Is supervisory communication more important than co-worker communication for employees’ engagement behavior in China? A moderated mediation analysis

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

Past research has demonstrated connections between emotional intelligence and organizational citizenship behavior. However, how they are connected has been rarely explored, especially from a communication perspective.

OBJECTIVES:

This study considered the mixed role of co-worker communication satisfaction and supervisory communication satisfaction in the relationship between emotional intelligence and organizational citizenship behavior.

METHODS:

Based on a two-wave survey of 230 employees in China, we conducted a moderated mediation analysis using the PROCESS Macro in SPSS.

RESULTS:

We found that co-worker communication satisfaction (CCS) was a mediator in the relationship between emotional intelligence (EI) and organizational citizenship behavior (OCB). On top of that, the relationship between CCS and OCB became more significant when supervisory communication satisfaction (SCS) was at a high level. In contrast, that relationship became non-significant when SCS was at a low level.

CONCLUSIONS:

These findings extends the pathway research between EI and OCB, primarily through the lens of communication. Also, this work verifies the different values of types of communication satisfaction as resources. It extends the Conservation of Resources Theory in the Chinese context by integrating cultural traits with employee behaviors.

Keywords

Emotional intelligence co-worker communication satisfaction supervisory communication satisfaction organizational citizenship behavior

1 Introduction

The connection between emotional intelligence (EI) and organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) has been explored in the field of organizational behavior (OB) for decades [1 –5]. EI refers to the ability to control one’s emotions and OCB means voluntary behavior beneficial for the organization and co-workers. Despite the worldwide interest in the relationship between EI and OCB, there is a paucity of studies on how they were connected [3], especially from communication perspectives [6]. An employee with high EI can detect a colleague’s emotions and enhance coordination and interpersonal interaction, promoting OCB. When detecting colleagues’ negative emotions, employees with high EI would like to help them by exhibiting more OCB [3]. Similarly, responses to genuine emotions are more likely to be pleasant compared to fake emotions [7]. In this way, employees with higher EI will build better interpersonal relationships [8] and perform better in response to suggestions and assistance [9]. In sum, a higher level of EI is more likely to contribute to achieving more satisfying communication. When the pathway through which EI relates to OCB is revealed, leaders can adopt managerial actions by promoting the pathway to achieve a higher level of employees’ OCB.

Under the Chinese context, supervisory communication satisfaction (SCS) as a resource is more fundamental than co-worker communication satisfaction (CCS) for Chinese employees, and the reasons can be explained from two aspects. On the one hand, Confucianism profoundly impacts the philosophy of Chinese society, especially the interactive relationship establishment and development, and Confucianism views orderly hierarchical relations as a necessity for society evolution [10]. Thus, subordinates should respect their supervisors. On the other hand, leaders are essential for the career development of employees. The previous research has verified that an unpleasant relationship between employee and leader would lead to a low level of job embeddedness of the employee even if he/she is not severely treated by colleagues [11]. Above, supervisory communication satisfaction (SCS) is more valued than co-worker communication satisfaction (CSC), which possibly reveals the underlying moderated effect of SCS on the relationship between CCS and OCB.

In what follows, we report an exploration of the CCS’ role as a mediator between EI and OCB, the moderating function of SCS on the relationship between CCS and OCB, and the moderated mediation effect of SCS on the relationship between EI and OCB via CCS.

This work makes three contributions to the management literature. Firstly, this work is among the first to investigate the way that communication influences the relationship between EI on OCB. Secondly, it contributes to addressing an identified gap in our understanding of the conditional effects of CCS on OCB as the level of SCS varies. Thirdly, this work extends the Conservation of Resources Theory (COR) by discussing the values of different resources. We use the COR as a theoretical basis to analyze to what extent employees invest or conserve resources for colleagues and organizations when they experience different levels of satisfying supervisory communication.

2 Literature and hypotheses

EI refers to “The ability to monitor one’s own and others’ feelings, to discriminate among them, and to use this information to guide one’s thinking and action” [12]. OCB implies voluntary activities that are beneficial for colleagues and organizational outcomes, not for the pursuit of rewards or avoidance of punishment [13, 14]. EI is composed of four abilities to control emotions: perception, understanding, facilitation, and regulation.

As to communication satisfaction (CS), the concept of CS was developed to measure employees’ overall satisfaction with different categories of communication [15, 16]. CS includes eight dimensions of: (i) organizational integration, (ii) supervisory communication, (iii) personal feedback, (iv) corporate information, (v) communication climate, (vi) co-worker communication, (vii) media quality, and (viii) subordinate communication. Co-worker and supervisor communication satisfaction are two dimensions of CS. Co-worker communication satisfaction (CCS) measures to what extent the employee is satisfied with informal communication and the accuracy of the information involving colleagues. Supervisory communication satisfaction (SCS) embodies how a subordinate can gain attention, guidance, and trust from a supervisor. Empirical evidence indicated that satisfying communication influenced career development by enhancing job performance [17], organizational identification [18], organizational citizenship behavior [19], creativity [20] to some extent, and decreasing turnover intention [21]. Co-worker communication and supervisory communication are vital for both individual and organizational development. However, to what extent their effects or mixed effects on organizational outcomes, particularly OCB, have received limited research attention [6]. The research reported here contributes to addressing this gap.

