How Fair Is My Job? The Effects of Organisational Justice on Job Involvement among Indian IT Workers during COVID-19

Abstract

Organisational justice has attained considerable attention due to work-related uncertainties induced by the COVID-19 pandemic. Using the uncertainty management theory of fairness at work, social exchange theory and norm reciprocity theory, this article investigates the mediating effects of work-related quality of life and job embeddedness on the relationship between organisational justice and job involvement during COVID-19. Data were collected through a survey questionnaire from five IT companies in India. Hayes’ PROCESS macro was used to test the parallel mediation effect in our study. The findings indicate that work-related quality of life and job embeddedness fully mediate the association between organisational justice and job involvement, and the point estimate of the differences between the two mediators confirms that work-related quality of life and job embeddedness are no different from each other, and they mediate the relationship between organisational justice and job involvement in parallel manner. The study highlights benefit that organisations may achieve from devising policies that capitalise on organisational fairness and facilitate working factors for better employee performance amid uncertain situations and shock events such as the current pandemic. The article also discusses other managerial implications to overcome the unwanted effects of employees’ work life uncertainties.

Keywords

Organisational justice job involvement work-related quality of life job embeddedness job engagement parallel mediation model COVID-19

A defining feature of the coronavirus pandemic is the employment uncertainty it has caused across organisations all over the world (Ruffolo et al., 2021; Wilson et al., 2020). The pandemic has induced anxiety among the workers about their futures. A recent report by McKinsey & Company shows that one of the best ways to help employees feel involved and adapt to the new ways of working when there is a constant flux in the organisational environment is to ensure respect, equality and fairness (Emmett et al., 2020). This context highlights the relevance of uncertainty management theory (UMT) (Lind & van den Bos, 2002) which notes that managers need to confer fairness as soon as possible when uncertainty is high (Lind & van den Bos, 2002). This issue of employees’ perception of organisational fairness is elaborated with the concept of organisational justice. Organisational justice is defined as ‘the employee’s perception regarding the fair and equal treatment in the organization’ (Murtaza et al., 2011, p. 74). Organisational justice plays a vital role in affecting several organisational and employee outcomes (Masterson et al., 2000; Pan et al., 2018), such as work engagement (van den Berg et al., 2008), job satisfaction (Diekmann, 2004) and well-being at work (Huong et al., 2016). These have significance for employees’ work-related quality of life, defined as a method used by organisations to respond to employees’ well-being (Wong et al., 2019) by enabling them to make decisions that assist them to design their lives at work (Robbins, 1989).

Moreover, the perception of organisational justice acts as a guard against well-being diminishers such as burnout (Correia & Almeida, 2020), as well as against any kind of psychological or physical distress (Blau, 1964; Gouldner, 1960). This coincides with the concept of social exchange theory (SET) and norm reciprocity theory (NRT) both of which emphasise the dynamics of how the perception of fairness at work influences one’s behaviour towards the organisation and contributes to specific levels of employee outcomes (Masterson et al., 2000). Against this background, this article seeks to establish an association between organisational justice and work-related quality of life which may help to predict whether the level of justice perception guides the level of employee health (Fujishiro & Heaney, 2009).

Currently, many organisations across the globe are re-evaluating employees’ job involvement amid the uncertainty. Job involvement refers to continuous effort put in by employees in physical, cognitive and emotional forms to complete their job and enhance their productivity and performance (Kropp, 2021). Previous studies indicate employees’ perceptions of justice at work act as a substantial factor influencing job involvement, and there is a significant association between the two (Lambert et al., 2019; Malhotra et al., 2020). However, there are no studies that explore the relationship between organisational justice and job involvement during uncertain situations such as COVID-19. This article seeks to fill this research gap. It investigates the relationship between organisational justice and job involvement considering other person–organisation (P–O) fit constructs. One such P–O construct is job embeddedness. Higher levels of job embeddedness facilitate employees to work productively with better outcomes (Ghosh & Gurunathan, 2014). Job embeddedness is a state of mind in which an employee decides to stay with the organisation because of different on-the-job or organisational and off-the-job or community factors (Lee et al., 2014). Job embeddedness relates to a person’s fit with and enmeshment in his organisation (Mitchell et al., 2001) and, hence, has relevance in the association between organisational justice and job involvement. This article also simultaneously explores the association between work-related quality of life and job involvement of employees. This is because there is a dearth of studies that explore the quality of work–life and its contribution to employee participation across diverse cultural and organisational contexts (Leitão et al., 2019), especially during uncertain times such as COVID-19 (Goodell, 2020).

Conceptual Framework and Research Hypotheses

Organisational Justice and Work-Related Quality of Life

People often make social judgements while evaluating the fairness of the rewards they receive for their efforts (Pan et al., 2018). Insights from SET (Blau, 1964) and NRT (Gouldner, 1960) suggest that employees who feel that their organisation values their contribution exhibit positive feelings towards their jobs and organisations. When individuals perceive and experience a lack of fairness in the organisation (Emmett et al., 2020), they may use manipulative means to achieve their goals. Employees’ perception of impartiality in reward and resource allocation and procedural fairness in decision-making affects an individual’s beliefs about receiving desired respect and dignity from the authority figures (Malhotra et al., 2020). Organisational justice can act as a buffer, guarding employees against the impact of work stressors (Ghosh et al., 2017; Malhotra et al., 2020). Unfairness can lead to work stress and other negative outcomes such as underperformance, substance abuse, early retirement and employee turnover (Campbell & Gavett, 2021), ultimately affecting employees’ work-related quality of life. Work-related quality of life covers the physical, social, psychological and ecological sides of an employee (Wong et al., 2019). It can also be considered as the outcome of an evaluation that each person performs by comparing his expectations with his reality (Argentero et al., 2007).

COVID-19 has led to several work-related difficulties such as skewed work–life balance, isolation and other psychosocial hazards (ILO, 2020). Besides, the changing work dynamics involving the physical and relational separation have hampered the two-way dialogue between the organisation and the employees and reduced trust between them (Maurer, 2020). According to the SET and NRT, any coordination gap can develop a feeling of uncertainty among individuals about their relationship with the organisation (Somashekhar et al., 2011). This, in turn, can affect work-related quality of life, causing imbalance between contribution and reward (Somashekhar et al., 2011). With uncertainty about future work development, it is apparent that the perception of fairness in organisational treatment (Ghosh & Gurunathan, 2014) and outcomes by employees working remotely (De-la-Calle-Durán & Rodríguez-Sánchez, 2021) can impact their well-being. As organisational justice directly influences health and quality of work and life (Gillet et al., 2013), we propose the following hypothesis.

