Next Article in Journal
Derivation and Evaluation of a Business Model to Promote Carbon Farming That Generates Valid Carbon Removal
Previous Article in Journal
The Development of Technogenic Deposits as a Factor of Overcoming Resource Limitations and Ensuring Sustainability (Case of Erdenet Mining Corporation SOE in Mongolia)
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 15
Issue 22
10.3390/su152215808
sustainability-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Impact of Work and Non-Work Support on Employee Well-Being: The Moderating Role of Perceived Organizational Support

by
Huong Le
1,*,
Neena Gopalan
2,
Joohan Lee
3,
Isuru Kirige
4,
Amlan Haque
5,
Vanita Yadav
6 and
Victoria Lambropoulos
1
1
School of Business and Law, Central Queensland University, Melbourne Campus, Melbourne, VIC 3000, Australia
2
School of Business, University of Redlands, Redlands, CA 92373, USA
3
Sorrell College of Business, Troy University, Troy, AL 36082, USA
4
Department of Management and Marketing, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC 3010, Australia
5
School of Business and Law, Central Queensland University, Sydney Campus, Sydney, NSW 2000, Australia
6
Urban Transformations Research Centre, Western Sydney University, Parramatta, NSW 2150, Australia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2023, 15(22), 15808; https://doi.org/10.3390/su152215808
Submission received: 21 September 2023 / Revised: 26 October 2023 / Accepted: 2 November 2023 / Published: 10 November 2023
(This article belongs to the Section Health, Well-Being and Sustainability)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Familial and organizational support are important for employees to sustain quality of life and workplace performance. Grounded in the conservation of resources theory, this study explored the underlying mechanism between family member support and employee well-being. Specifically, we examined how the relationship is mediated by psychological capital, and how perceived organizational support amplifies the effect of familial support on psychological capital. Using survey data from 231 Vietnamese employees, results showed that family member support positively predicted employee well-being. This relationship was mediated by psychological capital. Additionally, the relationship between family member support and psychological capital was moderated by perceived organizational support, becoming stronger under conditions of high organizational support. This study offers important theoretical implications regarding the roles of family and organizational support in impacting employee well-being and happiness. Additionally, it provides practical implications for strategic human resource management, highlighting approaches to develop a socially sustainable work environment that promotes employee well-being.