Conservation of Resources Theory (COR) provides a structure for better understanding motivations for investing in communication activities. The primary principle of COR is that one will take action to conserve their own resources and get new resources [22], and resources are valued or useful for goal attainment. Satisfying co-worker communication and supervisory communication can be considered resources since their usefulness for an employee to achieve good performance. The employee would be motivated to engage in beneficial behavior toward colleagues and the organization for the conservation of current resources, known as OCB. Additionally, EI was regarded as a resource [23], and employees with high EI can engage in behaviors beneficial for co-workers and the organization when needed [24]. However, the values of resources are changeable and not the same during different periods, and the most valuable resources are those that fit best with the cultural context and personal values [25].

2.1 EI, CCS, and OCB

Above, those possessing higher EI were more likely to manage their emotions and interpret others’ feelings accurately, and communicate with others in a positive mood, which impacted the communication quality positively. They therefore tend to be more effective at maintaining interpersonal communication [26].

Seen through the spotlight of Conservation of Resources Theory (COR), satisfying co-worker communication can be viewed as a valuable resource, and workers would like to engage in OCB to protect or enhance CCS [22]. Conversely, employees who were not satisfied with their communication with colleagues were less motivated to engage in OCB [27, 28]. Additionally, research reported that satisfaction with the communication environment motivated employees to be more engaged in their jobs [29]. When employees were satisfied with co-worker communication, they tended to be more motivated to reciprocate through greater engagement [30].

As to the relationship between EI and OCB, OCB was expected to be correlated with emotions. Scholars found that high EI could assist in matching one’s emotional state with the given work and was related to altruism and compliance [2], which were dimensions of OCB. These results lead to our first three hypotheses:

Hypothesis 1: EI is positively related to CCS.

Hypothesis 2: CCS is positively related to OCB.

Hypothesis 3: EI is positively related to OCB.

2.2 Mediating effect of co-worker communication between EI and OCB

As EI refers to the ability to regulate one’s emotions and react to others’ emotions appropriately, employees with high EI might influence co-workers’ communication within the organization by helping co-workers to deal with negative emotions by exhibiting more OCB [3]. It could also enhance the well-being of others by readily providing compliments and recognition for positive performance. The study posited that when employees are satisfied with co-worker communication, they would exhibit higher OCB [7]. Similarly, employees who show genuine emotions cause more satisfying responses than those who choose to hide their true feelings [12]. As a result, employees with high EI are expected to communicate effectively with others and achieve support from colleagues, thus promoting their OCB. This is captured by the hypothesis:

Hypothesis 4: CCS is a mediator between EI and OCB.

2.3 Moderation effect of SCS on the relationship between CCS and OCB

Supervisory communication implies attention, support, and trust that subordinates gain from supervisors. According to Conservation of Resources Theory (COR), satisfying supervisory communication can be viewed as a valuable resource that employees strive to protect or enhance. Loss of this kind of resource possibly impacts individual motivation more negatively than a similar increase in this resource, with individuals becoming more concerned with protecting the remaining resource [31], which will decrease the engagement behavior of employees. Besides, COR suggests that different resources are viewed differently by their values for goal attainment, and personal values can be shaped by cultural values [32].

In the Chinese context, Confucianism influences culture and values, thus satisfying communication with the supervisor is what the employee strives to achieve. SCS and CCS can be viewed as different resources, while satisfying supervisory communication is more fundamental than co-worker communication satisfaction. And only by achieving a high level of SCS can fully engage OCB. However, when the SCS is at a low level, the connection between CCS and OCB will probably be non-significant since the leader does not highly value employee’s work, making beneficial work have limited value for the employee. From the tenet of resource loss of COR, when experiencing resource loss, it will be complex to decide whether to invest limited resources to recovery or to conserve the present resource. By contrast, when a subordinate owns a high level of SCS, he/she will fit better with the organization, and the relationship between CCS and OCB would be much more significant. Previous work is also suggestive [8]. They found the connection between workplace ostracism and job embeddedness was significantly negative when LMX (leader-member exchange) was at a high level, while this relationship became non-significant when LMX was at a low level. We hypothesized that:

Hypothesis 5: SCS moderates the relationship between CCS and OCB, such that the relationship between CCS and OCB is significant when SCS is at a high level, whereas that relationship is nonsignificant when SCS is at a low level.

2.4 Moderation effect of SCS on the mediating role of CCS between EI and OCB

Based on the above analysis, EI is positively related to OCB through the role of CCS. Employees with a high level of EI are likely to own a high level of CCS, which in turn contributes to a high level of OCB. When SCS is at a low level, the employee is more likely to perceive being less embedded in the organization. In this circumstance, though a more vital ability to control and use one’s emotion would lead to a higher level of CCS, the positive relationship between CCS and OCB would be nonsignificant since he/she lacks SCS related motivation. On the contrary, when SCS is at a high level, an employee with high EI will achieve CCS and would like to engage more OCB to protect the valuable resource of SCS. Thus, we proposed that:

Hypothesis 6: SCS moderates the mediating effect of CCS on the relationship between EI and OCB, such that EI is positively related to OCB through CCS with a high level of SCS.

Figure 1 illustrates the research model.

Fig. 1

Research model.

