In conclusion, low job engagement may be a factor in both worse work performance and well-being. Therefore, many organizations are interested in assessing, increasing, and maintaining work engagement. However, a synthesis of the evidence supporting treatments has not yet been completed. An evaluation of the evidence supporting the efficacy of work engagement interventions was done using a systematic review and meta-analysis. A controlled workplace intervention using a validated work engagement measure was found via a thorough literature search. The Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES) was most often employed. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed on studies that had the relevant quantitative data. The results were evaluated for quality, publication bias, homogeneity, and systematic sampling error. The inclusion criteria were satisfied by twenty studies, which were then divided into four categories of interventions: (i) health promotion; (ii) leadership training; (iii) work resource development; and (iv) personal resource building. Overall, there was a little but favorable impact on work engagement (k=14, Hedges g=0.29, 95%-CI=0.12–0.46). With a medium to high impact for group treatments, moderator analyses showed a significant outcome for intervention style. Implementation success varied, and there was a considerable degree of heterogeneity across the research. More research is required, and researchers are urged to work closely with organizations to create treatments that are suitable for various locations and situations and include assessments of how well they are being implemented.