Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
www.emeraldinsight.com/0959-6119.htm
IJCHM
31,4 Does work engagement
mediate the influence of job
resourcefulness on job crafting?
1684 An examination of frontline hotel employees
Received 9 May 2018 Chien-Yu Chen
Revised 28 July 2018
6 October 2018
Department of Marketing and Logistics Management,
6 November 2018 Chihlee University of Technology, New Taipei City, Taiwan
Accepted 18 November 2018
Abstract
Purpose – Researchers and practitioners have remarked the critical nature of job crafting for employee and
organizational effectiveness in the hotel industry. However, few studies have investigated the determinants of
job crafting, especially the role of personality traits. Hence, this study aims to address this research gap by
exploring how job resourcefulness influences job crafting and by clarifying the mediating role of work
engagement.
Design/methodology/approach – The sample of the present study comprised 433 Taiwanese frontline
hotel employees. The hypothesized relationships were tested using structural equation modeling.
Findings – The results reveal that job-resourceful employees tend to engage themselves at work. Engaged
employees tend to craft their jobs individually and collaboratively. That is, work engagement is a mediator
between job resourcefulness and job crafting. Finally, the job resourcefulness–work engagement–individual
crafting relationship is closer than the job resourcefulness–work engagement–collaborative crafting
relationship.
Research limitations/implications – The findings suggest that job resourcefulness can be considered
as a criterion in selecting and retaining employees. Work engagement may serve as a mechanism for
interpreting the relationship between job resourcefulness and job crafting. This study provides crucial insights
to help hotel managers seek and aid employees who can actively reshape their work conditions. However, the
sample comprises only frontline hotel employees and the generalization can be considered in the future studies.
Originality/value – This research is the first to examine the psychological process that mediates the
connection between job resourcefulness and job crafting. The findings of this study contribute to the theory of
the relationship between personality traits and job crafting and may serve as a reference in related practices.
Keywords Personality, Work engagement, Job resourcefulness, Individual crafting,
Collaborative crafting
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
Academics and practitioners have distinguished the crucial role of frontline hotel employees
in work and organizational effectiveness (Cheng and O-Yang, 2018; Kim et al., 2018a)
because these employees are the main actors to deal with customer complaints, deliver high-
quality services, and are expected to achieve high sales performance (Lu et al., 2016; Ranjan
International Journal of et al., 2015). However, frontline hotel employees need to satisfy a variety of customer needs
Contemporary Hospitality
Management
and confront long working hours, burnout, and extreme emotional demands in service
Vol. 31 No. 4, 2019
pp. 1684-1701
interactions (Karatepe et al., 2014; Min et al., 2015). Hotel managers also often fail to make
© Emerald Publishing Limited the most of employee resources (Øgaard et al., 2008). Therefore, frontline hotel employees
0959-6119
DOI 10.1108/IJCHM-05-2018-0365 work in a sparse resource environment (Karatepe and Douri, 2012), which features a dearth
of job resources or support (e.g. less training and assistance, insufficient rewards, deficient Job crafting
human resources, and job insecurity) related to work duties (Harris et al., 2006; Karatepe,
2011; Licata et al., 2003). Hotel supervisors need to endeavor to improve employees’ job
situations through job design (Chen et al., 2014).
Job crafting represents bottom-up and employee-centered job design, in contrast with
traditional top-down and manager-centered job design (Wrzesniewski and Dutton, 2001).
The critical role of job crafting for employee and organizational effectiveness has been
recognized by scholars and practitioners (Kim et al., 2018a; Tims et al., 2016). Researchers
1685
have examined the links between job crafting and outcome variables (e.g. person-job fit, job
satisfaction and job burnout) (Chen et al., 2014; Cheng and O-Yang, 2018). However, few
studies have explored the antecedents of employees’ job crafting (Kim et al., 2018b;
Roczniewska and Bakker, 2016).
Past studies have revealed that personality traits play an essential role of influencing
employee job crafting behaviors (Roczniewska and Bakker, 2016). These personality traits
include proactive personality, promotion focus, narcissism, and psychopathy
(Brenninkmeijer and Hekkert-Koning, 2015; Roczniewska and Bakker, 2016; Tims et al.,
2012). Job resourcefulness, which is viewed as a situational-level personality trait, enables
workers to perform efficiently and effectively despite scarce resources (Yavas et al., 2011a).