3 Materials and method

3.1 Participants characteristics

We collected data using two surveys at ten companies across five industries. We collected data two times to decrease the bias of the common methods [33] and leave enough intervals for employees, such that they can evaluate their co-worker communication satisfaction levels and adopt the corresponding engagement behavior. To improve the generalizability of this research, we need employees from different industries. As we are familiar with the EMBA students in our department, and most of them are CEOs of different companies, they are also interested in this research and give us full support in choosing the sample by encouraging their employees to take an active part in this survey. We randomly choose companies in different industries, such as insurance, diary sales, advertising, textile, and audit. The sample companies’ sizes range from 10 to 156, and the ownerships were various. By referring to the sample size table of previous research [34], we needed to survey at least 217 employees to capture the features of these companies with a total of 500 employees. Also, scholars suggested that the sample size should be larger by 40% –50% than the requirement for invalid answers [35]. Since we would conduct a two-wave survey, the answer rate of the first-round questionnaire would not be 100%, and we aimed to choose 300 employees randomly as the sample.

The two-wave surveys were conducted in July and August of 2021 respectively in Nanjing. Participants completed two surveys with a one-month interval between them. For the first survey, 300 potential participants were asked to report demographic information, EI, CSC, and SCS. A total of 252 responses were received. They were then asked in the second survey to report their OCB, with 233 returned.

3.2 Measures

The scales of four constructs can be found in the Appendix.

3.2.1 Emotional intelligence

The emotional intelligence scale adopted here contains 16 items [36], all of which were used. One of the 16 sample items is, “I have a good sense of why I have certain feelings most of the time” (1 represents “strongly disagree” and 7 represents “strongly agree”). We conducted the Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA), and the reliability of the scale was calculated as 0.904 (see Table 1).

Table 1
Descriptive results

Variables M SD EI CCS SCS OCB

EI 4.8848 1.05384 (0.904)

CCS 5.3496 1.20141 0.323^* (0.867)

SCS 5.7574 0.88565 0.437^* 0.450^* (0.936)

OCB 5.6739 0.89469 0.440^* 0.276^* 0.345^* (0.941)

Variables	M	SD	EI	CCS	SCS	OCB
EI	4.8848	1.05384	(0.904)
CCS	5.3496	1.20141	0.323^***	(0.867)
SCS	5.7574	0.88565	0.437^***	0.450^***	(0.936)
OCB	5.6739	0.89469	0.440^***	0.276^***	0.345^***	(0.941)

NOTE: N = 230. Reliabilities are in parentheses. ^***p < 0.001.

3.2.2 Co-worker and supervisory communication satisfaction

Co-worker communication satisfaction and supervisory communication satisfaction scales have demonstrated a high degree of reliability in different organizational contexts [6, 15], and is still considered valid [29]. We used the five-question scale directly without editing or adding items to measure CCS. A sample item was, “Extent to which horizontal communication with other employees is accurate and free-flowing” (1 represents “strongly disagree” and 7 represents “strongly agree”). We then conducted an Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA), and the reliability of CCS in this work is 0.867 (see Table 1). Similarly, we adopted a five-item scale to measure SCS. A sample item of the scale was, “Extent to which my supervisor offers guidance for solving job- related problems” (1 represents “strongly disagree” and 7 represents “strongly agree”). We then conducted the Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA), and the reliability of SCS in this study was 0.936 (see Table 1).

3.2.3 Organizational citizenship behavior

The scale for measuring OCB was composed of 9 questions [37]. A sample item is, “I am willing to help workmates who encounter trouble at work” (1 represents “strongly disagree” and 7 represents “strongly agree”). We then conducted the Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA), and the reliability of OCB in this work is 0.941(see Table 1).

The questionnaires were initially English version and needed to be translated to Chinese. To ensure the quality of the translation, we conducted the work by inviting a professor in the English Department, who is a native Chinese speaker with more than 30-year experience in studying English. Three native Chinese speakers and three native English speakers evaluated both the translated Chinese and back-translated English versions. The professor’s comparisons between these groups confirmed the equivalency between the versions, consistent with the suggested procedure [38].

Of the 233 finally returned surveys, 230 surveys were usable. The final sample was 50% female, and their average age as well as work experience were 32 and 3.15 years respectively, and 56.96% (131 employees) held a bachelor’s certificate. Employees surveyed were chosen randomly from all company departments, such as accounting, HR, sales, production, and customer service. Their genders, ages, and education backgrounds vary to a large extent, representing the common characteristics of other employees in general.

3.3 Control variables

Previous works suggested that gender, age, tenure, and education level might contribute to OCB [39, 40], thus they were controlled in our model. Specifically, tenure and education level were positively related to OCB, and it has also been tested that age and gender [41] were linked with OCB.

3.4 Data analysis

We tested hypotheses by using the Hayes Process macro in SPSS [42, 43], which is widely used to investigate mediation and moderation effects [44]. The methods conduct regression-based approaches beginning with the correlation and simple linear regression, continuing through traditional uses of regression for mediation and moderation analysis, and culminating in a discussion of combining mediation and moderation into one singular analysis [45]. Precisely, an indirect effect (i.e., EI ⟶ CCS ⟶ OCB) can generally be estimated as the product of the direct effect of the predictor (EI) on the mediator (CCS) and the direct effect of the mediator (CCS) on the dependent variable (OCB). The indirect effect will be a single number in a simple mediation model. However, when the direct effect of the predictor on the mediator is conditional on another variable (i.e., SCS), the indirect effect will accordingly be a function of that variable [46].