H₁: There is a positive relationship between organisational justice and work-related quality of life.

Organisational Justice and Job Embeddedness

UMT states that fairness perception influences employees more when they face uncertainty (Lind & van den Bos, 2002), and fairness can decrease the work-related negative effects and enhance the work-related negative effects in uncertain times (van den Bos, 2001; van den Bos & Miedema, 2000). The ongoing pandemic has heightened uncertainty among all sections of workers around the world (Zavras, 2021) which warrants actions on the part of organisations to reflect fairness and concerns for their employees to help them manage uncertainty (Ruffolo et al., 2021; Weinberger, 2019). These actions can reduce anxiety, resulting in better-engaged employees (Bakker & Demerouti, 2008). Hence, the greater the organisational justice, the better the job enmeshment or embeddedness (De-la-Calle-Durán & Rodríguez-Sánchez, 2021). Hence, we hypothesise the following.

H₂: There is a positive relationship between organisational justice and job embeddedness.

Work-Related Quality of Life and Job Involvement

Work-related quality of life decides an employee’s emotions regarding several aspects such as job content, working situation and career advancement (Wong et al., 2019), and it is important in integrating employees into their work (Wong et al., 2019). However, changing demands during shock events such as COVID-19 can result in employees experiencing psychological resource loss (Suskin & Al-Yagon, 2020). As per the conversation of resources (COR) theory, in uncertain times individuals are inclined to protect present resources and acquire new ones (Hobfoll, 1989) and attempt to replenish lost resources by employment-related gains (Vinokur & Schul, 2002). But this replenishment is possible only when the organisation meets the employees’ expectations (Stiglbauer & Kovacs, 2018). This can also allow organisations to encourage their employees to take greater responsibilities in their work, thereby enhancing job involvement. Based on the above argument we propose the following hypothesis.

H₃: There is a positive relationship between work-related quality of life and job involvement.

Job Embeddedness and Job Involvement

The framework of job embeddedness constitutes elements such as fit, link and sacrifice which influence employees’ intent to stay with an organisation (Lee et al., 2014). The pandemic apparently has compromised these features with the depletion of employee resources. Literature on COR suggests that the impact of resource reduction can only be addressed by replacing them somehow (Halbesleben, 2006). A significant way to address these deficits is by aligning the job features with employee needs (Hackman & Oldham, 1976). It is recommended that a sync between appraisal and outcome enhances the link (formal or informal connection among employees, institutions and people) (Holtom et al., 2006) and the fit aspect of job embeddedness, ensuring compatibility with the organisation and the environment (Lee et al., 2014). Moreover, as equity theory shows, the balance between the inputs provided by the employees to the organisation and the output they receive from the organisation such as security, achievement, praise and reputation increases employee satisfaction and enhances their job involvement (Adams, 1963). This becomes particularly important in uncertain times of COVID-19 when distant work can result in job dissatisfaction and alienation, requiring organisations to create an enabling environment for greater employee– job involvement (Malhotra, et al., 2020). Based on the above argument we propose the following hypothesis.

H₄: There is a positive relationship between job embeddedness and job involvement.

Organisational Justice and Job Involvement

Research shows that organisational acknowledgement of the efforts put in by employees to complete job results in fairness perception (Edwards, 2009). In turn, felt procedural fairness results in greater job involvement (Lambert et al., 2013), job engagement (Uddin et al., 2019) and enhanced interest in work (Brown, 1996). Insights based on SET show that organisations need to address and embolden a social exchange relationship with employees in order to motivate them (Maslach & Leiter, 2017). This social exchange involves employees forming a psychological bond with the organisation through a process of organisational identification (Rousseau, 1998). This process promotes a positive feeling of being valued and respected by the organisation among employees (Gagné & Deci, 2005).

A recent Indian study reiterates that fair treatment of employees by organisations fosters psychological ownership and promotes organisational involvement (K & Ranjit, 2021). In general, employees who feel their organisation satisfies their needs are automatically motivated (Gagné & Deci, 2005). They internalise the organisational rules and work processes and feel included in the organisation and connected with their peers (Chiniara & Bentein, 2016). Employees develop converged interests and feel situated and connected in the social fabric of the job (Mitchell et al., 2001), resulting in a more involved workforce (Chen & Chiu, 2009). Thus, we propose the following hypothesis.

H₅: There is a positive relationship between organisational justice and job involvement.

Mediating Effect of Work-Related Quality of Life and Job Embeddedness on the Relationship Between Organisational Justice and Job Involvement

People generally judge their deservingness against their contribution and needs (Leitão et al., 2019). This also helps them judge organisational fairness in situations where their contributions vary according to organisational needs (Pan et al., 2018). They also evaluate the justice they receive vis-à-vis their peers (Blakely et al., 2005). Based on this evaluative behaviour, individuals identify themselves with the group and view themselves in relation to the values held or promoted by the group (Lee et al., 2014). In the current pandemic situation, comparable elements of rewards and pay may cause feelings of injustice and reduced satisfaction among employees, which may lead to employees becoming less involved in their job (Akinbobola, 2011). However, justice perception and embeddedness can be addressed with greater enmeshment, links and associations at work among people (Mallol et al., 2007), subsequently, improving the work-related quality of life (Haghgui, 2015). Embedded employees with improved work-related quality of life find a match among their professional interests, opportunities and rewards the organisation provides, leading to reciprocity in actions (Mitchell et al., 2001). Organisational appreciation of employees’ contributions reinforces their positive feelings and commitment towards the organisation which further enhances their job involvement (Adams, 1963; Eder & Eisenberger, 2008; Pohl & Galleta, 2017). Hence, we propose the following hypothesis.

H₆: Work-related quality of life and job embeddedness will mediate the relationship between organisational justice and job involvement in parallel manner.

Based on the above hypotheses, we suggest the following conceptual model (see Figure 1).