1. Introduction

Employee well-being plays a vital role in an organization’s sustainable performance and productivity [1,2]. In this paper, well-being refers to employees’ perceived life satisfaction and happiness [3,4]. Given the considerable time employees spend interacting at work, support from colleagues and family likely impacts well-being. Prior research examined well-being antecedents like leader–subordinate relationships [1], workplace support [5], and family support [5,6], but focused more on Western individualistic contexts than Eastern collectivistic ones. Researchers emphasized conflicting work–life attributes rather than positive interactions influencing individual and organizational sustainability. Thus, rigorous research is lacking on how work and family member support interact to benefit well-being across cultures. It is critical that human resource (HR) managers understand how these distinct sources of support (e.g., work and non-work) can interact favorably to improve the social sustainability of employees and organizations.
The literature provides clear evidence that employees with a high perception of family member support tend to have better well-being in the Western context [5]. However, familial and/or organizational support in Western contexts may work differently from Eastern contexts. For example, Vietnamese familial and organizational members place more value on interpersonal support and collaboration when working on familial and organizational tasks because of the distinct collectivistic cultural values and Confucian philosophies prevalent in Vietnam [7,8]. Moreover, the Vietnamese generally form close ties with both immediate and extended family members. Therefore, high levels of familial support are often expected to enable working members in a family to fulfill their work responsibilities, thereby financially supporting their families [8].
Both familial and organizational support is based on the relational dynamics of employees, serving as important relational resources [9]. However, the literature has not fully explored the potential interaction effects of these two relational factors on an employee’s well-being, nor have the underlying mechanisms been clearly explained. Our study addresses this gap and contributes to the literature by empirically examining (i) the impact of family relational resources, a non-work domain social support, on employee well-being; (ii) the potential mediating role of positive psychological capital in the link between family support and well-being; and (iii) how perceived organizational support, a work domain social resource, can enhance the effect of family support on well-being.
The purpose of this study is to answer the research questions: how and why does family member support influence employee well-being in a collectivistic work context (i.e., Vietnam)? In doing so, we adopt the conservation of resources (COR) theoretical framework [9] to explain how family member support—a non-work social resource—influences employee well-being. Drawing on the COR theory, we propose that psychological capital (defined as an individual’s positive psychological state of development [10]), can mediate the effect of family member support on well-being. In other words, perceived support from an employee’s family members can improve the quality of their life (i.e., well-being) by leading them to form and/or increase a positive psychological evaluation of their life. Given that psychological capital can be used to gain additional resources (i.e., resource investment) after consuming resources for a certain purpose [10], an employee with greater psychological capital would be able to channel the resource of family member support more effectively, leading to greater well-being. We also draw on the COR theory to posit that the impact of family member support on psychological capital depends on the level of perceived organizational support (POS). Specifically, in line with the COR theory, we expect that POS will strengthen the positive effect of support from family members on an employee’s positive psychological resources to gain additional resources.
This study makes several important contributions to the literature. First, drawing on the COR theory, this study identifies whether family member support—a form of relational resource derived from non-work domains—can influence the quality of an employee’s life (i.e., well-being) via psychological capital in the Vietnamese work context. Although family member support has generally been found to benefit employee well-being in Western workplaces [5], there is a limited understanding of whether these findings are generalizable and applicable to Vietnam, one of the major Eastern work contexts. Second, this study extends our understanding of the boundary conditions for the family member support–psychological capital relationship by examining how POS can potentially strengthen this link. Despite the rich literature on the role of work or non-work support and its effect on employee well-being [1,5,11], it is relatively underexplored how a non-work factor (i.e., family member support) interacts with contextual factors in the workplace (i.e., POS) to predict employee psychological capital in the Vietnamese context. Finally, this study is among the few empirical studies that examines the quality of an employee’s life in Vietnam where scant attention has been paid to improving employee well-being. Thus, more studies in emerging economies are important to determine whether theories from Western individualist culture can be generalized to the Vietnamese collectivist work context.
The proposed conceptual model is presented in Figure 1.

2. Theory and Hypotheses

2.1. Conservation of Resources (COR) Theory

We build our theoretical argument on the COR theory. The main premise of this theory is that individuals strive to conserve the resources that they value and acquire newer ones to avoid negative impacts on their well-being [9]. Such resources can be objects, things, personal characteristics, or conditions that are supportive and instrumental for one’s goals and purposes. Individuals utilize such resources when faced with conflicts or stress in life, conserving the remaining resources for future necessities [9]. The two key assumptions of the COR theory are that (i) people endeavor to conserve their resources when faced with a threat of resource loss or its actual loss and (ii) people are more likely to engage in resource investment behaviors to secure additional resources against resource loss [12]. Stress occurs, and people become more vulnerable to it when they perceive potential (or actual) resource loss or if they fail to gain additional resources following resource investment actions [13]. Thus, they endeavor to lessen the loss and expand the gain [9]. The COR theory is often used in well-being or work-related stress research [13]. Below we explain the rationale behind our hypotheses against COR’s theoretical background.