Job resourcefulness is crucial for hotel employees in directly managing customers’ requests
and ensuring that their expectations are met (Yavas et al., 2011a). Meanwhile, job
resourcefulness has useful implications for the hospitality industry and has received
considerable attention from scholars and managers (Cheng and Chen, 2017). Some
researchers have stated that job resourcefulness is associated with job outcomes (e.g.
creativity and job satisfaction) (Harris et al., 2006; Semedo et al., 2016). However, according
to our review of the literature, the link between job resourcefulness and job crafting is under-
examined.
Previous studies have investigated the psychological mechanism underlying the
influence of job resourcefulness on work-related outcomes (Harris et al., 2013). On this basis,
we deeply examine how job resourcefulness influences job crafting; that is, the mediation
processes in the job resourcefulness-job crafting relationship. We include work engagement
in this framework because it mediates the link between employee personality traits and job
outcomes (Bakker et al., 2012b; Paek et al., 2015). Job-resourceful employees are intrinsically
motivated to complete their jobs efficiently (Harris et al., 2013) and are inclined to exhibit
high work engagement (Cheng and Chen, 2017; Karatepe and Aga, 2012). Thus, employees
with such a personality trait have high work engagement because of their inner drive to
work more effectively. Work engagement can also be a vital antecedent of employees’
inclination toward job crafting (Bakker et al., 2012a; Lu et al., 2014). Hence, we consider
whether work engagement is a bridge between job resourcefulness and job crafting.
Based on the aforementioned discussion, to the author’s knowledge, no study has
developed a framework to explore the linkages between job resourcefulness, job crafting and
work engagement. Accordingly, the present study contributes to the body of hospitality
knowledge in several ways. First, we investigate whether job resourcefulness is associated
with job crafting and address a call for research on how personality traits influence
employee outcomes under poor working conditions (Kusluvan et al., 2010). This study also
responds to Kim et al. (2018b), who examined the determinants of job crafting. Second,
research that has explored the predictors and outcomes of hotel employees’ work
engagement is sparse (Kim and Koo, 2017). Research on work engagement is still limited in
the hospitality field (Liu et al., 2017). Our study addresses this gap in hospitality research by
analyzing whether work engagement acts a mediator in the job resourcefulness-job crafting
IJCHM relationship. The current study fills up a research gap identified by Yavas et al. (2011b), who
31,4 indicated that hotel studies should examine the links connecting job resourcefulness and
mental and behavioral outcomes. Finally, the phenomenon of “do more with less” is common
in the service industry (Harris et al., 2013). The findings can enhance managers’
understanding of how to increase frontline employees’ job crafting in resource-depleted
work conditions.
1686
Literature review, hypotheses development and research framework
Job resourcefulness
Job resourcefulness means an “enduring disposition” to harness limited resources and
conquer obstacles when completing job-related objectives and can be viewed as an
individual-difference concept (Licata et al., 2003, p. 257) or an employee personality trait
(Karatepe and Douri, 2012). Mowen (2000) proposed a hierarchical personality model with
four trait levels positioned according to degrees of abstractness: elemental, compound,
situational, and surface traits. Elemental traits are the least concrete, followed by compound,
situational, and surface traits. Based on Licata et al. (2003), the three levels are situational
traits that refer to enduring dispositions in which individuals are inclined to display
consistent behaviors in certain situations. Job resourcefulness is associated with enduring
pressure to act in a particular manner in a given situation (Ashill et al., 2009). Specifically,
job-resourceful employees tend to fulfill their work goals despite resource-depleted working
conditions (Semedo et al., 2016). Therefore, job resourcefulness is positioned as a situational
trait and is affected by elemental and compound traits (Licata et al., 2003). Employees who
possess the personality traits of conscientiousness and openness (elemental traits) and
competitiveness (a compound trait) are also likely to possess job resourcefulness
(Harris et al., 2013).
Frontline hotel employees encounter face-to-face contacts with customers under resource-
depleted job conditions (Karatepe and Douri, 2012), resulting in stressful and demanding
situations. However, job-resourceful employees can provide quality service in a poor work
environment, coping with work-related problems despite limited resources (Harris et al.,
2007). For example, job-resourceful employees can respond to unhappy or dissatisfied
customers by displaying respect and care in the service process (Karatepe and Douri, 2012).
Workers with high job resourcefulness are more resilient in the face of work restraints and
achieve work-related goals in resource-limited environments (Yavas et al., 2011a).