Methodology

Sample and Data Collection

With the COVID-19 restrictions in place in India (and around the world), a physical mode of data collection was not possible. Therefore, we administered an online survey on 500 professionals from five prominent IT companies located in Bangalore, India. The study followed a convenience sampling technique and collected the data from IT industry as the authors work frequently and closely with these industry professionals. We got in touch with the human resource departments of the IT companies who offered us demographic details of the employees. We used this employee database for the sampling frame of our study. We received responses from 255 IT professionals and retained 248 samples after discarding those with incomplete information. All participants were wholly informed about the nature and purpose of the survey beforehand, and it was only after we obtained their informed consent that we administered the surveys.

Table 1.

Mean, Standard Deviations and Correlations of Variables in the Study.

	M	SD	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8
1. Age	–	–	1
2. Gender	–	–	–0.102	1
3. Experience	–	–	0.742^***	–0.003	1
4. Level of management	–	–	0.374^***	–0.152^**	0.328^***	1
5. Organisational justice	3.21	0.50	0.258^***	0.154^*	0.347^***	0.150^**	1
6. Job embeddedness	3.69	0.42	0.179^**	–0.005	0.121^**	0.182^**	0.252^***	1
7. Job involvement	3.77	0.38	0.287^***	–0.002	0.245^***	0.262^***	0.276^***	0.454^***	1
8. Work-related quality of life	3.43	0.31	0.233^***	0.032	0.169^**	0.170^**	0.390^*	0.502^***	0.476^***	1

Source: The authors.

Notes: *denotes significance at.05 level; **denotes significance at.01 level; ***denotes significance at .001 level.

M = mean; SD = standard deviation.

The sample of the present study consisted of 44% male and 57% female respondents. Most of the respondents belonged to the age group of 23–24 years (56%), closely followed by the age groups of 35–46 years (33%) and 47–57 years (11%). With respect to the level of management to which the respondents belonged, the junior-level of management (67%) had most of the representation, followed by middle- (32%) and senior-level employees (2%). In addition, most of the respondents had a work experience in the present organisation for 1–8 years (65%), followed by those with experience of 9–17 years (35%) and 18–24 years (4%) taking up the rear.

Survey Instruments

The study uses standardised research measures with proven reliability and validity. These measures are discussed below.

Organisational Justice

The Ambrose and Schminke’s (2009) organisational justice scale was used for measuring organisational justice (Cronbach α = 82). It is a 6-item scale with items such as ‘Overall, I am treated fairly by my organisation’ and ‘Most of the people who work here would say they are often treated unfairly’, measured on a 7-point Likert scale which ranges from point 1 (strongly disagree) to point 7 (strongly agree).

Job Embeddedness

Clinton et al.’s (2012) job embeddedness scale was used for measuring job embeddedness (Cronbach α = 78). It is a 12-item scale with items such as ‘Overall, I fit very well in the organisation’ and ‘I would be very sad to leave the general community where I am based right now’, measured on a 5-point Likert scale which ranges from point 1 (strongly disagree) to point 5 (strongly agree).

Job Involvement

The Kanungo (1982) job involvement scale was used for measuring job involvement (Cronbach α = 75). It is a 10-item scale with items such as ‘To me, my job is only a small part of who I am’ and ‘I am very much involved personally in my job’, measured on a 5-point Likert scale which ranges from point 1 (disagree) to point 5 (agree).

Work Related Quality of Life Scale

The (Edward et al., 2007) 23-item work-related quality of life scale was used for measuring work-related quality of life (Cronbach α = 75). Items such as ‘I have a clear set of goals and aims to enable me to do my job’ and ‘I am satisfied with my life’, measured on a 5-point Likert scale which ranges from point 1 (strongly disagree) to point 5 (strongly agree), were used to gauge the perceived quality of life of employees as measured through six psychosocial subfactors.

Analysis

The study uses a quantitative research design where primary data have been analysed using IBM SPSS v. 25, SPSS PROCESS Macro and LISREL v.9.30. SPSS PROCESS Macro was used to test the parallel mediation.

Control Variables

We controlled for demographic variables such as age, gender and tenure. It has been found that younger workers are more affected by fairness (Wagner & Rush, 2000). Also, research by Anitha and Muralidharan (2014) shows a significant association between the age of employees with reference to their job involvement. Gender differences can moderate perceived fairness (Ekmekci, 2011; Greenberg & McCarty, 1990). Research also predicts the relationship between interactional justice and employee’s tenure in the organisation (George et al., 2017), with tenure being related to job involvement (Macesich, 2000). Thus, we controlled for these variables while predicting the relationship between organisational justice and job involvement to alleviate reverse causation concern and the confounding effects of these factors.

Confirmatory Factor Analysis

We conducted a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to assess the convergent and discriminant validity and the goodness of fit for the measurement model before testing study’s hypotheses with LISREL. 9.30, as suggested by Anderson and Gerbing (1988). The proposed four factor measurement model consisted of work-related quality of life, job involvement, job embeddedness and organisational justice. We opted for Satorra–Bentler scaled Chi-squared statistic (S–Bχ²) (Satorra & Bentler, 2001) in our study as a robust correction for non-normality. We also report the values of root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA), comparative fit index (CFI) and the Tucker–Lewis index (TLI). The results of the CFA revealed an acceptable model fit (S–Bχ² = 175.81, p < .001, CFI = 0.93, TLI = 0.91, RMSEA = 0.073) as suggested by Hair et al. (2010). We also conducted another CFA with one general factor to test the common method bias. The one factor structure showed a poor fit (S–Bχ² = 500.96, CFI = 0.78, IFI = 0.56, RMSEA = 0.171), thereby, asserting discriminant validity of the constructs.

Results

Hypotheses Testing

The hypotheses of the present article were verified in two steps. In the initial step, we conducted correlation along with multiple linear regression analysis in IBM SPSS v. 25 to test the associations among the variables in the study. The findings of correlation analysis show a positive association between organisational justice and work-related quality of life (r = 0.39, p < .001). The findings also show that organisational justice has positive relation with job embeddedness (r = 0.25, p < .001). Further, organisational justice shows positive association with job involvement (r = 0.27, p < .001). Additionally, work-related quality of life and job embeddedness also show positive association with job involvement (r = 0.47, p < .001), (r = 0.45, p < .001). Table 1 presents the mean, standard deviation and correlations of the variables discussed in the study.

Table 2.

Results of Multiple Regression Analysis.

