33. Rizopoulos D. ltm: an R package for latent variable modeling and item response analysis.. J Stat Softw (2007) 17:1–25.
    doi: 10.18637/jss.v017.i05google scholar: lookup
  34. Bates D, Maechler M, Bolker BM, Walker S. Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4.. J Stat Softw (2015) 67: 1–48.
    doi: 10.18637/jss.v067.i01google scholar: lookup
  35. Hartig F. DHARMa: Residual Diagnostics for Hierarchical Regression Models.. (2020).
  36. Fox J, Weisberg S. An R Companion to Applied Regression.. (2018).
  37. Zuur AF, Ieno EN, Walker NJ, Saveliev AA, Smith GM. Mixed effects models and extensions in ecology with R.. Stat Biol Health (2009).
    doi: 10.1007/978-0-387-87458-6google scholar: lookup
  38. Russell L. Emmeans: Estimated marginal means, aka Least-Squares Means.. (2018).
  39. Meyer JP, Gagnè M. Employee engagement from a self-determination theory perspective.. Ind Organ Psychol (2008) 1:60–2.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1754-9434.2007.00010.xpubmed: 0google scholar: lookup
  40. Deci E, Ryan RM. Self-Determination theory.. International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences Elsevier (2015) p. 486–91.
    doi: 10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.26036-4google scholar: lookup
  41. Mastenbroek N, Jaarsma ADC, Scherpbier A, Van Beukelen P, Demerouti E. The role of personal resources in explaining wellbeing and performance: a study among young veterinary professionals.. Eur J Work Organ Psychol (2014) 23:190–202.
    doi: 10.1080/1359432X.2012.728040google scholar: lookup
  42. Hessels J, Millán JM, Román C. The importance of being in control of business: work satisfaction of employers, own-account workers and employees.. SSRN Electron J (2015).
    doi: 10.2139/ssrn.2594327google scholar: lookup
  43. van Tuin L, Schaufeli WB, Van den Broeck A. Engaging leadership: Enhancing work engagement through intrinsic values and need satisfaction.. Hum Resour Dev Q (2021) 32:483–505.
    doi: 10.1002/hrdq.21430google scholar: lookup
  44. Carasco-Saul M, Kim W, Kim T. Leadership and employee engagement: proposing research agendas through a review of literature.. Hum Resour Dev Rev (2015) 14:38–63.
    doi: 10.1177/1534484314560406google scholar: lookup
  45. Cake M, King L, Bell M, Cobb K, Feakes A, Hamood W. VetSet2Go: A Collaborative Outcomes and Assessment Framework Building Employability, Resilience and veterinary graduate success.. Canberra, ACT: Department of Education and Training, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory; (2019).
  46. Vanagas G, Bihari-Axelsson S, Vanagiene V. Do age, gender and marital status influence job strain development for general practitioner?. Medicina (Kaunas) 2004;40(10):1014-8.
    pubmed: 15516827
  47. Parkes LP, Langford PH. Work–life bal ance or work–life alignment? A test of the importance of work-life balance for employee engagement and intention to stay in organisations.. J Manag Organ (2008) 14:267–84.
    doi: 10.1017/S1833367200003278google scholar: lookup
  48. Richer SF, Blanchard C, Vallerand RJ. A motivational model of work turnover.. J Appl Soc Psychol (2002) 32:2089–113.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2002.tb02065.xgoogle scholar: lookup
  49. Locke EA. The nature and causes of job satisfaction.. Handb Ind Organ Psychol (1976) 31:1297–343.
  50. Duijn C, Bok H, Ten Cate O, Kremer W. Qualified but not yet fully competent: perceptions of recent veterinary graduates on their day-one skills.. Vet Rec 2020 Feb 22;186(7):216.
    doi: 10.1136/vr.105329pubmed: 31767696google scholar: lookup
  51. Farivar F, Richardson J. Configurational demographic predictors of work–nonwork satisfaction.. Hum Resour Manag J (2020) 30:133–48.
    doi: 10.1111/1748-8583.12257google scholar: lookup
  52. Bannon S, Ford K, Meltzer L. Understanding millennials in the workplace.. CPA J (2011) 81:61.
  53. Zilcha-Mano S, Mikulincer M, Shaver PR. An attachment perspective on human–pet relationships: conceptualization and assessment of pet attachment orientations.. J Res Pers (2011) 45:345–57.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jrp.2011.04.001google scholar: lookup
  54. Ruse K, Bridle K, Davison A. Exploring human-horse relationships in Australian thoroughbred jumps racing.. J Vet Behav Clin Appl Res (2016) 15:95.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jveb.2016.08.069google scholar: lookup
  55. Jones B, McGreevy PD. Ethical equitation: applying a cost-benefit approach.. J Vet Behav (2010) 5:196–202.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jveb.2010.04.001google scholar: lookup
  56. Kreitchmann RS, Abad FJ, Ponsoda V, Nieto MD, Morillo D. Controlling for Response Biases in Self-Report Scales: Forced-Choice vs. Psychometric Modeling of Likert Items.. Front Psychol 2019;10:2309.
    doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02309pmc: PMC6803422pubmed: 31681103google scholar: lookup
  57. Mulder J, de Bruijne M. Willingness of online respondents to participate in alternative modes of data collection.. Surv Pract (2019) 12:1–11.
    doi: 10.29115/SP-2019-0001google scholar: lookup
  58. Cunningham CT, Quan H, Hemmelgarn B, Noseworthy T, Beck CA, Dixon E, Samuel S, Ghali WA, Sykes LL, Jetté N. Exploring physician specialist response rates to web-based surveys.. BMC Med Res Methodol 2015 Apr 9;15:32.
    doi: 10.1186/s12874-015-0016-zpmc: PMC4404667pubmed: 25888346google scholar: lookup

Citations

This article has been cited 2 times.
  1. Elte Y, Wolframm I, Vernooij H, Nielen M, van Weeren R. Equine veterinarians' care priorities regarding vaccination, colic, lameness and pre-purchase scenarios. Equine Vet J 2026 Jan;58(1):203-211.
    doi: 10.1111/evj.14537pubmed: 40452182google scholar: lookup
  2. Whitaker K, Burnette A, Tan JY, Graves M, Hunt J, Devine E, Anderson S, Kirkendall K, Wisnieski L. Factors influencing equine veterinarians' job satisfaction and retention: A focus group study. Equine Vet J 2025 Nov;57(6):1563-1571.
    doi: 10.1111/evj.14467pubmed: 39790082google scholar: lookup
Subscribe to our newsletter
Join 99,357 horse owners like you who receive our email updates on horse health and nutrition.