4 Results

4.1 Preliminary analysis

Table 1 lists the results of descriptive analysis, reliabilities, and correlations. We found that EI, CCS, SCS, and OCB were significantly correlated, demonstrating the necessity for further regression analysis. We also figured out that the reliabilities of all measures were high. When testing the variance inflation factors, the maximum one was age with OCB as a dependent variable (VIF = 1.567, the threshold for serious multicollinearity is 4), which suggested that multicollinearity should not be concerned for the future data analysis [47]. We also conducted an analysis by adding all control variables into the model and found that they were not significantly related to the dependent variable and were removed from the model.

4.2 Discriminant validity

We compared with any of the six three-factor models and found that the four-factor model fits best, as shown in Table 2.

Table 2
CFA results

Combined variables χ² df Δχ ² Δdf SRMR CFI IFI RMSEA

None 231.669 98 —— —— 0.0618 0.957 0.957 0.077

EI and CCS 1003.139 101 771.47^ 3 0.1525 0.71 0.712 0.197

EI and SCS 944.892 101 713.223^ 3 0.1312 0.729 0.73 0.191

CCS and SCS 764.473 101 532.804^ 3 0.1303 0.787 0.788 0.169

CCS and OCB 490.478 101 258.809^ 3 0.1135 0.875 0.875 0.13

SCS and OCB 472.315 101 240.646^ 3 0.0986 0.881 0.881 0.127

EI and OCB 471.298 101 239.629^ 3 0.0988 0.881 0.882 0.127

Combined variables	χ²	df	Δχ ²	Δdf	SRMR	CFI	IFI	RMSEA
None	231.669	98	——	——	0.0618	0.957	0.957	0.077
EI and CCS	1003.139	101	771.47^**	3	0.1525	0.71	0.712	0.197
EI and SCS	944.892	101	713.223^**	3	0.1312	0.729	0.73	0.191
CCS and SCS	764.473	101	532.804^**	3	0.1303	0.787	0.788	0.169
CCS and OCB	490.478	101	258.809^**	3	0.1135	0.875	0.875	0.13
SCS and OCB	472.315	101	240.646^**	3	0.0986	0.881	0.881	0.127
EI and OCB	471.298	101	239.629^**	3	0.0988	0.881	0.882	0.127

^**p < 0.001.

For the four-factor model, both CFI and IFI are above 0.90; meanwhile, both RMSEA and SRMR are below 0.08, supporting the appropriateness of using all four factors [48].

4.3 Testing hypotheses

Table 3 presents regression results for two models with EI as an independent variable and one with both EI and CCS as independent variables. The CCS regression’s positive and significant coefficient estimate is consistent with H1.

Table 3
Results of linear regression

Dependent variable CCS OCB

B SE B SE

EI 0.271^* 0.053 0.333^* 0.053

CCS 0.151^* 0.063

EI ⟶ CCS ⟶ OCB 0.041^*

Dependent variable	CCS	OCB
EI	0.271^***	0.053	0.333^***	0.053
CCS			0.151^***	0.063
EI ⟶ CCS ⟶ OCB			0.041^***

Notes: ^***p < 0.001.

Similarly, adding CCS to the OCB regression produces a significant coefficient for CCS, consistent with H2. Finally, EI’s positive and significant coefficient estimate in the first OCB regression is consistent with H3. Therefore, the first three hypotheses are supported.

H4 posits that CCS is one mediator between EI and OCB. Results for a mediation model estimated with the PROCESS macro in SPSS suggests the indirect effect between EI and OCB mediated by CCS is significant (β= 0.05). H5 proposes that the relationship between CCS and OCB varies at different levels of SSC, and more satisfying supervisory communication strengthens the effect of co-worker communication on OCB.

Table 4 displays the results of the moderation analysis. Using a bootstrapping analysis with 10,000 replications, CCS is positively related to OCB when SCS at the mean plus one standard deviation (effect = 0.3602; s.e. = 0.0943, p < 0.001) and at the mean (effect = 0.206; s.e. =0.069, p < 0.01), while the effect is nonsignificant when SCS is at the mean minus one standard deviation (effect = 0.0521; s.e. = 0.081, p = 0.521), which supports hypothesis 5, as shown in Fig. 2.

Table 4

Result of interaction effect analysis

Conditional effect of CCS on OCB at values of the moderator (SCS)
SCS	Effect	se	t	p
–1.2014	0.0521	0.081	0.6433	0.5207
0	0.2061	0.0688	2.9967	0.003
1.2014	0.3602	0.0943	3.8199	0.0002

Fig. 2

The moderation role of SCS in CCS and OCB.

Hypothesis 6, posits that SCS moderates the mediation role of CCS in EI and OCB. When supervisory communication is more satisfying, the positive relationship between EI and OCB via CCS would be stronger, while this relationship would be non-significant when SCS is less satisfying. Using the PROCESS macro reveals that SCS functions positively on the relationship between EI and OCB via CCS (effect = 0.099; s.e. = 0.045, p = 0.027). Detailed results of moderated mediating effects are displayed in Table 5.