2.2. Family Member Support and Employee Well-Being

There are two types of family member support: instrumental support and emotional support. Instrumental support involves an individual obtaining assistance in tangible ways, including help with transportation, personal care, or home duties [8], or informational resources given to an individual to reduce their stress [14]. Emotional support involves having empathy from one’s partner or the absence of conflict with family members [15]. Such support can affect employee attitudes and behaviors either directly or indirectly, for example, by reducing turnover intention [8,16] or lessening the negative impacts of workplace incivility [11]. Family members in a collectivist country such as Vietnam can include direct family members such as spouses, children, and parents of the working members as well as extended family members such as aunties, uncles, cousins and other relatives.
Well-being in this study refers to people’s subjective perception of their quality of life or a feeling of happiness, either with the self or with others in the current time or in the past [3,17]. It is broader than psychological well-being which is often used in well-being studies [5] as it measures people’s satisfaction with multiple domains such as their health, living standards, work achievement, safety, quality relationships, sense of belonging, and their quality of life in general [1,17]. Overall, the well-being construct is an indicator of people’s happiness, pleasure, and welfare, or in other words, their quality of life.
In this paper, we hypothesize that employee perceptions of family member support would benefit their general well-being. According to the COR theory [9], these relational resources enable employees to buffer the negative effect of stressful events, allowing them to become less vulnerable to stress and possibly benefiting their well-being during times of need. The “resource gain” dimension of the COR theory refers to initial resources at one’s disposal that may generate additional resources [18]. That is, the individual employee resorts to the support from their family, and consequently, the conservation or gain of the resource will lead to better well-being. Employees with more family member support are less likely to have resource depletion because they have additional resources to cope with workplace stressors. Family member support can thus assist people to conserve their resources for the workplace because they do not need to spend time and energy fulfilling their family duties. In turn, these resources can improve the employees’ well-being.
The prior literature provides empirical evidence that family member support positively influences employee well-being [6] and psychological well-being [5]. Supportive family members (i.e., spouse) can provide much-needed resources for individuals to reinforce their perception of being supported and valued, particularly in the Vietnamese culture [8]. Such emotional support from family may lead to greater self-confidence regarding one’s abilities and optimism [19], and as a result, a positive effect on one’s overall well-being. Therefore, family members of these employees may perceive the need to be successful at work so they can offer support to working family members with home duties. By reducing the employee’s share of home duties, family members may assist in reserving more resources for those working members of their family. Therefore, we propose the following:
Hypothesis 1. 
Family member support is positively related to employee well-being.

2.3. Psychological Capital as a Mediator

Psychological capital refers to one’s positive psychological state of development that includes hope, optimism, resilience, and self-efficacy [10]. Specifically, hope denotes the confident energy to see through a goal; optimism refers to encouraging anticipation of a future; resilience assists individuals in recovering and bouncing back from stressful events in life, and self-efficacy is the confidence that one has in the capacity to accomplish tasks [20]. An employee can enhance and develop psychological capital on their own in that psychological capital is state-like and thus open to an individual’s development [10]. According to the COR theory [9], psychological capital is considered a personal resource that individuals can draw on to meet their goals (i.e., to benefit their well-being). Psychological capital provides resources through the interaction of its four components, which assist in cushioning unfavorable influences, and in turn, culminate in positive attitudes and actions at work [21].
In this paper, we expect that employees who receive family member support will be more likely to develop and gain greater psychological capital. Specifically, the provision of family member support (both emotional and instrumental support) is highly valued and expected in the Vietnamese collectivist context. This is due to one of the major collectivist attributes that Vietnamese employees form close ties with their immediate and extended family members [8,22]. This high level of family member support—both emotional support and instrumental support— would likely enable employees in the Vietnamese work context to feel more confident in their abilities (i.e., self-efficacy), increase their hope and optimism to handle challenges at work and in life, as well as resilience to overcome various challenges and setbacks [20]. Consistent with Hobfoll’s [9,23] “gain spiral” and resource investment theorization, support for this argument exists in the empirical findings of Newman et al. [5], who found that family member support was positively related to psychological capital among refugees in Australia. Although there is no empirical evidence on the Vietnamese workplace, we theorize that family member support will have a positive impact on psychological capital among employees in the Vietnamese workplace.
We further contend that the COR theory explains how psychological capital can bring about employee well-being outcomes, such that high psychological capital may have a positive influence on an individual’s well-being. Specifically, stressful events or situations can deplete employee resources which would otherwise have assisted them to achieve a goal or kept them well [24]. Those with additional resources (i.e., optimism and hope, which is part of psychological capital) are more likely to cope with the resource loss that may emanate from stress [25]. Individuals with greater psychological resources are better able to cope with such stressors and experience fewer adverse effects from the stressors. Considering the COR theory tenets, additional resource gain can assist individuals to procure what they value [26]. Conversely, those employees with low psychological capital would have fewer personal resources to improve their well-being. Therefore, we argue that there is a positive relationship between psychological capital and employee well-being.
Drawing on the above argument, we argue that psychological capital plays a mediating role in transferring family member support so that an individual’s relational resources from non-work areas benefit their well-being. Employees with higher psychological capital are more likely to foster constructive outlooks about their future and retain faith in their capabilities to cope with workplace stressors [27]. A high level of psychological capital would help employees to utilize their familial support when buffering negative effects of occupational and personal life more effectively, leading to better well-being. Empirical research in academic settings in Australia shows that psychological capital mediates the relationship between instructor support and the quality of a student’s life [28]. Taken together, we propose:
Hypothesis 2. 
Family member support has an indirect effect on employee well-being, where this effect is mediated by psychological capital.