	Work-Related Quality of Life (M1)		Job Embeddedness (M2)		Job Involvement
	Model 1	Model 2	Model 3	Model 4	Model 5	Model 6	Model 7 (With the Mediators M1 and M2)	Model 8 (Without the Mediators)
Constant	2.833^***	2.151^***	3.496^***	2.508^***	1.543^***	1.821^***	2.371^***	2.371***
1.Age	0.224^*	0.217^*	0.165	0.160	0.097	0.125	0.084	0.187^*
2. Gender	0.071	0.009	0.033	–0.006	0.015	0.032	0.009	0.010
3. Experience	–0.033	–0.148	–0.048	–0.021	0.056	0.062	0.051	−0.022
4. Level of management	0.108	0.083	0.141^*	0.125	0.138^*	0.127*	0.114	0.170**
5. Organisational justice	–	0.372^***	–	0.235^***	–	–	0.042	0.208**
6. Work-related quality of life	–	–	–	–	0.420***	–	0.281^***	–
7. Job embeddedness	–	–	–	–	–	0.402***	0.261^***	–
R ²	0.067	0.185	0.049	0.096	0.278	0.267	0.330	0.150
Adjusted R²	0.052	0.168	0.033	0.077	0.263	0.251	0.311	0.132
F statistic	4.384^***	10.993^***	3.138^*	5.147^***	18.623***	17.585***	16.915^***	8.545^***

Source: The authors.

Notes: *denotes significance at.05 level; **denotes significance at.01 level; ***denotes significance at .001 level.

M1 = mediator 1, M2 = mediator 2.

In the next step, of hypotheses testing, we constructed eight models of multiple regression analysis involving linear relationships among the primary variables in the study (Table 2). Model 1 consists of only the control variables predicting the first mediator (M1) work-related quality of life. Model 3 also consists of only control variables, however, predicting the second mediator (M2) job embeddedness. Model 2 represents the direct effects of organisational justice on work-related quality of life. The β coefficient related to organisational justice was positive and significant for psychological empowerment (β = 0.372, p < .001), thus supporting H₁. Model 4 represents the direct effects of organisational justice on job embeddedness. The β coefficient related to organisational justice was positive and significant for job embeddedness (β = 0.235, p < .01), thus supporting H₂. Model 5 represents the direct effect of work-related quality of life on job involvement. The β coefficient associated with work-related quality of life was positive and significant for job involvement (β = 0.420, p < .001), thus supporting H₃. Model 6 represents the direct effect of job embeddedness on job involvement. The β coefficient related job embeddedness was positive and significant for job involvement (β = 0.402, p < .001), thus supporting H₄. Model 8 represents the direct effect of organisational justice on job involvement. The β coefficient related to organisational justice was positive and significant for job involvement (β = 0.208, p < .01), thus supporting H₅.

Table 3.

Parallel Mediator Model Summary (PROCESS, Model 4).

Antecedent

M1 (Work-Related Quality of Life)

M2 (Job Embeddedness)

Y (Job Involvement) Without Mediators

Y (Job Involvement) with Mediators

Coeff.

LLCI

ULCI

Coeff.

LLCI

ULCI

Coeff.

LLCI

ULCI

Coeff.

LLCI

ULCI

Organisational justice

0.24^***

0.04

0.15

0.31

0.21^**

0.05

0.09

0.31

0.13^**

0.04

0.05

0.21

0.02

0.04

–0.05

0.10

M1(Work-related quality of life)

–

0.28^***

0.06

0.15

0.41

M2 (Job embeddedness)

0.19^***

0.04

0.10

0.28

Constant

2.15^***

0.24

1.67

2.62

2.50^***

0.34

1.83

3.81

2.37^***

0.25

1.87

2.86

1.25^***

0.26

0.73

1.77

Source: The authors.

Notes: *denotes significance at.05 level; **denotes significance at.01 level; ***denotes significance at .001 level.

LLCI = lower limit confidence interval; ULCI = upper limit confidence interval; Coeff = coefficient; SE = standard error;M1 = Mediator 1; M2 = Mediator 2; Y = dependent variable.

To test parallel mediation as proposed in H₆, we used Hayes’ (2013) parallel mediation model. Mediation analysis is generally carried out following Baron and Kenney’s (1986) ‘3-step’ approach. However, this approach is considered to have several analytical deficits. (Hayes, 2013). Therefore, we used the model 4 of PROCESS macro developed by Hayes (2013). We opted for this programme, as it offers the opportunity to assess the direct indirect effect in a mediation model with more precision. A parallel mediation analysis consists of two mediators, where the mediators can correlate but are not allowed to become each other’s predictors. As recommended by Hayes (2013), three conditions should be met. First, there should be significant association between the independent and the dependent variable. Second, the independent variable must have a have a significant association with both the mediators. Third, both the mediators should have a significant association with the dependent variable. In addition, the indirect effect of both the mediators should be simultaneously significant. The absence of zero in the analysed confidence interval confirms the hypothesised indirect path to be significant. Hypotheses H₁–H₅ being supported provides the initial conditions for conducting the mediation analysis. Moreover, the findings of the indirect effect also reveal a significant indirect association between organisational justice via work-related quality of life with job involvement (β = 0.067, SE = 0.02, LLCI = 0.022, ULCI = 0.124) as well as an indirect association of organisational justice via job embeddedness with job involvement (β = 0.039, SE = 0.02, LLCI = 0.006, ULCI = 0.0.83). However, the direct effect between organisational justice and job involvement became insignificant once the mediators were added to the model (Table 3). The presence of zero in the confidence interval of the direct effect confirms that the path was insignificant (Table 4). Moreover, the point estimate of the differences between the two mediators (i.e., work-related quality of life and job embeddedness) are no different from each other and mediates the relationship between organisational justice and job involvement in parallel manner (0.028, 95% CI = −0.033, 0.093) (the parallel mediation model with the point estimates has been shown in Figure 2). Therefore, we can conclude that work-related quality of life and job embeddedness show a full parallel mediation between organisational justice and job involvement which corroborates H₆.

Figure 1.

Source: The authors.

Figure 2.

Source: The authors.

Table 4.

Results of Indirect and Direct Effects (PROCESS, Model 4).

Path	Indirect Estimate	SE	LLCI	ULCI	Results
OJ↓WRQL↓JI	0.067	0.02	0.022	0.124	Supported
OJ↓JE↓JI	0.039	0.02	0.006	0.083	Supported
	0.107	0.03	0.045	0.177	Supported

Source: The authors.