Table 5

Results of moderated mediation effect

Conditional indirect effects of EI on OCB at values of the moderator (SCS)
Mediator	SCS	Effect	Boot SE	BootLLCI	BootULCI
CCS	–1.2014	0.0073	0.0257	–0.0418	0.0605
CCS	0	0.0445	0.0227	0.003	0.0922
CCS	1.2014	0.0816	0.0318	0.0247	0.151

Using the bootstrapping analysis, again with 10,000 replications shows that the indirect relationship between EI and OCB through the effect of CCS is nonsignificant when SCS is at the mean minus one standard deviation (effect = 0.007, s.e. = 0.026, CI = [–0.042, 0.061]), however, this indirect effect is significant when SCS is at the mean(effect = 0.045, s.e. = 0.023, CI = [0.003 0.092]) and at the mean plus one standard deviation (effect = 0.082, s.e. = 0.032, CI = [0.025, 0.151]), which confirms hypothesis 6.

5 Discussion

Consistent with previous results [2], we found that EI is positively related to OCB. We also found that CCS is positively associated with OCB and that it mediates the relationship between EI and OCB, which enhances the exploration of the pathways between EI and OCB. And SCS moderates the direct impact of CCS on OCB, and moderates the mediating effect of CCS on the relationship between EI and OCB. Consistent with the Conservation of Resources Theory, we found that the relationship between EI and OCB and between CCS and OCB is positive and significant when SCS is high, and much more minor and insignificant when SCS is low. These findings verify that the values of different resources are distinguished under the different cultural contexts. The results reinforce previous work [8 , 50], which explores how different kinds of resources in the organization can be supplemented with each other. The results emphasize that organizations seeking to enhance OCB need to pay attention to communication within the organization, both between co-workers and between workers and supervisors. High levels of satisfaction with both communication avenues do the most to enhance OCB.

5.1 Theoretical implications

We view that the theoretical implications of this research exist in four areas. Firstly, this study is among the first to explore the underlying relationship between EI and OCB through the effect of communication. Our results show that CCS can affect OCB both directly and by mediating the relationship between EI and OCB. Also, these findings would provide new thoughts about the origins of OCB, especially from a communication perspective. Secondly, our results highlight the role that SCS plays. Previous research argued that this relationship needs further investigation [7], and our results demonstrate that it is important. Thirdly, we have used the Conservation of Resources Theory (COR) as a framework for understanding how employees respond to changeable SCS. Our results verify the different values of SCS and CCS as resources and extend COR to some extent. Fourthly, we extend the COR theory by considering the Chinese context, which values the relationship between subordinate and supervisor arguing for further more, and would facilitate other research exploring specified cultural effects.

5.2 Practical implications

These results also suggest practical implications for the management of organizations. This work reinforces the positive relationship between EI and OCB that has been previously identified. EI is manifested as better communication skills and more harmonious relationships, essential aspects of CCS. Since CCS is positively related to OCB, enhancing the employees’ EI would both directly increase OCB and indirectly increase it by increasing CCS. Higher EI employees contribute more OCB themselves and contribute to a work environment that increases the OCB of other employees. Such effects have been found to reduce training costs and improve work efficiency and firm profit, especially in the service industry [51].

As stated above, leaders should be aware of the significance of EI. The actions for choosing employees with high EI can be seen in Table 6. Human resource staff can consider EI as an additional desired job qualification at the recruiting stage. To the extent that different tasks benefit differently from the employees’ EI, supervisors can consider matching employees to tasks with EI as an important consideration. Such assignments make the best use of employee skills and likely enhance job satisfaction.

Table 6
Actions for identifying and developing employees’ EI

Recruitment By his/her answers to EI questionnaire

By third-party appraisal (comments of ex-colleague)

By leaderless group discussion

Training By assigning the suitable job

By providing EI training courses

By providing the easy environment for communication

Recruitment	By his/her answers to EI questionnaire
	By third-party appraisal (comments of ex-colleague)
	By leaderless group discussion
Training	By assigning the suitable job
	By providing EI training courses
	By providing the easy environment for communication

Beyond recruitment and appropriate task assignment, leaders can also improve the EI of existing employees. There is evidence that formal training programs can enhance employee EI. EI can be nurtured by building an environment that encourages employees to engage in those activities that support good interpersonal relationships. Learning by doing can enhance EI in the same way it affects performance in other job-related tasks. Employees should be made aware of the importance of building EI and should be rewarded for participating in activities that are expected to enhance it.

The results also highlight the importance of CCS and SCS. CCS mediates the relationship between EI and OCB. Additionally, SCS moderates the relationship between CCS and OCB and moderates the indirect relationship between EI and OCB via CCS, which suggests that more satisfying communication with the supervisor would promote more OCB in employees. Satisfying supervisory communication provides an environment where gestures of appreciation are common and would enhance worker satisfaction, increasing productivity.

Supervisors should pay attention to the form and effectiveness of communication among employees and encourage co-worker communication by providing suitable communication environments. Specifically, the supervisor should enhance communication with subordinates by sharing information that helps employees understand the extent and value of their contribution to the organization. Supervisors can expand this communication by introducing the opportunities and threats faced by the organization and how those impact the goals of the organization, which can further enhance the extent to which employees identify with the firm, which would in turn enhance their engagement and job performance.