2.4. Perceived Organizational Support as a Moderator

Perceived organizational support incorporates employees’ belief that their organization recognizes and appreciates their contribution, and shows concern about their welfare [29]. It refers to employee assessment or perceptions of the extent to which their organization provides support and cares for them when they need to cope with work–family demands. Research shows positive relationships between POS to employee welfare, attitudes, and behaviors at work, such as job satisfaction, organizational commitment, employee engagement [30], and knowledge sharing [31].
Given this positive relationship between POS and an employee’s work attitude and behavior, we propose that the relationship between family member support and psychological capital will be moderated by POS. That is, POS can alter the strength of the effect of employees’ family member support on their psychological capital, such that for employees with higher POS, family member support will have a stronger positive impact on psychological capital. Considering the “spiral gain” argument of the COR theory [9,13], the more employees are able to invest in resources, the more likely they are to acquire and enhance their additional resources (i.e., psychological capital). Supportive work environments can affect psychological capital positively because such favorable occupational contexts enable employees to effectively address work demands, consume fewer resources, provide additional resources, and become less vulnerable to stress. Given the similar favorable attribute of family member support, when perceiving more POS, employees high in family member support will build up more psychological capital because these two positive relational resources form a positive resource gain spiral. For example, those employees may be able to gain more support from their family members and better improve their psychological capital. This is because when they sense that the organization cares for them, they will be more likely to pass on these positive emotions to their family members while sharing less negative work outcomes. This feeling might further lead to more trust and support from their family members, leading to a gain spiral of resources. Such a mutually beneficial work and non-work relationship would help individuals to experience greater psychological capital; for example, by heightening employee hope and increasing resilience, optimism, and self-efficacy (all of which are psychological capital dimensions) [10,32]. Therefore, we propose that when POS is high, it accentuates the effect of family member support on psychological capital by presenting employees with greater resources from both work and non-work environments.
Hypothesis 3. 
POS moderates the relationship between family member support and psychological capital, such that this relationship becomes stronger for those with higher levels of POS.

3. Methods

3.1. Sample and Procedure

We conducted a field survey with 253 Vietnamese employees at multiple factories in Southern provinces of Vietnam for approximately six months, started in 2016 and completed in 2017. This manufacturing sector was chosen as it was a labor-intensive sector; thus, ensuring well-being of workers played a critical role in the development of the sector. This study received ethical approval from the university in Australia. Taking into account geographical access, timing, and social connections, one author and a colleague in Vietnam contacted factory managers to request permission to survey their employees. The managers granted access to survey employees during lunch and after work. All participants were offered a small monetary incentive as thanks for volunteering their time to participate in the survey. To ensure the clarity of the survey in Vietnamese and retain equivalence to the English version, the questionnaire was translated from English into Vietnamese and then back-translated into English by a team of bilingual Vietnamese–English speaking researchers.
After data cleaning and removing 22 responses due to missing or unclear data, the final sample included 231 full-time employees for analyses. We complied with ethical requirements for research involving human subjects. Informed consent was obtained voluntarily and anonymously from participants, who could withdraw without penalty. The sample comprised 73% female and 27% male respondents, with an average organizational tenure of 11 years and a mean age of 42 years.
Given the small size of the current sample (N = 231), we ran the power analysis. With the effect size (r = 0.15), we specified the number of predictors in set A to be two (2) (gender, age), the number of predictors in set B to be three (3) (i.e., family member support, perceived organizational support, and psychological capital). In addition, we set up the p-value at 5% (alpha = 0.05) which stands for the Type I error: this refers to the probability with which we reject the null hypothesis when it still is true. As a result, we can see the observed power for our predictors as 99.94%. Given the meaning of statistical power being the probability of rejecting the null hypothesis when it is false, the small sample size of this study is not a major issue.

