Do interpersonal resources improve your job performance? Scale development of interpersonal resources and the moderated mediation model of group harmony

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

How to help workers establish a safe and healthy working environment is the primary purpose of promoting workplace health psychology.

OBJECTIVE:

The aim of this study was to investigate the relationship between interpersonal resources and job performance (work performance, organizational citizen behavior). Besides, this study tries to clarify the psychological mechanisms of vitality and emotional attachment, and further considers the moderating role of group harmony.

METHODS:

Questionnaires were used. Two samples included 267 and 285 questionnaires were collected in study 1. A total of 151 valid and matched surveys were collected in study 2.

RESULTS:

Study 1 tested the psychometric properties of the interpersonal resources scale, and then, established three constructs of interpersonal resources: “interpersonal caring”, “interpersonal inclusion”, and “interpersonal connection”. Study 2 results showed positive correlations between interpersonal resources and job performance. Vitality has the mediating effect between interpersonal resources and work performance, and emotional attachment has the mediating effect between interpersonal resources and organizational citizen behaviors. In addition, the moderating effects of group harmony were supported.

CONCLUSION:

This research covered two studies to clarify the construct of interpersonal resources and develop an interpersonal resources scale with reliability and validity. Furthermore, this research further discussed the theoretical meaning and practical application and explained the future research direction. This research not only responds to experts’ calls but also considers the influence of cultural values to examine the model of interpersonal resources.

Keywords

Attachment job engagement social skills work performance

1 Introduction

Work stress, which is an important ascendant research topic in recent years, has been paid close attention to by researchers of organizational behavior. How to help workers establish a safe and healthy working environment is the primary purpose of promoting workplace health psychology. Apart from the importance of academic development, this topic is also necessary for practical management. The problem of long working hours has not improved, thus, workers’ reaction to work stress is increasing, and cases of suspected overwork are frequent. When employees face workplace health problems, it will affect their personal health and quality of life, reduce their work performance, and increase the operating costs for enterprise operations [1]. Therefore, how to improve workers’ workplace health has long been an important issue that both academic researchers and practical managers hope to deal with.

With the promotion of positive psychology, researchers began to pay attention to how to promote the health and happiness of workers and to discover and promote the factors that can help individuals and society grow [2]. One of the stress theories in modern times has also begun to develop towards a positive view, such as the Job Demand-Resource Model (JD-R), as proposed by Bakker and Demerouti [3], which pointed out that the positive impact of job resources in the environment should be included to help employees grow and develop, thus, improving their work performance. While past research focused on clarifying job demands or their negative effects, they hoped to change or eliminate stressors for stress response management [1]; however, the view on resources is rather vague, especially the core concept of interpersonal resources, which has not yet been clearly explained by research.

The possible reason is that, although many studies on work stress that consider positive thinking have begun to appear, traditionally, social support is still used to refer to social resources [4]. However, the components of social resources are not only supportive concepts, but also involve other connotations; for example, some scholars have adopted social capital [2] or good network relationships as substitutes for measuring interpersonal resource. Although these resources are known to have an impact on employees’ job performance, the psychological mechanisms involved are rarely explored, resulting in no clear conclusion regarding the factors that should be covered in the mediating effects of interpersonal resources, which makes it difficult to promote the research and development of interpersonal resources.

Besides, for many work fields that pay special attention to interpersonal relationships, such as the Chinese work field, dealing with interpersonal issues is usually the primary task of Chinese workers. It is emphasized that, in order to establish good guanxi with others and emphasize group harmony, resource allocation must be carried out according to renqing principles [5]. After reviewing relevant cultural values, we can find that Chinese workers place value on maintaining harmony and emphasizing the group first. The arguments of the work stress theory point out cultural value and interpersonal influence should be taken into account when studying work stress [3]. However, the existing empirical studies have generally tested interpersonal resources, while the impact of this cultural characteristic is not considered. In other words, to date, the existing related studies cannot fully capture the construct of interpersonal resources, and the moderating effect of group harmony in interpersonal resources research.

In order to solve the above research gap, this research intended to develop the definition and construct of interpersonal resources, established the measurement items of interpersonal resources, and examined the relationship between interpersonal resources and job performance. According to the relevant research of JD-R, clarify the psychological mechanisms, and explore the influence of group harmony.

1.1 Interpersonal resources

Many stress models [3] and retrospective articles [6, 4] include the concept of interpersonal interaction, and believe that it is not sufficient to consider only work factors, meaning interpersonal relationships should also be considered when conducting research on stress. Many empirical studies have found that we can feel social support [7]. The dominant social capital [8] can help individuals to obtain resources and improve their work efficiency, health, and well-being. In other words, social resources come from the fact that a worker feels supported or is provided with the resources he or she needs to work when he or she interacts with others.

Workers receive social support from others, and when they have social capital, they hold social resources on behalf of other individuals. However, the culture in which an individual lives shapes their behavior, and the interactions of social relations under different cultures may have different meanings and influences. In Chinese culture, people emphasize group first. Furthermore, the collectivist culture also emphasizes that, when interacting with others, great importance should be attached to congenial character, emotional harmony, and sharing weal and woe in interpersonal communications [9, 10], which is the core of whether individual can establish good relationships with others. If only the above-mentioned concepts of social resources are used for the research of Chinese workers, the overall appearance of interpersonal resources will not be fully captured, and they must bear the risk of group myth, as caused by too much emphasis on homo-configuration [11].

Establishing and maintaining harmonious social relations is the primary task of Chinese interpersonal communication, arguing with others is not encouraged, and conflict avoidance is an important feature of maintaining Chinese relations. Western society believes that reducing conflicts reflects the establishment of a social relationship, but for Chinese thinking, harmony itself is a sign of the quality of the relationship, and harmony is the key value of the establishment of social relationships [9]. This kind of thinking with interpersonal harmony as the primary goal will enable individuals to take the overall situation into consideration when taking action, comprehensively consider the relevant people and things, pay attention to the influence of individuals on others, and maintain interpersonal harmony in interactive situations as much as possible. Therefore, the purpose of providing the assistance needed by the demanders or the resources of others is to maintain or establish a harmonious relationship between the interactive parties. Obviously, cultural factors do affect how individuals interact with others, and it is necessary to consider the influence of cultural values, in order to completely clarify the core elements of interpersonal resources.

Reviewing some studies of cultural values and interpersonal interactions, it is found that there are many concepts with Chinese cultural values that can be used as references for the development of interpersonal resource constructs, such as guanxi or renqing. In the organizational field, guanxi is an important foundation for the operation of Chinese enterprises [12]. Regarding workplace interpersonal relationships, connections can be used to ensure mutual benefits, mutual obligations, trust, and understanding in interpersonal relationships, and guide Chinese towards long-term social and commercial development. In other words, guanxi can be regarded as a kind of social capital in Chinese society; through the effective use of social capital, mutual benefit, trust, and dependence can be strengthened [12]. Guanxi also represents a strategy of interpersonal resources that supports each other’s goals and values each other’s needs [13, 14].