However, if supervisory communication practices create a perception of special treatment for employees or groups, it may undermine the sense of commitment employees have to the organization and each other. Supervisors should pay attention to their communication practices, considering fairness in communication and signs that employees perceived unjustified differential treatment.

Given the relationship between EI and communication satisfaction, the supervisor’s EI may be an essential factor in raising SCS. Supervisors themselves participating in training and activities that are likely to build EI can contribute to enhanced SCS, and increase OCB.

5.3 Limitations and future research

A couple of significant limitations should be ad-dressed in future work that builds on these results. Firstly, we collected all data from employees, enhancing the risk of common method bias. We should avoid this problem in the future by asking their direct leaders to rate subordinates’ OCB. Secondly, we see more scope for using the Conservation of Resources framework. We have considered CCS and SCS as resources in our analysis. There may be value in considering other resources that could be important to employees at the workplace under the different cultures. This work may provide a richer understanding of how employees apply their efforts toward resource protection and thereby enabling supervisors to consider how the processes in the workplace contribute to the perception by employees that they need to invest in resource-protecting activities. Thirdly, the small size of the research sample decreases the generalizability of this work.

6 Conclusions

We aimed to investigate whether co-worker communication satisfaction (CCS) acts as a mediator between emotional intelligence (EI) and organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) and how supervisory communication satisfaction (SCS) moderated the relationship between CCS and OCB. We consider two pathways through which SCS can affect OCB, by affecting the direct relationship between CCS and OCB and by affecting the moderating influence of CCS on the impact EI has on OCB. The results are consistent with the hypotheses we put forward.

Ethical approval

Not applicable.

Informed consent

Not applicable.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Footnotes

Acknowledgments

The authors have no acknowledgments.

Funding

This work received funding from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant number 7217020419), National Social Science Foundation of China (Grant number 21BGL140), Research Project of Humanities and Social Sciences for Universities in Henan Province (Grant number 2023-ZDJH-120) and Henan University of Technology High-level Talent Research Start-up Fund Project (Grant number 2021SBS34).

Appendix: Scales of the four constructs

Scale for emotional intelligence

1. I have a good sense of why I have certain feelings most of the time.

2. I have good understanding of my own emotions.

3. I really understand what I feel.

4. I always know whether I am happy.

5. I always know my friends’ emotions from their behavior.

6. I am a good observer of others’ emotions.

7. I am sensitive to the feelings and emotions of others.

8. I have a good understanding of the emotions of people around me.

9. I always set goals for myself and then try my best to achieve them.

10. I always tell myself I am a competent person.

11. I am a self-motivated person.

12. I would always encourage myself to try my best.

13. I can control my temper and handle difficulties rationally.

14. I am quite capable of controlling my own emotions.

15. I can always calm down quickly when I am very angry.

16. I have good control of my own emotions.

Notes: Respondents were asked to rate their likelihood on a 7-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree, 7 = strongly agree).

Scale for co-worker communication satisfaction

1. Extent to which the grapevine is active in our organization.

2. Extent to which horizontal communication with other employees is accurate and free flowing.

3. Extent to which communication practices are adaptable to emergencies.

4. Extent to which my workgroup is compatible.

5. Extent to which informal communication is active and accurate.

Notes: Respondents were asked to rate their likelihood of satisfaction on a 7-point Likert scale (1 =strongly disagree, 7 = strongly agree).

Scale for supervisory communication satisfaction

1. Extent to which my supervisor listens and pays attention to me.

2. Extent to which my supervisor offers guidance for solving job related problems.

3. Extent to which my supervisor trusts me.

4. Extent to which my supervisor is open to ideas.

5. Extent to which the amount of supervision given to me is about right.

Notes: Respondents were asked to rate their likelihood of satisfaction on a 7-point Likert scale (1 =strongly disagree, 7 = strongly agree).

Scale for organizational citizenship behavior

1. I am willing to help workmates who meet trouble at work.

2. I will adjust my work plan for satisfying others need for holiday.

3. I will help new workmates to get used to the work environment as much as possible.

4. I sincerely care for workmates and be polite to them.

5. I will fight positively against the bad words on company said by others.

6. I am proud of recommending company to others.

7. I always put forward suggestions to improve the efficiency of company.

8. I am loyal to company.

9. I always pay attention on the image of company.

Notes: Respondents were asked to rate their likelihood of engagement such behavior on a 7-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree, 7 = strongly agree).

References

Alfonso

, Zenasni

, Hodzic

, Ripoll

. Understanding the mediating role of quality of work life on the relationship between emotional intelligence and organizational citizenship behaviors. Psychological Reports. 2016;118(1):107–127.

Carmeli

, Josman

. The relationship among emotional intelligence, task performance, and organizational citizenship behaviors. Human Performance. 2006;19(4):403–19.

Côté

, Miners

CTH

. Emotional intelligence, cognitive intelligence, and job performance. Administrative Science Quarterly. 2006;51(1):1–28.

Turnipseed

, Vandewaa

. Relationship between emotional intelligence and organizational citizenship behavior. Psychological Reports. 2012;110(3):899–914.