Notes: LLCI = lower limit confidence interval; ULCI = upper limit confidence interval, SE = standard error; OJ = organisational justice; WRQL = work-related quality of life; JI = job involvement; JE = job embeddedness.

Discussion

This study attempted to analyse the relationship of organisational justice with job involvement and to examine whether work-related quality of life and job embeddedness mediate this relationship. Results supported the hypothesis that there exists a significant positive relationship between organisational justice and work-related quality of life. The findings of the current study are in sync with the observations made by Schaufeli and Bakker (2004) who reported that organizational justice can positively affect work related quality of life which gets hampered because of taxing job demands consuming employees’ physical and mental resources. Similarly, research illustrates that depletion of resources (time, energy, effort) generally results in negative perception about the work domain among individuals and a gradual decline in workplace well-being (Nohe et al., 2015). This means that a just and caring organisational climate and managerial support for employees result in less work–life conflict and depletion of resources (Allen, 2001), leading to better work-related quality of life. In the current context, when the work–life boundaries are getting blurred, management’s support and just provisions may enhance the work-related quality of life and reduce the adverse effect of stressors such as fatigue, burnout and anxiety.

Our present study revealed a positive relationship between work-related quality of life and job involvement corroborating earlier research that organisational environment of fairness is psychologically important for ensuring employees’ involvement at the workplace (Brunette, 2004), and that well-being at work decides employee involvement (Robertson & Cooper, 2010). The COVID-19 crisis has manifested numerous challenges to the world of work, and employees’ involvement is a crucial one. This requires organizations to deploy measures that promote employees’ well-being, thereby enhancing job involvement. In the current scenario, when the employees are losing ‘love’ for their jobs (Campbell & Gavett, 2021), we argue that exploring avenues to enhance job embeddedness can instil job involvement in the employees.

Our findings also establish a positive relation between organisational justice and job embeddedness, which means that organisational justice can help reduce psychological stress of employees and maintain positive affect and work motivation, leading to job embeddedness (see Maslach et al., 2001). In situations such as COVID-19 pandemic, organisational justice can act as a tool to ensure high embeddedness among employees so that they strongly identify with their work and are energised to allocate the already overused personal resources (knowledge, skills) (Demerouti & Cropanzano, 2010).

Our study also reveals a positive association between organisational justice and job involvement which is in line with previous research that shows that employees look towards organisational justice and indications of fair treatment in the organisation during uncertain times to keep up their motivation to work hard and remain involved in their job (Lind & van den Bos, 2002). We add to this literature in the context of COVID-19. Individuals who perceive their management to be fair in treating them will stick to the organisation, even if the pandemic causes loss of formal organisational citizenship due to work-from-home norms. Organisations should ensure that their processes and policies are optimal for remote workers (Weddel-Wedellsborg, 2020), which in turn will result in strong sense of belongingness.

Finally, our findings show a parallel mediating effect of work-related quality of life and job embeddedness on the positive relationship between organisational justice and job involvement. This implies that during uncertain times, perception of fairness makes employees feel more enmeshed within their organisation because of greater sense of fit which ultimately translates into them not leaving their present jobs. This is corroborated from previous studies that fairness perception at work leads to increased work-related quality of life (Rai & Tripathi, 2015), eventually leading to involvement at work (Gillet et al., 2013). Therefore, we offer important insights into the conditions that can affect the effectiveness of an organisation which in turn can affect its attractiveness to prospective candidates.

Implications

This study adds to the literature of organisational justice and job involvement by exploring the mediating effects of work-related quality of life and job embeddedness between the two. Results of this study can especially aid IT industry, which has faced an unprecedented change in its working arrangement in organisational policy formulation.

Several organisations are struggling to preserve the right talent to upgrade the downgrading business space (Maurer, 2020). In this context, organisation’s fairness in dealing with employees would instil trust among them about the impartiality of the management in providing the required facility (Shah et al., 2020). It is crucial to initiate incentives and policies to respond to the new work scenario. For instance, announcing a monetary supplement to compensate for the risk of possible infection when they enter the workplace can showcase fairness of the organisation.

Managers should quantify the work and reorganise links among teams and recalibrate self-image of the employees. For employees who are resuming in-person work, it is very important for the organisation to take care of the safety of the employees at the office (Weddel-Wedellsborg, 2020). This will further increase the embeddedness and involvement of the employees and act as an efficient retention strategy even when situation improves.

Organisations must assess the significance of job embeddedness in enhancing job involvement through several avenues such as enhanced employee empowerment, growth opportunities, re-skilling and up-skilling.

The study also highlights the importance of need-based policies for individual employees to reduce their work-related stress and promote work-related quality of life. Organisations should also gather ‘thick’ insights on ‘feelings and perceptions’ of employees through regular surveys and informal discussions which can help the organisations to understand the changing needs of the workers from time to time.

Finally, the study’s finding on the positive relationship between work-related quality of life and job involvement points to the need for organisations to understand how focusing on the work-related quality of life can facilitate creation of conducive work environment and development of open culture which can facilitate better dialogue and decision-making process to achieve organisational goals.

Limitations and Future Research

The present study is not without limitations. First, it uses a specific crisis situation which may restrict the generalizability of the application of findings. Also, this study could have benefitted from the inclusion of uncertainty as a measured variable. However, uncertainty is too broad a concept to be tackled in a single study. Lind and van den Bos (2002) argue that there are different types of uncertainties with different far-fetching implications and effects. Thus, the scope remains open for future studies to replicate a similar model as discussed in the present study after considering different types of uncertainties. Second, our study did not use distinct organisational justice sub-dimensions such as procedural, distributive and interactional justice (Adams, 1963) to assess their impact on the other variables. A consideration of these sub-dimensions of organisational justice would have benefitted the study in gaining an in-depth understanding of the impact of this construct on other variables in the study. Third, the data in our study was collected using a cross-sectional design. Although cross-sectional designs are considered a useful research design methodology, it was recently pointed out by Spector (2019) that the process still appears troublesome while trying to find causal relationships between the variables of interest. Therefore, a longitudinal study may provide better support to prove the causal relationship between the constructs. Fourth, the study employed self-reported measures. Such measures, though consistent with the research question, are inherently subjective constructs and, hence, the bias of the focal person towards the same cannot be discounted. There could also be an issue of common method bias with our study. However, common method bias is a complicated problem to tackle especially with studies solely based on self-reported measures.