R enqing and face are special social transaction rules in Chinese culture. Renqing rules can be applied to individuals to express their feelings to others during social interactions to maintain harmony in interpersonal relationships. It is a common phenomenon in Chinese society to associate others with renqing, including the allocation of resources. When allocating resources, Chinese people will look at the target, follow the rules of renqing in the face of their own people, and follow the rules of rationality in the face of ordinary people. Such practice is deemed fair and reasonable [5]. Therefore, renqing is often related to the establishment of relationships, and involve the distribution of resources as a means to maintain harmonious relationships. Furthermore, in order to maintain the balance of reciprocity among people, individuals can use renqing as a means of interpersonal operation, which can be stored, credited, and transferred. Considering the operation of renqing, it is bound to affect the number of personal resources obtained.

Based on the above cultural value and interpersonal interaction, this study develops a new scale to capture interpersonal resources in Chinese culture. The definition of interpersonal resources is to feel the care of others, receive the tolerance, understanding, and appreciation of others, and optimize connections with others, trust each other, and work together. Interpersonal resources include three dimensions: interpersonal caring, interpersonal inclusion, and interpersonal connection. Interpersonal caring means feeling the care of others. Merges show utmost care, help one other, and guide and support; Interpersonal inclusion means receiving the tolerance, understanding, and appreciation of others, and knowing how to be grateful in return; Interpersonal connection means optimizing connections with others, trusting each other, and working together.

1.2 Interpersonal resources and job performance

What impact will interpersonal resources have on workers? Looking back on previous studies, the widely used theory is the JD-R model, as proposed by Bakker and Demerouti [3], which aims to explore the possible influence of job demands and job resources on employee job outcomes in the general workplace environment. According to the model, for workers, there is a positive correlation between job resources and workers’ work performance. On this basis, this research argues that the interpersonal resources can be regarded as a kind of job resource for workers. When workers accept interpersonal resources from others in the workplace, it has an incentive effect on employees; as long as job resources meet workers’ psychological needs, it can improve workers’ work performance.

In the literature review of job demands and the resource model, work performance and organizational citizen behaviors are often used as indicators of job performance [4]. In this research, work performance and organizational citizen behaviors are also seen as work performance triggered by interpersonal resources. The results show that, according to the JD-R argument, employees accept interpersonal resources will bring positive results to their work performance and organizational citizen behaviors. In addition, most of the current JD-R studies used social support as a measure of job resources [3, 7].

Furthermore, in Chinese culture, people emphasizes group first. The collectivism culture also emphasizes that, when interacting with others, great importance should be attached to congenial character, emotional harmony, and sharing weal and woe in interpersonal communications [10], which is the core of whether an individual can establish good relationships with others. Besides, Confucian cultural values emphasize harmony between individuals and society [15]; pursuing the ideal of peace is most important, and will avoid direct conflicts with others [16]. This kind of thinking with interpersonal harmony as the primary goal will enable individuals to take the overall situation into consideration when taking actions, comprehensively consider the relevant people and things, pay attention to the influence of individuals on others, and maintain interpersonal harmony in interactive situations as much as possible. When they have interpersonal resources, means they interact with others harmony, have social support, might result in good job performance. Therefore, this paper proposes the following hypothesis:

Hypothesis 1: Interpersonal resources is positive related with job performance (work performance, organizational citizen behaviors).

1.3 The mediating effects of vitality and emotional attachment

Then, according to the relevant research of JD-R, the most commonly used concept to explain the intermediary mechanism is job engagement. Among them, “Vitality” is a concept directly corresponding to the concept opposite from the core element of job burnout, meaning “emotional exhaustion” [17], which is the most core construct representing job engagement, and refers to the individual’s willingness to be devoted to work and persevere even in the face of difficulties, and thus, is one of the important antecedents of job performance. Therefore, this research chooses vitality as a measure representing job engagement. According to the JD-R model, when workers receive more interpersonal resources, they may have positive personal feelings regarding work objectives, which will help them to effectively achieve work objectives along with their active working state. In other words, interpersonal resources will induce workers to devote more energy to their work, thus, improving their personal performance and organizational citizen behaviors.

More importantly, the Chinese are deeply influenced by the traditional Confucian culture and value interpersonal relationships. Besides work, social exchange activities are also involved in personal life [18]. Therefore, from the perspective of incorporating Chinese cultural factors, when workers receive more interpersonal resources, it can arouse their personal dedication and have positive effect on the establishment of emotional relationships. In other words, when the emotional attachment is stronger, it reflects that both parties have good guanxi quality [18], meaning they have more favorable exchanges with each other, and believe that each other’s commitments are reliable. Both parties will repeatedly perform obligations in the exchange relationship, which is conducive to mutual cooperation and coordination, will improve the work efficiency of employees, and promote the business development of the organization [13, 19]. According to the theory of emotional attachment, when a person has continuous feelings for a specific person, the attachment will occur [20]. The establishment of attachment relationships is very important in Chinese communication; when there are positive interpersonal interactions and mutual benefits, it may affect work performance through emotional attachment [21]. Based on the above, in addition to the job engagement path, as described by the JD-R model, emotional attachment should have a mediating effect between interpersonal resources and work performance; therefore, this paper proposes the following hypotheses:

Hypothesis 2-1: Vitality mediates the relationship between interpersonal resources, work performance, and organizational citizen behaviors.

Hypothesis 2-2: Emotional attachment mediates the relationship between interpersonal resources, work performance, and organizational citizen behaviors.

1.4 The moderating effects of group harmony

According to the principle of collectivism orientation, Chinese attach importance to teamwork, and emphasize collective beliefs and group responsibilities. Under the context of Chinese interpersonal relationships, workers make great efforts to maintain harmonious relations with others, and form the standards and principles of mutual cooperation. In an organization, we should be helpful to each other, and maintain a trustworthy attitude. During cooperation, we hope to be accepted by groups and pay attention to maintaining long-term relations with group harmony [10]. “Harmony” is a value emphasized by Chinese society, thus, the interpersonal interactions of Chinese workers cannot be ignored when discussing the concept of interpersonal resources for Chinese workers.

Triandis [22] pointed out that collectivist workers have a high degree of attachment to organizations. For those with high group harmony, individuals have strong emotional needs and security, such as renqing and feelings [10]. When they feel that others have given resources, individuals will closely link their relationship and feelings, which may deepen the relationship between personal resources and emotional attachment. In addition, those with high group harmony strive to maintain group harmony in their interactions with others, and emphasizes that when they encounter problems at work, they work together as a team. Therefore, when they obtain other people’s resources, they will be more involved in their work for the sake of the collective good, which will strengthen the relationship between interpersonal resources and vitality. Thus, this research argues that, when considering group harmony, especially for Chinese organizations, harmony is a very important situational variable in the response process of interpersonal resources. This paper proposes the following hypotheses:

Hypothesis 3-1: Group harmony moderates the relationship between interpersonal resources and vitality. The higher the group harmony, the stronger the relationship between interpersonal resources and Vitality.