Accordingly, previous studies have investigated the positive functions and benefits of
job resourcefulness in various service environments (Harris et al., 2006). Semedo et al. (2016)
investigated employees from public and private organizations and reported that compared
with employees with low job resourcefulness, job-resourceful employees are more creative at
work. Service recovery performance can be enhanced by job resourcefulness in a study of
call center employees conducted by Ashill et al. (2009). Job-resourceful frontline bank
employees are committed to their organizations (Karatepe and Aga, 2012). Therefore, job
resourcefulness is crucial for employee and organizational outcomes. Nevertheless, Karatepe
and Douri (2012) reported that few hotel studies give attention to job resourcefulness.
Work engagement
Work engagement means a positive, affective-motivational and work-related state of mind
(Schaufeli et al., 2002). Vigor, dedication and absorption are the main components of work
engagement (Bakker and Bal, 2010). Vigor means that employees are energetic and mentally
resilient at work; dedication refers that employees embrace their jobs deeply and
enthusiastically; and absorption reflects that employees concentrate on the work happily Job crafting
and absorbedly (Bakker et al., 2012a).
Scholars and practitioners have recognized the central role of work engagement for
improving work efficiency and effectiveness in the hotel field (Liu and Cho, 2018; Lyu et al.,
2016). For example, work engagement can enhance job performance, extra-role customer
service, and work-life balance (Cain et al., 2018; Karatepe, 2013). Employees with high work
engagement are inclined to provide great service, satisfy customer needs, and exhibit
creativity in their work (Karatepe, 2013; Karatepe and Olugbade, 2016). Work engagement 1687
can also reduce employee turnover intention and enhance service recovery (Karatepe and
Olugbade, 2016; Kim and Gatling, 2018). High turnover intention and poor service quality
are detrimental to organizational performance. Therefore, managers are supposed to
cultivate abundant frontline employees with high work engagement, thereby facilitating
human capital management (Karatepe and Olugbade, 2016). Further research is required to
examine the work engagement construct in the hospitality industry (Liu et al., 2017).
Job crafting
The construct of job crafting introduced by Wrzesniewski and Dutton (2001) refers to a set
of proactive behaviors that employees may utilize to alter the physical, relational, and
cognitive boundaries of their jobs. Because these behaviors pertain to physical, relational,
and cognitive changes in the jobs, scholars have suggested other forms of job crafting. For
instance, Tims et al. (2012) identified four types of job-crafting behaviors: increasing social
job resources, increasing structural job resources, increasing challenging job demands, and
decreasing hindering job demands. The job-crafting behaviors suggested by Leana et al.
(2009) are individual and collaborative crafting. In individual crafting, employees adopt
active roles to alter and frame their job boundaries, and in collaborative crafting, employees
work together to adjust task boundaries and thereby accomplish common job-related
objectives (Leana et al., 2009). In the current study, we utilize the classification by Leana
et al. (2009) because frontline hotel employees can adjust their service process on their own
(i.e. through individual crafting) or in cooperation with other employees (i.e. through
collaborative crafting) to improve service experiences (Chen et al., 2014). In the hospitality
field, individual crafting is such that workers decide to provide extra blankets for customers
by themselves. Collaborative crafting is such that an employee decides together with his/her
coworkers to change the way of providing great service to customers or to their family
members and friends.
The degree that employees craft their jobs plays a crucial role in employee and
organizational effectiveness. When employees display job crafting behaviors, they
experience a high level of organizational commitment and job satisfaction (Cheng et al.,
2016), a high person-job fit, and enhanced meaningfulness at work (Tims et al., 2016).
Therefore, studies have examined the antecedents of job crafting, including individual
characteristics (e.g. regulatory focus) (Tims and Bakker, 2010), work characteristics (e.g. job
autonomy) (Kim et al., 2018a), and organizational characteristics (e.g. perceived
organizational support) (Kanten, 2014). However, examinations of the determinants of job
crafting have been limited (Kim et al., 2018b).
Previous research has investigated the influence of personality traits on job crafting. The
Big Five model is based on the basic personality traits that influence employees’ work
behaviors. Bell and Njoli (2016) found that employees with a high level of conscientiousness,
agreeableness, openness to experience, or neuroticism are more likely to craft their jobs; by
contrast, extraverted employees are less inclined to engage in job crafting. The influences of
other personality variables on job crafting have also been explored. Bakker et al. (2012b)
IJCHM argued that proactive employees are inclined to craft their jobs. Brenninkmeijer and
31,4 Hekkert-Koning (2015) revealed that promotion-focused individuals tend to craft their social
and structural job resources and challenging demands. Furthermore, Bipp and Demerouti
(2015) observed that employees with high approach temperament seek out resources and
challenges, whereas employees with high avoidance temperament attempt to decrease their
job demands. Compared with the above personality variables, Roczniewska and Bakker
1688 (2016) examined the relationship between dark personality traits (e.g. narcissism and
psychopathy) and job crafting. They discovered that individuals with high narcissism
exhibit greater tendencies to seek social job resources and challenges and to avoid job
demands. Individuals who score high in psychopathy are less likely to increase their social
resources.