Future studies can use more in-depth, in-person interviews and other qualitative data for boundary measurement as an alternative which might help to overcome the individual bias. Moreover, a diverse sample from different cultures, countries and industries can be examined to establish a firmer ground for the relation and to make it applicable to a wider range of population.

Conclusion

The results of our study show that a positive relationship exists between organisational justice, on the one hand, and job involvement, job embeddedness and work-related quality of life, on the other hand. The study also shows the parallel mediating effect of work-related quality of life and job embeddedness on the organisational justice–job involvement relationship. Thus, the findings indicate that if managers try to improve the organisational justice of the organisation and job embeddedness of their employees and subsequently enhance the work-related quality of life, job involvement will increase, which in turn may positively affect the job performance of their personnel. Now more than ever, a successful organisation will need employees who will do more than their usual duties. In order to accomplish this goal, understanding their individual motivations to create conducive work environments that will embed them in the organisational fabric is crucial. The mediation effects in our study further state that organisations can improve organisational justice and job involvement by manipulating various dimensions of work-related quality of life and job embeddedness. In other words, the study highlights the significance of a culture of well-being and compassion for greater involvement of employees in their jobs.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD

Priyanka Bhowmik

References

Adams

J. S.

(1963). Towards an understanding of inequity. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology , 67(5), 422–436. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0040968

Akinbobola

(2011). Conflict in human capital relationships: The impact of job satisfaction on job involvement in a workplace. International Journal of Social Science and Humanity , 1, 92–95. https://doi.org/10.7763/IJSSH.2011.V1.16

Allen

(2001). Family-supportive work environments: The role of organizational perceptions. Journal of Vocational Behavior , 58(3), 414–435. https://doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.2000.1774

Ambrose

M. L.

, & Schminke

(2009). The role of overall justice judgments in organizational justice research: A test of mediation. Journal of Applied Psychology , 94(2), 491–500. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013203

Anderson

J. C.

, & Gerbing

D. W.

(1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin , 103(3), 411–423. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033–2909.103.3.411

Anitha

, & Muralidharan

(2014). A study on job involvement with special reference to marketing professionals in Coimbatore. Paripex-Indian Journal of Research , 3(11), 149–151.

Argentero

, Miglioretti

, & Angilletta

(2007). Quality of work life in a cohort of Italian health workers. Giornale italiano di medicina del lavoro ed ergonomia , 29, 50–54.

Bakker

A. B.

, & Demerouti

(2008). Towards a model of work engagement. Career Development International , 13(3), 209–223. https://doi.org/10.1108/13620430810870476

Baron

, & Kenny

(1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 51(6), 1173–1182. 10.1037//0022–3514.51.6.1173

10.

Blakely

, Andrews

, & Moorman

(2005). The moderating effects of equity sensitivity on the relationship between organizational justice and organizational citizenship behaviors. Journal of Business and Psychology , 20(2), 259–273. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869–005–8263–3

11.

Blau

P. M.

(1964). Justice in social exchange. Sociological Inquiry , 34(2), 193–206. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475–682x.1964.tb00583.x

12.

Brown

(1996). A meta-analysis and review of organizational research on job involvement. Psychological Bulletin , 120, 235–255. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033–2909.120.2.235

13.

Brunette

M. J.

(2004, September 1). Work environment quality of working life among the Cambodian workforce: A pilot study [Conference session]. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, Long Beach, CA, United States. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F154193120404801405

14.

Campbell

, & Gavett

(2021, February 10). What Covid-19 has done to our well-being-in 12 charts . HBR. https://hbr.org/2021/02/what-covid–19-has-done-to-our-well-being-in–12-charts

15.

Chen

C. C.

, & Chiu

S. F.

(2009). The mediating role of job involvement in the relationship between job char-acteristics and organizational citizenship behavior. The Journal of Social Psychology , 149, 474–494. https://doi.org/10.3200/SOCP.149.4.474–494

16.

Chiniara

, & Bentein

(2016). Linking servant leadership to individual performance: Differentiating the mediating role of autonomy, competence and relatedness need satisfaction. The Leadership Quarterly , 27(1), 124–141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2015.08.004

17.

Clinton

, Knight

, & Guest

D. E.

(2012). Job embeddedness: A new attitudinal measure. International Journal of Selection and Assessment , 20(1), 111–117. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468–2389.2012.00584.x

18.

Correia

, & Almeida

A. E.

(2020). Organizational justice, professional identification, empathy, and meaningful work during COVID-19 pandemic: Are they burnout protectors in physicians and nurses? Frontiers in psychology , 11, 566139. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.566139

19.

Culturally sensitive dance movement therapy for ultra-orthodox women: Group protocol targeting bodily and psychological self-perceptions. The Arts in Psychotherapy , 71, 101709. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aip.2020.101709

20.

De-la-Calle-Durán

M. C.

, & Rodríguez-Sánchez

J. L.

(2021). Employee engagement and wellbeing in times of COVID-19: A proposal of the 5Cs model. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health , 18(10), 5470. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18105470

21.

Demerouti

, & Cropanzano

(2010). From thought to action: Employee work engagement and job performance. In Bakker

A. B.

, & Leiter

M. P.

(Eds.), Work engagement: A handbook of essential theory and research (pp. 147–163). Psychology Press.

22.

Diekmann

(2004) The power of reciprocity: Fairness, reciprocity, and stakes in variants of the dictator game. Journal of Conflict Resolution , 48(4), 487–505. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022002704265948

23.

Eder

, & Eisenberger

(2007). Perceived organizational support: Reducing the negative influence of co-worker withdrawal behavior. Journal of Management , 34(1), 55–68. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206307309259

24.

Edwards

M. R.

(2009). HR, perceived organisational support and organisational identification: An analysis after organisational formation. Human Resource Management Journal , 19, 19–115.

25.

Ekmekci

(2011). Sustainable reputations with rating systems. Journal of Economic Theory , 146(2), 479–503. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobembeddednesst.2010.02.015

26.

Emmett

, Schrah

, Schrimper

, & Wood

(2020, June 29). COVID-19 and the employee experience: How leaders can seize the moment . Mckinsey & Company. https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/organization/our-insights/covid–19-and-the-employee-experience-how-leaders-can-seize-the-moment

27.