Hypothesis 3-2: Group harmony moderates the relationship between interpersonal resources and emotional attachment. The higher the group harmony, the stronger the relationship between the interpersonal resources and the emotional attachment.

2 Study 1

2.1 Methods

2.1.1 Participants and procedures

The purpose of study 1 was to develop a new measurement tool. In this research, in order to fully understand the phenomenon of interpersonal resources, and widely apply the findings in various organizational fields, data collection is conducted for workers across various industries and backgrounds in Taiwan. Data screening was carried out after the return. The exclusion criteria included any responses with missing data or random answers. The questionnaire survey method was mainly used for two independent samples. Sample 1 was used for exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and Coefficient of Internal Consistency analysis, in order to carry out item analysis to obtain a more concise and stable measurement tool with a stable factor structure. Then, Sample 2 was used for confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) of the scale of the interpersonal resources, while discriminant validity and convergent validity were used to confirm whether the factor structure of the newly developed interpersonal resources scale met the expectations.

2.2 Results

2.2.1 Demographic description

A total of 267 worker questionnaires were recovered in sample 1. Among them, females accounted for 67.81%; the average age was 39.40 years old; academic qualifications were mainly university (40.62%), with an average seniority of 5.74 years; the subjects were dominated by grass-roots personnel (81.62%); the industries of the affiliated companies were mainly medical industries (56.61%) and traditional industries (34.54%).

A total of 285 worker questionnaires were recovered in sample 2. Among them, females accounted for 66.31%; the average age was 37.31 years old; academic qualifications were mainly university (30.51%), with an average seniority of 5.83 years; the subjects were dominated by grass-roots personnel (82.12%); the industries of the affiliated companies were mainly medical industries (47.03%) and traditional industries (45.31%).

2.2.2 EFA results

There were 20 items, and a total of three factors were obtained. The eigenvalues were all greater than 1, and the overall explanation was 71.6%, as shown in Table 1. Further examination of the contents of each factor shows that the three factors were reasonable and acceptable. In this research, three structural robust dimensions of interpersonal resources were obtained, which are explained, as follows:

Interpersonal caring: The factor load is 0.76∼0.88, and the explanatory variation is 55.68%, for a total of eight items.

Interpersonal inclusion: The factor load is 0.60∼0.87, and the explained variation amount is 8.41%, for a total of seven items.

Interpersonal connection: The factor load is 0.73∼0.93, and the explained variation amount is 7.51%, for a total of five items.

Table 1
Exploratory factor analysis of interpersonal resources

Item M SD F1 F2 F3

Interpersonal caring

Others care about my daily life. 4.18 1.15 0.88 –0.07 0.04

At work, others are willing to promote me. 4.07 1.24 0.86 0.01 –0.04

Others will care about my work situation. 4.31 1.12 0.85 0.01 0.06

When I am helpless, I can get timely help from others. 4.22 1.14 0.83 0.18 –0.09

In times of crisis, I can rely on others to survive the crisis. 4.03 1.23 0.80 0.08 –0.04

Others are willing to help me solve the problems I encounter. 4.26 1.18 0.79 0.08 0.01

Others are willing to take the time to teach me. 4.34 1.17 0.76 0.13 –0.05

When I am not in good health, others will send their respects. 4.45 1.06 0.76 –0.08 0.20

Interpersonal inclusion

Others believe that I sometimes make mistakes because of many uncontrollable factors. 3.96 1.20 –0.10 0.87 0.05

When I show kindness to others, others will give it back. 4.10 1.25 –0.04 0.83 0.08

When the result is not satisfactory, others can understand my sufferings and not criticize me harshly. 3.97 1.21 0.06 0.82 –0.03

Others will tolerate my mistakes. 4.12 1.11 0.13 0.80 –0.11

Others will find ways to repay me for my efforts. 3.85 1.17 0.15 0.74 –0.01

I can be grateful for giving to others. 4.11 1.22 0.10 0.68 0.04

Others will adopt my suggestions. 4.18 1.02 0.22 0.60 0.16

Interpersonal connection

The contacts I have established with others are helpful for me to finish my work. 4.67 1.07 –0.01 –0.018 0.93

Establishing contact with others can make me feel comfortable at work. 4.59 1.11 –0.12 0.091 0.89

At work, others and I will cooperate with each other to complete a task. 4.61 1.05 0.24 –0.172 0.78

Establishing a network with others can reduce my work troubles. 4.48 1.17 –0.21 0.342 0.76

At work, others and I trust each other. 4.54 1.10 0.29 –0.117 0.73

Eigenvalue 11.14 1.68 1.50

Explanatory variation (%) 55.68 8.41 7.51

Cumulative explanatory variation (%) 55.68 64.09 71.60

Item	M	SD	F1	F2	F3
Interpersonal caring
Others care about my daily life.	4.18	1.15	0.88	–0.07	0.04
At work, others are willing to promote me.	4.07	1.24	0.86	0.01	–0.04
Others will care about my work situation.	4.31	1.12	0.85	0.01	0.06
When I am helpless, I can get timely help from others.	4.22	1.14	0.83	0.18	–0.09
In times of crisis, I can rely on others to survive the crisis.	4.03	1.23	0.80	0.08	–0.04
Others are willing to help me solve the problems I encounter.	4.26	1.18	0.79	0.08	0.01
Others are willing to take the time to teach me.	4.34	1.17	0.76	0.13	–0.05
When I am not in good health, others will send their respects.	4.45	1.06	0.76	–0.08	0.20
Interpersonal inclusion
Others believe that I sometimes make mistakes because of many uncontrollable factors.	3.96	1.20	–0.10	0.87	0.05
When I show kindness to others, others will give it back.	4.10	1.25	–0.04	0.83	0.08
When the result is not satisfactory, others can understand my sufferings and not criticize me harshly.	3.97	1.21	0.06	0.82	–0.03
Others will tolerate my mistakes.	4.12	1.11	0.13	0.80	–0.11
Others will find ways to repay me for my efforts.	3.85	1.17	0.15	0.74	–0.01
I can be grateful for giving to others.	4.11	1.22	0.10	0.68	0.04
Others will adopt my suggestions.	4.18	1.02	0.22	0.60	0.16
Interpersonal connection
The contacts I have established with others are helpful for me to finish my work.	4.67	1.07	–0.01	–0.018	0.93
Establishing contact with others can make me feel comfortable at work.	4.59	1.11	–0.12	0.091	0.89
At work, others and I will cooperate with each other to complete a task.	4.61	1.05	0.24	–0.172	0.78
Establishing a network with others can reduce my work troubles.	4.48	1.17	–0.21	0.342	0.76
At work, others and I trust each other.	4.54	1.10	0.29	–0.117	0.73
Eigenvalue		11.14	1.68	1.50
Explanatory variation (%)		55.68	8.41	7.51
Cumulative explanatory variation (%)		55.68	64.09	71.60

Note: N = 267.