However, different jobs require different traits (Raymark et al., 1997). As described, job
resourcefulness is a situation-related personality trait that plays an important role for
frontline employees in the service industry where resource scarcity exists. Therefore, an
examination of the role of job resourcefulness in job crafting among hotel employees is
imperative. To our knowledge, few discussions in the literature have focused on the
potential influence of job resourcefulness on job crafting. In addition, the aforementioned
studies have explored the influence of personality traits on job crafting, but have not
consider individual crafting and collaborative crafting. However, individual and
collaborative crafting are crucial job crafting behaviors in the hotel industry (Cheng and
O-Yang, 2018). Therefore, a research gap exists pertaining to the effect of job
resourcefulness on individual and collaborative crafting.
Research framework
The research framework based on the aforementioned hypotheses is displayed in Figure 1.
Age, gender, and education are also related to work engagement and job crafting (Karatepe
and Olugbade, 2009; Roczniewska and Bakker, 2016). Therefore, these variables are treated
as control variables (Figure 1).
Methodology
Participants and procedures
Data were obtained from frontline hotel employees because most frontline hotel
employees work in resource-constrained environments (Harris et al., 2006). Following
the suggestions of Cheng and O-Yang (2018), we targeted four- and five-star full-time
employees who had frequent contact with customers (e.g. food servers and front desk
staff). Based on information from the Taiwan Tourism Bureau (2015), Taiwan has 73
four- and five-star hotels. The authors contacted the personnel managers of each hotel
to recruit participants. In total, we obtained the participation of 18 hotels which contain
100-400 rooms and seven hotels which have 400-700 rooms. This distribution by hotel
size is proportional to the hotel population. According to Podsakoff et al. (2012), we
reassured the respondents that their responses would be anonymous and confidential.
Figure 1.
The conceptual
framework of the
relationships among
job resourcefulness,
work engagement
and job crafting
Each participants received a package with a cover letter, a return envelope, the Job crafting
questionnaire and a gift.
Many assessment methods have been used to verify sample size adequacy. Siddiqui
(2013) suggested that 15 cases are required per indicator (i.e. per questionnaire item that
reflects the latent variable). Our study used 25 questionnaire items to measure the four latent
variables, representing that the cutoff sample size was 375. In addition, a relatively large
sample size can enhance model estimation and a sample size between 300 and 500 is
1691
appropriate for research intended for problem-solving (Malhotra and Birks, 2007). Based on
these considerations, 20-25 questionnaires were administered to each hotel. In total, 580
questionnaires were distributed, and 448 were returned. After 15 invalid surveys were
excluded, 433 usable questionnaires remained (response rate, 75 per cent); thus, our sample
size was acceptable; 57.7 per cent of the participants were female; 50.1 per cent were 26-35
years old; 67 per cent were single; 69.1 per cent held a bachelor’s degree; and 52.9 per cent
had 1-5 years of organizational tenure. The sample’s characteristics were similar to those of
other samples in the hotel literature (Chen et al., 2014; Li et al., 2012).
To assess the sample for nonresponse bias, the responses of participants who submitted
their questionnaires later were compared with those of participants who submitted their
questionnaires earlier (Armstrong and Overton, 1977). The means of all the studied
variables did not differ between the early and late survey groups (the first 75 per cent and
the remaining 25 per cent). Therefore, the nonresponse bias could be ruled out in this study.
Measures
The researchers utilized previously used survey questionnaires and measured all of the
constructs by employing a five-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly
agree). The back-translation procedure from Van de Vijver and Hambleton (1996) was
executed by the authors and two hotel workers whose Chinese and English are both fluent to
ensure the translated version accuracy. A pilot test was administered to 30 Taiwanese hotel
employees to confirm the validity and reliability of the questionnaire items.
Job resourcefulness was evaluated with four items from the study of Licata et al. (2003).
Work engagement was used with nine items that were derived from Schaufeli et al. (2006).