Fujishiro

, & Heaney

C. A.

(2009). Justice at work, job stress, and employee health. Health Education & Behavior , 36(3), 487–504. https://doi.org/10.1177/1090198107306435

28.

Gagné

, & Deci

E.L.

(2005). Self-determination theory and work motivation. Journal of Organizational Behavior , 26(4), 331–362. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.322

29.

George

, George

, Wallio

, & Wallio

(2017). Organizational justice and millennial turnover in public accounting. Employee Relations , 39(1), 112–126.

30.

Ghosh

, & Gurunathan

(2014). Linking perceived corporate social responsibility and intention to quit: The mediating role of job embeddedness. Vision: The Journal of Business Perspective , 18(3), 175–183. https://doi.org/10.1177/0972262914539219

31.

Ghosh

, Sekiguchi

, & Gurunathan

(2017). Organizational embeddedness as a mediator between justice and in-role performance. Journal of Business Research , 75, 130–137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.02.013

32.

Gillet

, Fouquereau

, Bonnaud-Antignac

, Mokounkolo

, & Colombat

(2013). The mediating role of organizational justice in the relationship between transformational leadership and nurses’ quality of work life: A cross-sectional questionnaire survey. International Journal of Nursing Study , 50, 1359–1367.

33.

Goodell

J. W.

(2020). COVID-19 and finance: Agendas for future research. Finance Research Letters , 35, 101512. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2020.101512

34.

Gouldner

A. W.

(1960). The norm of reciprocity: A preliminary statement. American Sociological Review , 25(2), 161. https://doi.org/10.2307/2092623

35.

Greenberg

, & McCarty

(1990) Comparable worth: A matter of justice. In Ferris

G. R.

, & Rowland

K. M.

(Eds.), Research in personnel and human resources management (pp. 265–301). JAI Press.

36.

Hackman

J. R.

, & Oldham

G. R.

(1976). Motivation through the design of work: Test of a theory. Organizational Behavior & Human Performance , 16(2), 250–279. https://doi.org/10.1016/0030–5073(GG76)90016–7

37.

Haghgui

(2015). Empowerment, quality of work life and job satisfaction. Journal of Exploratory Studies in Law and Management , 2 (GG3), 204–212.

38.

Hair

J. F.

, Black

W. C.

, Babin

B. J.

, & Anderson

R. E.

(2010). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). Pearson.

39.

Halbesleben

J. R. B.

(2006). Sources of social support and burnout: A meta-analytic test of the conservation of resources model. Journal of Applied Psychology , 91(5), 1134–1145. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.91.5.1134 (Retraction published 2011, Journal of Applied Psychology, 96[1], 182).

40.

Hayes

A. F.

(2013). Methodology in the social sciences. Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach . Guilford Press.

41.

Hobfoll

S. E.

(1989). Conservation of resources: A new attempt at conceptualizing stress. American Psychologist , 44(3), 513–524. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003–066X.44.3.513

42.

Holtom

, Mitchell

, & Lee

(2006). Increasing human and social capital by applying job embeddedness theory. Organizational Dynamics , 35, 316–331. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.orgdyn.2006.08.007

43.

Huong

, Zheng

, & Fujimoto

(2016). Inclusion, organisational justice and employee wellbeing. International Journal of Manpower , 37(6), 945–964. https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1108/IJM–12–2015–0212

44.

ILO. (2020, May 7) Working from home: Estimating the worldwide potential . ILO. https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/—ed_protect/—protrav/—travail/documents/briefingnote/wcms_743447.pdf

45.

, & Ranjit

(2021). Organizational justice and organizational citizenship behaviour: The mediating role of psychological ownership. Journal of Organizational Effectiveness: People and Performance . https://doi.org/10.1108/JOEPP-01-2021-0012

46.

Kanungo

R. N.

(1982). Measurement of job and work involvement. Journal of Applied Psychology , 67(3), 341–349. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021–9010.67.3.341

47.

Kropp

(2021, January 14). 9 Trends that will shape work in 2021 and beyond . HBR. https://hbr.org/2021/01/9-trends-that-will-shape-work-in–2021-and-beyond

48.

Lambert

E. G.

, Haynes

S. H.

, Keena

L. D.

, May

, & Leone

(2019). Research note: The relationship of organizational justice variables with job involvement among southern prison staff. Journal of Crime and Justice , 42(4), 480–494. https://doi.org/10.1080/0735648X.2019.1581652

49.

Lambert

E. G.

, Hogan

N. L.

, & Cheeseman

(2013). Research note: Strain-based work-family conflict and its relationship with perceptions of distributive and procedural justice among correctional staff. Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology , 28, 35–47. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11896–012–9111–9

50.

Lee

T. W.

, Burch

T. C.

, & Mitchell

T. R.

(2014). The story of why we stay: A review of job embeddedness. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior , 1, 199–216. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych–031413–091244

51.

Leitão

, Pereira

, & Gonçalves

Â.

(2019). Quality of work life and organizational performance: Workers’ feelings of contributing, or not, to the organization’s productivity. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health , 16(20), 3803. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijobembeddednessrph16203803

52.

Lind

E. A.

, & van den Bos

(2002). When fairness works: Toward a general theory of uncertainty management. Research in Organizational Behavior , 24, 181–223. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0191–3085(02)24006-x

53.

Macesich

(2000). Issues in money and banking . Praeger Publishers (Greenwood Publishing Group).

54.

Malhotra

, Sahadev

, & Sharom

N. Q.

(2020) Organisational justice, organisational identification and job involvement: The mediating role of psychological need satisfaction and the moderating role of person-organisation fit. The International Journal of Human Resource Management . https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2020.1757737

55.

Mallol

C. M.

, Holtom

B. C.

, & Lee

T. W.

(2007). Job embeddedness in a culturally diverse environment. Journal of Business and Psychology , 22(1), 35–44. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869–007–9045-x

56.

Maslach

, & Leiter

M. P.

(2017). Understanding burnout: New models. In Cooper

C. L.

, & Quick

J. C.

(Eds.), The handbook of stress and health: A guide to research and practice (pp. 36–56). Wiley-Blackwell.

57.

Maslach

, Schaufeli

W. B.

, & Leiter

M. P.

(2001). Job burnout. Annual Review of Psychology , 52, 397–422. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.397

58.