2.2.3 Reliability

The internal consistency coefficient of Cronbach’s α in the interpersonal resources global scale is 0.96. Looking closely at the dimensions, Cronbach’s α of interpersonal caring is 0.95; Cronbach’s α of the number of interpersonal inclusions is 0.93; Cronbach’s α of interpersonal connections is 0.91. In addition, each item is related to the total score of the overall scale from 0.64 to 0.81, and the total score from various dimensions is 0.72 to 0.85. Deleting any item does not increase the interpersonal resources scale or the Cronbach’s α value of each construct. In summary, the scale of the interpersonal resources has high and stable internal consistency reliability.

2.2.4 CFA results

Confirmatory factor analysis was performed for the aforementioned three-factor model, The appropriateness indicators for the 20 items of the theoretical model are (χ² = 666.50, p < 0.01, df = 167, CFI = 0.90, RMSEA = 0.09, SRMR = 0.06), which reach acceptable levels [23], and the factor load reached a significant level (β= 0.77∼0.87, p < 0.01). Then, referring to the practice of Anderson and Gerbing [24], this research set the three factors as pairwise correlations to generate 3 nested models, and tested the chi-square difference with the original three-factor model. All three modes were significant in the chi-square test (χ² from 142.328 to 275.76). It can be seen that various factors are not suitable for the merger, and the three-factor model of interpersonal resources has good construct validity.

2.2.5 Convergent validity and discriminant validity

In terms of convergent validity, this research followed the suggestions of Anderson and Gerbing [24]. If a scale has convergent validity, the potential load of each potential variable in its factor analysis must be significant for each of its measured variables. The results show that the three-factor model of interpersonal resources has a significant load of all factors (β= 0.82∼0.89, p < 0.01), thus, it is supported by the test of convergent validity; in terms of discriminant validity, Jöreskog and Sörbom [25] suggested to review the 95% confidence interval of the pairwise correlation coefficient of factors; if it contains 1 (or –1), it means a lack of discriminant validity. The results show that the absolute value of the correlation between two factors of the three factors of interpersonal resources is between 0.63∼0.75, each correlation coefficient is plus or minus the 1.96 standard errors (between 0.51∼0.87), and does not include 1 (or –1), thus, the test for discriminant validity is also supported.

3 Study 2: Nomological network

3.1 Method

3.1.1 Participants and procedure

The purpose of this study establishes a nomological network of interpersonal resources, use questionnaires for data collection, consider the impact of the common method variance, and use time lag design to reduce research bias [26]. In terms of questionnaire design, the research questionnaire was divided into two questionnaires. The pre-test questionnaire was distributed first, and the post-test questionnaire was distributed after one week. The questionnaire was designed in a cross-time point manner, and the two questionnaires were given different names.

In this research, in order to fully understand the phenomenon of interpersonal resources, and widely apply the findings in various organizational fields, data collection is conducted for workers across various industries and backgrounds in Taiwan. 163 sets of questionnaires were sent out, which were filled out by subjects with many years of work experience. Data screening was carried out after the return. The exclusion criteria included any responses with missing data, random answers.

3.1.2 Measures

In this research, a self-reported questionnaire was used to collect data. With the exception of personal background data, the other scales were measured by a 6-point scale. The measurement tools used are, as follows:

Independent variable: Interpersonal resources: Twenty items were developed according to Study 1. Participants were asked to evaluate their interactions with others at work according to their past work experience, and Cronbach’s α= 0.94. Respondents filled in the answers from “never done so” to “always done so” according to the frequency.

Mediating variables: Vitality: This study used Schaufeli, Bakker, and Salanova [27] to develop the Vitality Scale for job dedication, with a total of three items, and various sample topics, such as “I am always energetic at work", and Cronbach’s α= 0.87. Respondents filled in the answers from “never done so” to “always done so” according to the frequency. Emotional attachment: This study revised the emotional attachment dimension in the relationship quality scale developed by Chen et al. [18], with a total of four items, and various sample items, such as “If others have problems in their lives, I will do my best to help them", and Cronbach’s α= 0.74. Respondents filled in the answers from “never done so” to “always done so” according to the frequency.

Outcome variables: Work performance: This study used Farh and Cheng’s [28] work performance scale, with a total of four items, and various sample topics, such as “I can always finish the work delivered by others on schedule", and Cronbach’s α= 0.87, according to the degree of consent from strongly disagree to strongly agree. Organizational citizen behaviors: The organizational citizen behaviors scale of Williams and Anderson [29] was adopted, with a total of 16 items, and various sample items, such as “I will spontaneously assist colleagues who have multiple tasks at the same time”, and Cronbach’s α= 0.86, according to the degree of consent from strongly disagree to strongly agree.

Moderating variable: Group harmony: This study adopted the group harmony scale developed by Chen [9], and three items with the highest factor loading were selected as being representative, with various sample topics, such as “We have a sense of security for each other”, and Cronbach’s α= 0.75, according to the degree of consent from strongly disagree to strongly agree.

Control variable: Social support: This study revised the Social Support Scale developed by O’Driscoll, Brough, and Kalliath [30], with a total of four items, and various sample topics, such as “I received useful information or suggestions from others”, and Cronbach’s α= 0.90. Respondents filled in the answers from “never done so” to “always done so” according to the frequency. Personal background variables: Individual demographic variables include gender (0 = Male; 1 = Female), age, marital status (0 = Unmarried; 1 = Married), educational background (1 = Below Senior high school and vocational school; 2 = Junior college; 3 = Bachelor Degree; 4 = Master Degree; 5 = Doctoral Degree), seniority, rank, and other data commonly used in previous studies.

3.1.3 Analysis

In this study, SPSS22.0 and JASP-0.11.1.0 software were used for analyses. SPSS22.0 was used to perform descriptive statistics; reliability testing, and correlation analyses. JASP-0.11.1.0 was used to perform confirmatory factor analysis and goodness-of-fit index analysis. To maintain the accuracy of the model’s pathways, PROCESS v3.3 was used to validate the model. Bootstrapping, which is an important tool for determining mediation and moderation, was adopted to examine the significance of the mediation and moderation effects.

3.2 Study 2 results

3.2.1 Demographic description

151 sets of questionnaires were effectively returned, for an effective return rate of 92.64%. In the distribution of background variables, females accounted for 86.11%; the average age was 35.76 years old; unmarried ethnic groups accounted for 53.62%; the educational level was dominated by the university, accounting for 64.90%; the average length of service was 7.10 years; the ranks were mainly general staff, accounting for 84.13%.