Miao

, Humphrey

, Qian

. The cross-cultural moderators of the influence of emotional intelligence on organizational citizenship behavior and counterproductive work behavior. Human Resource Development Quarterly. 2020;31(2):213–33.

Chan

SHJ

, Lai

HYI

. Understanding the link between communication satisfaction, perceived justice and organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Business Research. 2017;70:214–23.

Grandey

, Fisk

, Mattila

, Jansen

, Sideman

. Is “service with a smile” enough? Authenticity of positive displays during service encounters. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 2005;96(1):38–55.

Wong

, Law

. The effects of leader and follower emotional intelligence on performance and attitude: An exploratory study. The Leadership Quarterly. 2002;13(3):243–274.

Pearce

, Randel

. Expectations of organizational mobility, workplace social inclusion, and employee job performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior. 2004;25(1):81–98.

10.

Chen

, Chen

, Huang

. Chinese Guanxi: An integrative review and new directions for future research. Management and Organization Review. 2013;9(1):167–207.

11.

Zhang

, Fan

, Deng

, Lam

, Hu

, Wang

. Exploring the interpersonal determinants of job embeddedness and voluntary turnover: A conservation of resources perspective. Human Resource Management Journal. 2019;29(3):413–432.

12.

Mayer

, Salovey

. What is emotional intelligence? In Salovey P, Sluyter D, (Eds.). Emotional development and emotional intelligence: Implications for educators. New York: Basic Books; 1997, pp. 3–31.

13.

Organ

. Organizational citizenship behavior: The good soldier syndrome. Lexington, Mass: Lexington Books; 1988.

14.

Rotundo

, Sackett

. The relative importance of task, citizenship, and counterproductive performance to global ratings of job performance: A policy-capturing approach. Journal of Applied Psychology. 2002;87(1):66–80.

15.

Downs

, Hazen

. A factor analytic study of communication satisfaction. Journal of Business Communication. 1977;14(3):63–73.

16.

Modaff

, DeWine

, Butler

. Organizational communication: Foundations, challenges, and misunderstandings (2nd ed.), Boston: Allyn and Bacon; 2008.

17.

Kirkman

, Rosen

, Tesluk

, Gibson

. The impact of team empowerment on virtual team performance: The moderating role of face-to-face interaction. Academy of Management Journal. 2004;47(2):175–192.

18.

Morgan

, Reynolds

, Nelson

, Johanningmeier

, Griffin

, Andrade

. Tales from the fields: Sources of employee identification in agribusiness. Management Communication Quarterly. 2004;17(3):360–395.

19.

Bolino MC . Citizenship and impression management: Good soldiers or good actors? [J]. Academy of Management Review. 1999;24(1):82–98.

20.

, Zhao

, Xia

, Liu

. The relationship between team hometown diversity and team creativity: From the chinese perspective. Sustainability (Basel, Switzerland). 2018;10(10):3458.

21.

Jones

, Chonko

, Rangarajan

, Roberts

. The role of overload on job attitudes, turnover intentions, and salesperson performance. Journal of Business Research. 2007;60(7):663–671.

22.

Hobfoll

. Conservation of resources: A new attempt at conceptualizing stress. The American Psychologist. 1989;44(3):513–524.

23.

Ghasemi

, Abedinlou

, Alimohammadi

, Abolghasemi

, Ebrahimi

, Rahimi

, et al. The relationship between emotional intelligence, personality traits and safety behaviors in metal industries workers: Confirmatory factor analysis. Work (Reading, Mass.). 2021;70(3):909–915.

24.

Winkel

, Wyland

, Shaffer

, Clason

. A new perspective on psychological resources: Unanticipated consequences of impulsivity and emotional intelligence. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology. 2011;84(1):78–94.

25.

Halbesleben

JRB

, Neveu

, Paustian-Underdahl

, Westman

. Getting to the “COR”: Understanding the role of resources in conservation of resources theory. Journal of Management. 2014;40(5):1334–1364.

26.

Mayer

, Roberts

, Barsade

. Human abilities: Emotional intelligence. Annual Review of Psychology. 2008;59(1):507–536.

27.

Beauregard

. Fairness perceptions of work–life balance initiatives: Effects on counterproductive work behaviour: Fairness perceptions of work–life balance initiatives. British Journal of Management. 2014;25(4):772–789.

28.

De Clercq

, Haq

, Azeem

. The roles of informational unfairness and political climate in the relationship between dispositional envy and job performance in Pakistani organizations. Journal of Business Research. 2018;82:117–126.

29.

Jalalkamali

, Ali

, Hyun

, Nikbin

. Relationships between work values, communication satisfaction, and employee job performance: The case of international joint ventures in Iran. Management Decision. 2016;54(4):796–814.

30.

Karriker

, Williams

. Organizational justice and organizational citizenship behavior: A mediated multifoci model. Journal of Management. 2009;35(1):112–135.

31.

Halbesleben

JRB

. The role of exhaustion and workarounds in predicting occupational injuries: A cross-lagged panel study of health care professionals. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology. 2010;15(1):1–16.

32.

Morelli

, Cunningham

CJL

. Not all resources are created equal: COR theory, values, and stress. The Journal of Psychology. 2012;146:393–415.