Masterson

, Lewis

, Goldman

, & Susan

(2000). Integrating justice and social exchange: The differing effects of fair procedures and treatment on work relationships. Academy of Management Journal , 43, 738–748. https://doi.org/10.2307/1556364

59.

Maurer

(2020, April 6). Virtual happy hours help co-workers, industry peers stay connected . SHRM. https://www.shrm.org/hr-today/news/hr-news/pages/virtual-happy-hours-help-coworkers-stay-connected.aspx

60.

Mitchell

T. R.

, Holtom

B. C.

, Lee

T. W.

, Sablynski

C. J.

, & Erez

(2001). Why people stay: Using job embeddedness to predict voluntary turnover. Academy of Management Journal , 44(6), 1102–1121. https://doi.org/10.5465/3069391

61.

Murtaza

, Shad

, Shahzad

, Shah

M. K.

, & Khan

N. A.

(2011). Impact of distributive and procedural justice on employees’ commitment: A case of public sector organization of Pakistan. European Journal of Economics, Finance and Administrative Sciences , 73–80. https://numerons.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/08-impact-of-distributive-and-procedural-justice.pdf

62.

Nohe

, Michel

, & Sonntag

(2014). Family-work conflict and job performance: A diary study on boundary conditions and mechanisms. Journal of Organizational Behavior . https://doi.org/10.1002/job.1878

63.

Pan

, Chen

, Hao

, & Bi

(2018). The effects of organizational justice on positive organizational behavior: Evidence from a large-sample survey and a situational experiment. Frontiers in Psychology , 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02315

64.

Pohl

, & Galletta

(2017). The role of supervisor emotional support on individual job satisfaction: A multilevel analysis. Applied Nursing Research , 33, 61–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apnr.2016.10.004

65.

Rai

, & Tripathi

(2015). A study on QWL and its effects on job performance. Apeejay: Journal of Management Sciences and Technology , 2 (GG2), 33–42.

66.

Robbins

S. P.

(1989). Organizational behaviour: Concepts, controversies, and applications . Prentice Hall.

67.

Robertson

I. T.

, & Cooper

C. L.

(2010). Full engagement: The integration of employee engagement and psychological well-being. Leadership & Organization Development Journal , 31, 324–336. https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1108/01437731011043348

68.

Rousseau

D. M.

(1998). The ‘problem’ of the psychological contract considered. Journal of Organizational Behaviour , 19, 665–671. https://www-jstor-org-443.web.bisu.edu.cn/stable/3100282

69.

Ruffolo

, Price

, Schoultz

, Leung

, Bonsaksen

, Thygesen

, & Ostertun

G. A.

(2021). Employment uncertainty and mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic initial social distancing implementation: A cross-national study. Global Social Welfare , 8(2), 141–150.

70.

Satorra

, & Bentler

P. M.

(2001). A scaled difference chi-square test statistic for moment structure analysis. Psychometrika , 66(4), 507–514. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02296192

71.

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 Behaviour , 25(3), 293–315. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.248

72.

Shah

, Sachdeva

, & Dodiuk-Gad

R. P.

(2020). COVID-19 and racial disparities. Journal of American Academy of Dermatology , 83(1), e35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaad.2020.04.046

73.

Somashekhar

D. R

, Pundhir

, & Saxena

(2011). Towards more effective relations among employees: A study of altruism among teachers in India. The International Journal of Management , 28, 939–944.

74.

Spector

P. E.

(2019). Do not cross me: Optimizing the use of cross-sectional designs. Journal of Business and Psychology , 34(2), 125–137. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869–018–09613–8

75.

Stiglbauer

, & Kovacs

(2018). The more, the better? curvilinear effects of job autonomy on well-being from vitamin model and PE-Fit theory perspectives. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology , 23(4), 520–536. 10.1037/ocp0000107

76.

Suskin

, & Al-Yagon

(2020). Culturally sensitive dance movement therapy for ultra-orthodox women: Group protocol targeting bodily and psychological self-perceptions. The Arts in Psychotherapy , 71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aip.2020.101709

77.

Uddin

M. A.

, Mahmood

, & Fan

(2019). Why individual employee engagement matters for team performance? Mediating effects of employee commitment and organizational citizenship behaviour. Team Performance Management: An International Journal , 25(1/2), 47–68. https://doi.org/10.1108/TPM–12–2017–0078

78.

van den Berg

, Manias

, & Burger

(2008). The influence of job-related factors on work engagement of staff at the university of the free state. Acta Academica , 40(3), 85–114.

79.

van den Bos

(2001). Reactions to perceived fairness: The impact of mortality salience and self-esteem on ratings of negative affect. Social Justice Research , 14(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1012501506803

80.

van den Bos

, & Miedema

(2000). Toward understanding why fairness matters: The influence of mortality salience on reactions to procedural fairness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 79(3), 355–366. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022–3514.79.3.355

81.

Vinokur

A. D.

, & Schul

(2002). The web of coping resources and pathways to reemployment following a job loss. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology , 7(1), 68–83. https://doi.org/10.1037/1076–8998.7.1.68

82.

Wagner

S. L.

, & Rush

M. C.

(2000). Altruistic organizational citizenship behaviour: Context, disposition, and age. The Journal of Social Psychology , 140(3), 379–391. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224540009600478

83.

Weddel-Wedellsborg

(2020, August 11). Leading into the post-COVID recovery . HBR. https://hbr.org/2020/08/leading-into-the-post-covid-recovery

84.

Weinberger

(2019, November 6). How machine learning pushes us to define fairness . HBR. https://hbr.org/2019/11/how-machine-learning-pushes-us-to-define-fairness

85.

Wilson

, Lee

, Fitzgerald

, Oosterhoff

, Sevi

, & Shook

(2020). Job insecurity and financial concern during the COVID-19 pandemic are associated with worse mental health. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine , 62(9), 686–691.

86.

Wong

, Chan

, & Ngan

S. C.

(2019). The effect of long working hours and overtime on occupational health: A meta-analysis of evidence from 1998 to 2018. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health , 16(12). https://doi.org/10.3390/ijobembeddednessrph16122102

87.

Zavras

(2021). Feeling uncertainty during the lockdown that commenced in March 2020 in Greece. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health , 18(10), 5105.