3.2.2 CFA Results

Confirmatory factor analysis was initially carried out, and the results show a 7-factor model (χ² = 437.43, p < 0.01, df = 231, χ²/df = 1.89, CFI = 0.90, RMSEA = 0.07, SRMR = 0.06); a six-factor model that combines social support and interpersonal resources (χ² = 576.02, p < 0.01, df = 237, χ²/df = 2.43, CFI = 0.83, RMSEA = 0.09, SRMR = 0.07); a two-factor model that combines the pretest (social support, interpersonal resources, group harmony) and the posttest (Vitality, emotional attachment, organizational citizen behaviors, work performance) (χ² = 1011.54, p < 0.01, df = 251, χ²/df = 4.03, CFI = 0.62, RMSEA = 0.14, SRMR = 0.13); finally, a single factor model (χ² = 1453.28, p < 0.01, df = 252, χ²/df = 5.76, CFI = 0.40, RMSEA = 0.17, SRMR = 0.16) was used. From the above, it can be seen that the seven-factor model has a significantly better-fit degree [23], the factor load reaches a significant level (β= 0.49∼0.94, p < 0.01), and is superior to other competition models, thus, the seven-factor model is the most suitable measurement model.

3.2.3 Correlation

The correlation analysis results are shown in Table 2. Interpersonal resources are positively correlated with other variables, such as vitality (r = 0.24, p < 0.01), emotional attachment (r = 0.31, p < 0.01), organizational citizen behaviors (r = 0.36, p < 0.01), and work performance (r = 0.29, p < 0.01). Vitality is positively correlated with work performance (r = 0.28, p < 0.01); emotional attachment is positively correlated with organizational citizen behaviors (r = 0.32, p < 0.01) and work performance (r = 0.20, p < 0.01). Group harmony is positively correlated with other variables, such as vitality (r = 0.27, p < 0.01), emotional attachment (r = 0.51, p < 0.01), organizational citizen behaviors (r = 0.23, p < 0.01), and work performance (r = 0.20, p < 0.05). The results are roughly in line with the inference of this research.

Table 2
Descriptive Statistics, Correlations, and Alphas

Variable Mean SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

1. Gender 1.86 0.35

2. Age 35.76 10.68 – 0.03

3. Education 2.72 0.66 0.15 – 0.19^*

4. Marriage 1.46 0.50 0.07 0.65^ – 0.06

5. Tenure 7.10 7.02 0.05 0.58^ – 0.09 0.38^

6. Job Level 1.26 0.69 – 0.13 0.30^ 0.00 0.17^* 0.28^**

7. Social support 4.34 0.72 – 0.01 0.05 0.09 0.11 0.04 0.20* (0.90)

8. Interpersonal resources 3.78 1.05 0.05 0.06 0.15 0.06 0.07 0.14 0.51^ (0.94)

9. Vitality 3.61 1.02 – 0.13 0.28^ 0.08 0.16 0.10 0.22^** 0.16^* 0.24^* (0.87)

10. Emotional attachment 4.57 0.70 – 0.10 0.04 – 0.01 0.04 0.08 0.15 0.34^ 0.31^ 0.13 (0.74)

11. Group harmony 4.34 0.93 – 0.22^** 0.19^* – 0.05 0.11 0.08 0.15 0.34^ 0.42^ 0.27^ 0.51^ (0.75)

12. OCB 4.24 0.53 0.04 0.03 – 0.03 – 0.09 0.14 0.05 0.29^ 0.36^ 0.12 0.32 0.23 (0.86)

13. Job performance 4.34 0.84 – 0.01 0.14 – 0.05 0.08 0.14 0.13 0.19^* 0.29^ 0.28^ 0.20^* 0.20^* 0.68^** (0.87)

Variable	Mean	SD	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12	13
1. Gender	1.86	0.35
2. Age	35.76	10.68	– 0.03
3. Education	2.72	0.66	0.15	– 0.19^*
4. Marriage	1.46	0.50	0.07	0.65^**	– 0.06
5. Tenure	7.10	7.02	0.05	0.58^**	– 0.09	0.38^**
6. Job Level	1.26	0.69	– 0.13	0.30^**	0.00	0.17^*	0.28^**
7. Social support	4.34	0.72	– 0.01	0.05	0.09	0.11	0.04	0.20*	(0.90)
8. Interpersonal resources	3.78	1.05	0.05	0.06	0.15	0.06	0.07	0.14	0.51^**	(0.94)
9. Vitality	3.61	1.02	– 0.13	0.28^**	0.08	0.16	0.10	0.22^**	0.16^*	0.24^*	(0.87)
10. Emotional attachment	4.57	0.70	– 0.10	0.04	– 0.01	0.04	0.08	0.15	0.34^**	0.31^**	0.13	(0.74)
11. Group harmony	4.34	0.93	– 0.22^**	0.19^*	– 0.05	0.11	0.08	0.15	0.34^**	0.42^**	0.27^**	0.51^**	(0.75)
12. OCB	4.24	0.53	0.04	0.03	– 0.03	– 0.09	0.14	0.05	0.29^**	0.36^**	0.12	0.32**	0.23**	(0.86)
13. Job performance	4.34	0.84	– 0.01	0.14	– 0.05	0.08	0.14	0.13	0.19^*	0.29^**	0.28^**	0.20^*	0.20^*	0.68^**	(0.87)

Note. N = 151. Gender was coded as 1 = Male and 2 = Female; OCB = organizational citizen behaviors. *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01.

3.2.4 Regression

In this research, the mediation effect was verified first, and the results are shown in Table 3. First, M1 shows that, after controlling social support, interpersonal resources significantly affect vitality (β= 0.20, p < 0.05); M3 shows that, after controlling social support, interpersonal resources significantly affect emotional attachment (β= 0.18, p < 0.05), indicating that the higher the interpersonal resources, the higher the vitality and emotional attachment. Furthermore, M5 shows that interpersonal resources positively affect work performance (β= 0.25, p < 0.01); M7 shows that interpersonal resources has a positive effect on organizational citizen behaviors (β= 0.29, p < 0.01). H1 is supported.