Finally, job crafting was operationalized with 12 items from Leana et al. (2009), with six
focused on individual crafting and six on collaborative crafting. These aforementioned valid
and reliable scales have been adopted in previous hotel studies (Cheng and Chen, 2017;
Cheng and O-Yang, 2018).
addition, the AVE of each construct was greater than that of any pair of constructs
(Table III). Thus, discriminant validity was supported (Fornell and Larcker, 1981).
Because the studied variables were measured using a self-evaluation method, it is
necessary to confirm that the findings were unaffected by common method variance (CMV).
According to the CFA results, the single-factor model had significantly poor fit values
compared with the measurement model (Table II). Therefore, CMV was not a major concern
in the current study.
Zero-order correlations
As shown in Table III, job resourcefulness significantly and positively associated with work
engagement (r = 0.71; all p < 0.01), individual crafting (0.73) and collaborative crafting
(0.63). Additionally, work engagement positively related to individual crafting and
collaborative crafting (0.69 and 0.62 respectively). Finally, individual crafting was positively Job crafting
associated with collaborative crafting (0.69).
Figure 2.
Structural path
estimates model
IJCHM presented in Table IV, the comparison of x 2 difference and proportion of significant
31,4 hypothesized paths indicated that the alternative model had worse fit than the original
model. Accordingly, the hypothesized framework was supported.
The researchers adopted Preacher and Hayes’s (2004) SPSS macros to estimate the true
indirect influence and its 95 per cent confidence interval (CI). The Sobel test suggested by
previous studies (Mansour and Mohanna, 2018) reported that work engagement mediated
1694 the influence of job resourcefulness on individual crafting (Sobel = 0.23, p < 0.01; 95 per cent
CI = 0.16, 0.31) and collaborative crafting (Sobel = 0.24, p < 0.01; 95 per cent CI = 0.16, 0.32).
Therefore, H3a and H3b were supported.
Finally, the direct and indirect influences of job resourcefulness on individual crafting
through work engagement were 0.63 and 0.23 (cumulative influence = 0.86). The direct and
indirect influences of job resourcefulness on collaborative crafting through work
engagement were 0.52 and 0.28 (cumulative influence = 0.80). Therefore, the job
resourcefulness-work engagement-individual crafting relationship was closer than the job
resourcefulness-work engagement-collaborative crafting relationship.
Theoretical implications
First, previous researchers have suggested that job resourcefulness is a crucial determinant
of many work-related outcomes (Semedo et al., 2016). In addition, Yavas et al. (2011b)
Practical implications
The present study offers several key managerial implications. First, the service industry is
characterized by high job and emotional demands (Yoo and Arnold, 2016). It is essential for
managers to identify employees who can deal with these work pressures by actively crafting
their work conditions. Our findings suggest that job resourcefulness can be considered as a
criterion for selecting and retaining such frontline employees. Job resourcefulness measures
or scenario-grounded exams may be adopted as assessments of whether job applicants or
IJCHM current employees exhibit job resourcefulness. Managers can also establish training
31,4 programs to enhance employees’ job resourcefulness.
Second, job-resourceful employees tend to solve work-related problems and are not
passive employees who view work problems as a hindrance to complete their work.
Therefore, job-resourceful employees may be positioned as pioneers who discover problems
at the point of contact with customers and improve their service interactions efficiently.
1696 Managers can apply participative management practices to obtain feedback from job-
resourceful employees and improve job design by collecting these employees’ comments
regarding how they craft their work to solve the work problems in the service process.
Third, work engagement involves a crucial psychological process in which job
resourcefulness influences individual and collaborative crafting. In addition, the
job resourcefulness-work engagement-individual crafting relationship is closer than the job
resourcefulness-work engagement-collaborative crafting relationship. Accordingly,
managers should provide job-resourceful employees with the resources required to enhance
their work engagement. For example, managers can plan performance appraisal programs
(e.g. results-oriented or pay increments for individual performance) to encourage work
engagement (Huertas-Valdivia et al., 2018) and in turn display individual crafting.
Additionally, empowerment, job responsibility, and role ambiguity have all been shown to
influence work engagement (Harris et al., 2006; Karatepe, 2013; Karatepe et al., 2014).
Therefore, managers should provide job-resourceful employees with empowerment,
autonomy, and clear and relevant work instructions (e.g. job responsibility and goals) that
help them work more effectively, and thereby enhance their work engagement, which
subsequently strengthens their inclinations to exhibit job crafting. In summary, these
practical strategies can aid managers in enhancing how job resourcefulness and work
engagement affect job crafting activities in the organizations.
Corresponding author
Chien-Yu Chen can be contacted at: dustinchen@mail.chihlee.edu.tw
For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com