33.

Podsakoff

, MacKenzie

, Podsakoff

. Sources of method bias in social science research and recommendations on how to control it. Annual Review of Psychology. 2012;63(1):539–569.

34.

Krejcie

, Morgan

. Determining sample size for research activities. Educational and Psychological Measurement. 1970;30(3):607–610.

35.

Salkind

. Exploring Research (3rdd Ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall; 1997.

36.

Wong

. The effects of leader and follower emotional intelligence on performance and attitude an exploratory study. Leadership Quarterly. 2002;13(3):243–274.

37.

Lee

, Allen

. Organizational citizenship behavior and workplace deviance: The role of affect and cognitions. Journal of Applied Psychology. 2002;87(1):131–142.

38.

Brislin

. The wording and translation of research instrument. In Lonner W, Berry J (Eds.), Field methods in cross-cultural research. Beverly Hills: Sage; 1986, pp. 137–164.

39.

Park

. The roles of OCB and automation in the relationship between job autonomy and organizational performance: A moderated mediation model. International Journal of Human Resource Management. 2018;29(6):1139–1156.

40.

Wei

, Han

, Hsu

. High-performance HR practices and OCB: A cross-level investigation of a causal path. The International Journal of Human Resource Management. 2010;21(10):1631–1648.

41.

TWH

, Sorensen

, Eby

. Locus of control at work: A meta-analysis. Journal of Organizational Behavior. 2006;27(8):1057–1087.

42.

Hayes

. Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis. New York: The Guilford Press; 2013.

43.

Hayes

, Scharkow

. The relative trustworthiness of inferential tests of the indirect effect in statistical mediation analysis: Does method really matter? Psychological Science. 2013;24(10):1918–1927.

44.

Lim

, Tai

. Family incivility and job performance: A moderated mediation model of psychological distress and core self-evaluation. Journal of Applied Psychology. 2014;99(2):351–359.

45.

Bolin

JHH

, Andrew

. Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. New York, NY: The Guilford Press. Journal of Educational Measurement. (2013)2014;51(3):335–337.

46.

Hayes

, Preacher

. Quantifying and testing indirect effects in simple mediation models when the constituent paths are nonlinear. Multivariate Behavioral Research. 2010;45(4):627–660.

47.

O’Brien

. A caution regarding rules of thumb for variance inflation factors. Quality & Quantity. 2007;41(5):673–690.

48.

Lance

, Woehr

, Meade

. Case study: A monte carlo investigation of assessment center construct validity models. Organizational Research Methods. 2007;10(3):430–448.

49.

Liu

, Wang

. Self-control and organizational citizenship behavior: The role of vocational delay of gratification and job satisfaction. Work (Reading, Mass.). 2021;68(3):797–806.

50.

Anitha

EGN

, Suganthi

. How organizational citizenship behavior is promoted among nurses: A moderated mediation model. Work (Reading, Mass.). 2021;71(1):263–12.

51.

Dong

, Seo

, Bartol

. No pain, no gain: An affect-based model of developmental job experience and the buffering effects of emotional intelligence. Academy of Management Journal. 2014;57(4):1056–1077.

Is supervisory communication more important than co-worker communication for employees’ engagement behavior in China? A moderated mediation analysis

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

OBJECTIVES:

METHODS:

RESULTS:

CONCLUSIONS:

Keywords

1 Introduction

2 Literature and hypotheses

2.1 EI, CCS, and OCB

2.2 Mediating effect of co-worker communication between EI and OCB

2.3 Moderation effect of SCS on the relationship between CCS and OCB

2.4 Moderation effect of SCS on the mediating role of CCS between EI and OCB

3.1 Participants characteristics

3.2 Measures

3.2.1 Emotional intelligence

Table 1 Descriptive results Variables M SD EI CCS SCS OCB EI 4.8848 1.05384 (0.904) CCS 5.3496 1.20141 0.323*** (0.867) SCS 5.7574 0.88565 0.437*** 0.450*** (0.936) OCB 5.6739 0.89469 0.440*** 0.276*** 0.345*** (0.941)

3.2.3 Organizational citizenship behavior

3.3 Control variables

3.4 Data analysis

4 Results

4.1 Preliminary analysis

4.2 Discriminant validity

Table 3 Results of linear regression Dependent variable CCS OCB B SE B SE EI 0.271*** 0.053 0.333*** 0.053 CCS 0.151*** 0.063 EI ⟶ CCS ⟶ OCB 0.041***

5.1 Theoretical implications

5.2 Practical implications

6 Conclusions

Ethical approval

Informed consent

Conflict of interest

Footnotes

Acknowledgments

Funding

Appendix: Scales of the four constructs

References

Table 1
Descriptive results

Variables M SD EI CCS SCS OCB

EI 4.8848 1.05384 (0.904)

CCS 5.3496 1.20141 0.323^* (0.867)

SCS 5.7574 0.88565 0.437^* 0.450^* (0.936)

OCB 5.6739 0.89469 0.440^* 0.276^* 0.345^* (0.941)

Table 3
Results of linear regression

Dependent variable CCS OCB

B SE B SE

EI 0.271^* 0.053 0.333^* 0.053

CCS 0.151^* 0.063

EI ⟶ CCS ⟶ OCB 0.041^*