Table 3
Regression analysis

Vitality Emotional attachment Job performance OCB

M1 M2 M3 M4 M5 M6 M7 M8

Gender –0.12 –0.10 –0.09 0.01 –0.01 0.02 0.03 0.05

Age 0.23^ 0.23^ –0.01 –0.06 0.11 0.06 0.01 0.01

Job level 0.10 0.07 0.07 0.05 0.06 0.03 –0.02 –0.04

Social support 0.03 –0.02 0.24^* 0.14 0.05 0.02 0.15 0.09

Interpersonal resources 0.20^* 0.18^* 0.18^* 0.05 0.25^** 0.19^* 0.29^ 0.24^

Group harmony 0.17 0.47^**

Vitality 0.19^* 0.02

Emotional attachment 0.10 0.23^

Interpersonal Resources x Group harmony 0.22^ 0.16^*

Δ R ² 0.18 0.23 0.16 0.32 0.10 0.15 0.15 0.19

R ² 0.16 0.21 0.16 0.30 0.10 0.14 0.15 0.19

F 5.31^ 5.49^ 5.37^ 9.72^ 3.33^ 3.43^ 4.96^** 4.79^*

	Vitality	Emotional attachment	Job performance	OCB
Gender	–0.12	–0.10	–0.09	0.01	–0.01	0.02	0.03	0.05
Age	0.23^**	0.23^**	–0.01	–0.06	0.11	0.06	0.01	0.01
Job level	0.10	0.07	0.07	0.05	0.06	0.03	–0.02	–0.04
Social support	0.03	–0.02	0.24^*	0.14	0.05	0.02	0.15	0.09
Interpersonal resources	0.20^*	0.18^*	0.18^*	0.05	0.25^**	0.19^*	0.29^**	0.24^**
Group harmony		0.17		0.47^**
Vitality						0.19^*		0.02
Emotional attachment						0.10		0.23^**
Interpersonal Resources x Group harmony		0.22^**		0.16^*
Δ R ²	0.18	0.23	0.16	0.32	0.10	0.15	0.15	0.19
R ²	0.16	0.21	0.16	0.30	0.10	0.14	0.15	0.19
F	5.31^**	5.49^**	5.37^**	9.72^**	3.33^**	3.43^**	4.96^**	4.79^*

Note. N = 151. OCB = organizational citizen behaviors. ^*p < 0.05; ^**p < 0.01.

After M6 was added with vitality and emotional attachment, interpersonal resources (β= 0.19, p < 0.05) and vitality (β= 0.19, p < 0.05) positively affect work performance and emotional attachment (β= 0.10, p > 0.05), indicating that vitality has mediating effect between interpersonal resources and work performance. Moreover, M8 shows that interpersonal resources (β= 0.24, p < 0.01) and emotional attachment (β= 0.23, p < 0.01) positively affect organizational citizen behaviors, while vitality (β= 0.02, p > 0.05) did not reach a significant level, indicating that emotional attachment has mediating effect between interpersonal resources and organizational citizen behaviors. H2-1 and H2-2 are partially supported.

Then, the moderating effect of group harmony was verified. From M2, it can be seen that the intersection multiplication term of interpersonal resources and group harmony predicts vitality (β= –0.22, p < 0.05) at a significant level, indicating that group harmony can moderate the relationship between interpersonal resources and vitality; in addition, it can be seen from M4 that the intersection multiplication term of interpersonal resources and group harmony has a significant level of emotional attachment (β= 0.16, p < 0.05), which indicates that group harmony can moderate the relationship between interpersonal resources and emotional attachment. H3-1 and H3-2 are supported.

According to the above research results, the interaction diagram is drawn. As shown in Fig. 1, the effect of interpersonal resources and vitality is the strongest when the group harmony is high (β= 0.64, p < 0.01); however, when the group harmony is low, the effect of interpersonal resources and vitality is not significant (β= 0.01, p > 0.05), indicating that a high degree of group harmony enhances the predictive effect of interpersonal resources on vitality. Similarly, as seen in Fig. 2, when the group harmony is high, the effect of interpersonal resources and emotional attachment is strongest (β= 0.15); however, when the group harmony is low, the effect of interpersonal resources and emotional attachment is not significant, indicating that a high degree of group harmony enhances the prediction effect of interpersonal resources on emotional attachment.

Fig. 1

Group harmony moderates the relationship between interpersonal resources and vitality.

Fig. 2

Group harmony moderates the relationship between interpersonal resources and emotional attachment.

Finally, in order to ensure the accuracy of the path, the adjusted mediation effect is verified through PROCESS, and the results are shown in Table 4. Interpersonal resources affect work performance only via vitality (95% CI [0.01–0.12]), but not via emotional attachment (95% CI [–0.02–0.07]). The results show that, when group harmony is high, vitality has a significant conditional indirect effect between interpersonal resources and work performance (95% CI [0.01–0.17]). While interpersonal resources only affect organizational civil actors (95% CI [–0.07–0.01]) through emotional attachment, they do not affect organizational citizen behaviors (95% CI [0.01–0.07]) through the vitality path. It is shown that, when group harmony is high, emotional attachment has a significant conditional indirect effect (95% CI [0.01–0.17]) between interpersonal resources and organizational citizen behaviors.

Table 4

The mediated moderation results

	Mediate variables	Conditional indirect effects					Mediated Moderation
		Group harmony	Effect	SE	95% CI		Index	SE	95% CI
					LLCI	ULCI			LLCI	ULCI
Job Performance	Vitality	Low(M-1SD)	–0.01	0.03	–0.06	0.05	0.05	0.03	0.01	0.12
		Mean(M)	0.05	0.03	0.01	0.12
		High(M+1SD)	0.09	0.04	0.01	0.17
	Emotional attachment	Low(M–1SD)	–0.01	0.02	–0.06	0.02	0.02	0.02	–0.02	0.07
		Mean(M)	0.01	0.02	–0.02	0.05
		High(M+1SD)	0.02	0.02	–0.02	0.07
OCB	Vitality	Low(M–1SD)	–0.01	0.01	–0.02	0.01	0.01	0.01	–0.02	0.03
		Mean(M)	0.01	0.01	–0.02	0.03
		High(M+1SD)	0.01	0.02	–0.03	0.05
	Emotional attachment	Low(M–1SD)	–0.01	0.02	–0.07	0.01	0.03	0.02	0.01	0.07
		Mean(M)	0.02	0.02	0.02	0.04
		High(M+1SD)	0.03	0.02	0.01	0.07

Note. N = 151. OCB = organizational citizen behaviors. ^*p < 0.05; ^**p < 0.01.

4 Discussion and conclusion

This research effectively responded to the important gaps in previous interpersonal resource literature. Considering the specific situation of Chinese culture, this research established the interpersonal resources dimension by collecting and integrating behavior incidents and found many elements that cannot be explained by the social support theory or social capital in the past. In order to clarify the dimension characteristics of the newly developed interpersonal resources, this research further compared them with past similar concepts. First, regarding the dimension of “interpersonal caring", similar to the concepts of emotional companionship support and substantial resource support, if workers receive assistance from others in the workplace, their adaptability can be improved [17]. This dimension is a very common element of interpersonal resources in current organizations and has cross-cultural universality, while in the past, the core of social support was mostly to supplement the resources of the workforce However, interpersonal caring, as described in this research, is not only to support the workforce but also to take care of personal life. The concept of caring at the life level is the biggest feature of Chinese organizations that is different from that of western enterprises, and this is in line with the expectations of traditional culture. Chinese enterprises often play the role of parents, and care workers regard them as family members and neighbors. Therefore, this dimension not only involves the support of work but also includes care in private life. Thus, it is impossible to directly use social support to replace interpersonal caring.

