Search results

This study intends to investigate how an employee's proactive personality and a supervisor's idiosyncratic deals (i-deals) relate to their subordinates' affective commitment (AC) and occupational well-being (OWB), in light of the mediating role of subordinates' i-deals, using proactive motivation theory and the job demand–resource (JD-R) model as theoretical foundations.

The study consisted of 342 employees working in the hospitality industry. To examine the proposed model, the researchers used the structural equation modelling approach and bootstrapping method in AMOS.

The results affirmed the influence of subordinates' proactiveness on AC and OWB, but no direct influence of supervisors' prior i-deals on subordinates' AC and OWB was established. When investigating the mediational role of subordinates' i-deals, a partial mediation effect was found between subordinates' proactive personality with AC and OWB, whereas full mediation was established between supervisors' i-deals and subordinates' AC and OWB.

These findings shed light on how i-deals improve AC and OWB for both groups of supervisors and subordinates. In an era of increasing competition amongst organizations operating within the hospitality industry, i-deals serve as a human resource strategy to recruit, develop and retain talented individuals.

The novelty of this research lies in its specific investigation of the combined influence of proactive personality as an individual factor and supervisors' i-deals as an organizational factor on subordinates' i-deals within the context of the hospitality industry. Furthermore, it aims to analyse the potential impact of these factors on AC and OWB.

This study aims to investigate how employee perspectives on the role of business, specifically capitalist beliefs, affect the corporate social responsibility (CSR)–reputation–employee behavior relationship.

A conceptual model was developed, and to test the model empirically, survey data were collected over two phases from 192 working professionals. Data were analyzed in SAS using Hayes’s PROCESS approach.

Results of this study reveal that the positive employee outcomes (i.e. affective commitment and reduced turnover intentions), resulting from CSR, through perceived employer reputation (i.e. an employee’s perception of how others view their firm), are diminished when employees have strong capitalist beliefs.

Building on the signaling and person–organization fit literatures, this study highlights the theoretical and managerial importance of recognizing employees’ ideological differences as well as the value of considering employee perceptions of reputation. Although many stakeholders value social responsibility, not all do, and a firm’s intended outcomes will vary depending on employees’ beliefs.

This study demonstrates that CSR not only affects institutional-level corporate reputation, as previously studied, but also affects employees’ behaviors through “perceived employer reputation”, or employee beliefs about how other stakeholders perceive the firm. Moreover, this study highlights the importance of understanding employee differences, including ideological differences, prior to engaging in certain types of CSR.