Regarding the dimension of “interpersonal inclusion", we can see the similarities and differences between individualist and collectivist cultures. In collectivist Chinese society, the sense of achievement is to belong to the group, to be proud of the group, to pay attention to renqing, face, and courtesy, to maintain interpersonal relationships, to maintain group harmony, and to tolerate other people’s mistakes. When individual goals and group goals conflict with each other, people will give priority to group interests. Even if they have to sacrifice themselves, they still give priority to common rights and interests. Moreover, the concept of exchange reciprocity in a collectivist society, emphasizes the internal morality, gratitude, and return kindness demonstrated by individuals as a social norm in Chinese society [31]. Moreover, the concept of return by the Chinese is “more returns” rather than “equal returns” [32], which will affect the allocation of resources and highlight the characteristics of the dimension of personal inclusion.

Regarding the dimension of “interpersonal connection", it can be compared with social capital. Social capital is a network interaction between people, interacting with others in organizations, and is a channel to obtain resources. While this behavior is somewhat similar to the word “guanxi” in Chinese organizations, is different in essence. Guanxi is not only a kind of social network in Chinese society. Some scholars have pointed out that the research orientation of social capital, which only considered economic rationality in the past, should be adjusted, and emphasis should be placed on the essence and structure of relations [33]. In the west, individual-centered social capital emphasizes the principles of justice and reciprocity, and reciprocal exchanges based on fairness can explain how the connection of social networks provides social capital and specific advantages for actors; in contrast, Chinese society is a “Guanxi-based” society. The relationship between the Chinese has a return on investment; workers will try to establish relationships through communication and social activities, and this relationship must be maintained. This also shows that the Chinese must invest, generate valuable exchange relationships for individuals, and develop emotional and foundation-building useful contacts, instead of general short-term exchange relationships. In other words, in the field of Chinese organizations, the concept of networking cannot be ignored when considering interpersonal resources [12]. “Connection” is a unique word in Chinese culture. Under the law of renqing, Chinese people are more active in creating interpersonal connections and managing interpersonal relationships, thus, obtaining useful resources. In addition, Bian [36] pointed out that guanxi is a unique phenomenon of the Chinese, and can be regarded as a resource of two-way emotional bondage, high intimacy, and long-term emotional attachment, thus, representing the dimension of interpersonal connection.

This research developed a measurable interpersonal resources scale and conceptually sorted three important theoretical dimensions of interpersonal resources. This research not only responds to experts’ calls but considers the influence of cultural values to develop important constructs of interpersonal resources. Moreover, through the detection of multiple samples in a series of studies, an interpersonal resources measurement tool with good reliability and validity has been established, which facilitates the development and verification of the subsequent interpersonal resources model and provides important research value for interpersonal resources, stress management, and Chinese management.

The model test of interpersonal resources was carried out in this research. Interpersonal resources had positive effects on vitality, emotional attachment, work performance, and organizational citizen behaviors, which could provide evidence of mediating effects of interpersonal resources. In addition, the results show that vitality mediates the relationship between interpersonal resources and work performance, echoing the JD-R model, and the results of regarding job engagement as a mediating path are consistent [3]. Furthermore, this research expanded the JD-R model and found that emotional attachment is also very important in this process. This research not only responds to experts’ calls, but considers the influence of cultural values to explore the emotional relationships process of interpersonal resources, which facilitates the development and verification of the subsequent interpersonal resources model and provides important research value for interpersonal resources, stress management, and Chinese management.

Finally, when talking about Chinese culture, harmonious values and collectivism are the highest guiding principles required by Chinese culture. Previous studies have found that the value of harmony plays an important role in maintaining interpersonal harmony between leadership behavior and work performance, and emphasizes relationships and human culture [34]. Considering the value of group harmony, it is found that group harmony strengthens the relationship between interpersonal resources, personal motivation, and emotion, which shows that the group harmony culture plays an important situational variable in the study of interpersonal resources and provides supporting evidence for cultural influence. On the whole, this research considered the specific situation of Chinese culture, and the reconstructed interpersonal resources model will indeed be influenced by the value of group harmony, which highlights that the newly constructed interpersonal resources measurement implies the elements of harmony and collectivist culture. Through this series of studies, this research has improved the scale of the interpersonal resources and provided supporting evidence for the nomological network, which is helpful for the discussion and development of relevant studies in the future.

4.1 Limitations and future research

Although this research carried out standard research procedures and controlled possible interference factors as much as possible, some research limitations must be explained. First, there is no specific reference to specific objects in the measurement of interpersonal resources. However, regarding interpersonal interaction, the influence of the interacting object is often taken into account [1]; in other words, some interpersonal resource incidents may often come from supervisors, colleagues, or other stakeholders. Therefore, it is suggested that future research can include objectivity, and use others in the scale objects to refer to specific objects, such as supervisors, colleagues, or customers, in order to repeatedly verify the constructs developed in this research, and understand the role played by the source objects and clarify whether there is stability across source samples.

Secondly, in the verification part of the research model, while the number of samples is relatively small, the final valid sample number is still more than 100, as recommended by scholars [35]. While the size of the sample should not affect the research results, it is still suggested that future research should select sufficient samples according to the statistical verification force to avoid possible problems during research design.

Previous studies mostly regarded social support or social capital as social resources in the workplace, which echoes the research concepts of this study. It is suggested that cross-cultural comparison can be conducted in the future to explore whether social support and social capital have different effects from the concept of the interpersonal resource developed in this research. More importantly, efforts may be made to further analyze whether there is a special intermediary explanation mechanism or a unique prediction effect in interpersonal resources for workers with different cultural backgrounds. For example, if the person has more interpersonal resources than others, group cohesion is also strong, exhibiting organizational citizen behaviors before relationships are strengthened, whether the effect in a collectivist society is stronger than individualist society. This will further verify the differences between interpersonal resources and social support and social capital, highlight the importance of interpersonal resources, and provide a reference for interpersonal management.

Future research can include individual differences or situational effects to clarify the applicability of the interpersonal resources model; for example, reference can be made to past JD-R research [4], which has been applied to analyze and discuss many regulatory variables. Whether these concepts are also applicable to the interpersonal resources model developed in this research, or whether the research results are different, still requires more research, comparison, and demonstration. It is suggested that more series and repetitive empirical studies are needed in the future to revise and deepen the theory of interpersonal resources, in order to establish a complete logical conceptual correlation network of interpersonal resources.

Finally, Chinese society is a “Guanxi-based” society. The relationship between the Chinese has a return on investment; workers will try to establish relationships through communication and social activities, and this relationship must be maintained. This also shows that the Chinese must invest, generate valuable exchange relationships for individuals, and develop emotional and foundation-building useful contacts, instead of general short-term exchange relationships. In other words, in the field of Chinese organizations, the concept of networking cannot be ignored when considering interpersonal resources [12]. Under the law of renqing, Chinese people are more active in creating interpersonal connections and managing interpersonal relationships, thus, obtaining useful resources. In addition, Bian [36] pointed out that guanxi is a unique phenomenon of Chinese, and cab be regarded as a resource of two-way emotional bondage, high intimacy, and long-term emotional attachment, thus, representing the dimension of interpersonal connection. The relationship between this phenomenon and interpersonal resources needs more studies in the future to understand the resource operation of Chinese workers.

Ethical approval

Not applicable.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all participants included in the study.

Conflict of interest

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

Footnotes

Acknowledgments

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the author upon reasonable request.

Funding

The author would like to express gratitude to the Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan for the financial support. (MOST 106-2410-H-227-008-MY2).

References

Kao

, Cheng

. Job stress in workplace: Review and extension. Journal of Human Resource Management. 2014;14(1):77–102.

Paliga

, Kożusznik

, Pollak

, Sanecka

. The relationships of psychological capital and influence regulation with job satisfaction and job performance. PLoS One. 2022;17(8):e0272412.

Bakker

, Demerouti

. The job demands-resources model: State of the art. Journal of Managerial Psychology. 2007;22(3):309–28.

Schaufeli

. Applying the job demands-resources model. Organizational Dynamics. 2017;2(46):120–32.

Zhang

, Yang

. Beyond distributive justice: The reasonableness norm in Chinese reward allocation. Asian Journal of Psychology. 1998;1(3):253–69.

Cooper

, Philip

, Michael

. Organizational Stress: A Review and Critique of Theory, Research, and Applications. Foundations for Organizational Science: A SAGE Publications Series. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc; 2001.

Choi

, Yoon

, Kim

. Leader behavioral integrity and employee in-role performance: The roles of coworker support and job autonomy. International Journal Environment Research and Public Health. 2020;17(12):4303.

Doeglas

, Suurmeijer

, Briancon

, Moum

, Krol

, Bjelle

, Samderman

, Heuvel

WVD

. An international study on measuring social support: Interactions and satisfaction. Social Science & Medicine. 1996;43(9):1389–97.

Chen

, Unal

, Xin

, Leung

. Harmony matters: Exploring effect of group harmony on performance. Academy of Management. 2014;1:17626–17626. 2017.

10.

Peng

, Yang

. The influential factors and developing procedure in interpersonal interaction relation. Indigenous Psychological Research in Chinese Societies. 1999;12:291–312.

11.

Simsek

, Veiga

, Lubatkin

, Dino

. Modeling the multilevel determinants of top management team behavioral integration. Academy of Management Journal. 2005;48(1):69–84.

12.

Wong

, Leung

TKP

, Hung

, Ngai

EWT

. A model of guanxi development: Flexibility, commitment and capital exchange. Total Quality Management. 2014;18(8):875–87.

13.

, Bai

, Ming

. Effect of supervisor-subordinate guanxi and subordinate’s traditionality on work engagement and job performance: A moderated mediation model. Management Review. 2022;34(11):193–205.

14.

Abramson

, Ai

. Using guanxi-style buyer-seller relationships in China: Reducing uncertainty and improving performance outcomes. International Executive. 1997;39(6):765–804.

15.

Ünal

, Chen

, Xin

. Justice climates and management team effectiveness: The central role of group harmony. Management and Organization Review. 2017;13(4):821–49.

16.

Liu

, Spector

, Shi

. Cross-national job stress: A quantitative and qualitative study. Journal of Organizational Behavior. 2007;28:209–39.

17.

Schaufeli

, Bakker

. Job demands, job resources, and their relationship with burnout and engagement: A multi-sample study. Journal of Organizational Behavior. 2004;25(3):293–315.

18.

Chen

, Friedman

, Yu

, Fang

, Lu

. Supervisor-subordinate guanxi: Developing a three-dimensional model and scale. Management and Organization Review. 2009;5(3):375–99.

19.

Barnes

, Yen

, Zhou

. Investigating guanxi dimensions and relationship outcomes: Insights from Sino-Anglo business relationships. Industrial Marketing Management. 2011;40(4):510–21.

20.

Bowlby

. Attachment and loss. attachment (2nd ed.). Vol. 1, New York: Basic Books; 1982.

21.

Lee

, Yann

. The affections of mentor functions in food and beverage education on professional commitment: Considering the mediating effect of emotional attachment. Journal of Tourism and Leisure Management. 2016;4(2):68–78.

22.

Triandis

. Individualism and collectivism. 1st ed. New York: Boulder, Co. Westview Press; 1995.

23.

, Bentler

. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal. 1999;6(1):1–55.

24.

Anderson

, Gerbing

. Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin. 1988;103(3):411–23.

25.

Jöreskog

, Sörbom

. LISREL 8: Structural equation modeling with the SIMPLIS command language. Scientific Software International; 1993.

26.

Podsakoff

, MacKenzie

, Lee

, Podsakoff

. Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology. 2003;88(5):879–903.

27.

Schaufeli

, Bakker

, Salanova

. The measurement of work engagement with a short questionnaire: A cross-national study. Educational and Psychological Measurement. 2006;66(4):701–16.

28.

Farh

, Cheng

. Modesty bias in self-ratings in Taiwan: Impact of item wording, modesty valus, and self-esteem. Chinese Journal of Psychology. 1997;39(2):103–18.

29.

Williams

, Anderson

. Job satisfaction and organizational commitment as predictors of organizational citizenship and in-role behaviors. Journal of Management. 1991;17(3):601–17.

30.

O’ Driscoll

, Brough

, Kalliath

. Work-family conflict, psychological well-being, satisfaction and social support: A longitudinal study in New Zealand. Equal Opportunities International. 2004;23(1-2):36–56.

31.

. Xunzi’s transformation of confucius’ theory of rituals. Legein Monthly. 2008;1(399):38–47.

32.

Han

. The study of Chinese interpersonal attribution styles and motivations for achievements. Journal of Social Sciences and Philosophy. 2010;22(1):41–76.

33.

Borgatti

, Foster

. The network paradigm in organizational research: A review and typology. Journal of Management. 2003;29(6):991–1013.

34.

Lau

, Nguyen

, Pham

LNT

, Cernas-Ortiz

. A. The mediating role of harmony in effective leadership in China: From a Confucianism perspective, Asia Pacific Business Review. 2021.

35.

Hair

, Black

, Babin

, Anderson

, Tatham

. Multivariate data analysis. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice hall; 1998, pp. 207–19.

36.

Bian

. Guanxi. In Beckert

, Zafirovski

. (Ed.). International encyclopedia of economic sociology London: Routledge; 2005.