3.2. Measures

The well-being scale was measured on an 11-point Likert scale, where 0 indicated ‘extremely dissatisfied’ and 10 indicated ‘extremely satisfied’. In contrast, all items for psychological capital, family member support, and POS were responded to on a 5-point Likert scale where 1 representing “strongly disagree” and 5 representing ‘strongly agree’.
Family member support (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.86) includes five items (adapted from Aryee et al.’s, 1999 spousal support scale) [33]. A sample item is “If my job gets demanding, my family members take on some of my home duties”.
Psychological capital (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.77) includes eight items (adapted from Luthans et al., 2007) [10] with four dimensions: self-efficacy, hope, optimism, and resilience. A sample item is: “I can get through difficult times at work because I’ve experienced difficulty before”.
Perceived organizational support (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.86) consists of five items from Eisenberger and colleagues [29]. A sample item is “My organization values my contribution to its well-being”.
Well-being (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.91) was measured by nine items from the well-being index developed by Commins and colleagues [17]. A sample item is “How satisfied are you with your achievements; your health”.
We controlled for age and gender (male = 1, female = 0) in regressions based on prior research [1] indicating their potential effects on employee well-being.

3.3. Data Analytic Strategy

We first tested the measurement model using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) in IBM SPSS AMOS 25.0. The direct relationship between family member support and well-being (Hypothesis 1) was tested using hierarchical regression analysis in IBM SPSS Statistics 28.0, the indirect relationship between family member support and well-being through psychological capital (Hypothesis 2), and the moderating effect of perceived organizational support (Hypothesis 3) was tested using Hayes’ (2018) [34] PROCESS Macro–OLS regression modeling.

4. Results

4.1. Construct and Discriminant Validity Analyses

We conducted a series of CFA to check the discriminant validity and the distinctiveness of the study variables. The measurement models were evaluated based on the comparative fit index (CFI), the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA), the Tucker–Lewis index (TLI), and the standardized root mean square residual (SRMR) (see Table 1). The results indicate that the 4-factor model of family member support, POS, psychological capital, and well-being (χ2 = 765.63, df = 353, p < 0.00, RMSEA = 0.07, CFI = 0.87, TLI = 0.86, SRMR = 0.07) provided a better fit to the data than a 3-factor model (i.e., POS and family member support loaded onto one factor (χ2 = 1406.96, df = 347, p < 0.00, RMSEA = 0.11, CFI = 0.68, TLI = 0.66, SRMR = 0.11), a 2-factor model (i.e., POS, family member support, and psychological capital loaded onto one factor; χ2 = 1549.05, df = 349, p < 0.00, RMSEA = 0.12, CFI = 0.64, TLI = 0.61, SRMR = 0.11), and a 1-factor model (i.e., combining all four study variables; χ2 = 2008.81, df = 350, p < 0.00, RMSEA = 0.14, CFI = 0.51, TLI = 0.47, SRMR = 0.13). These results provided support for the distinctiveness of the study variables for subsequent data analyses and indicated that common method variance was minimal.
To address potential common method biases due to the cross-sectional survey design, Harman’s single-factor test was used to assess common method variance. This widely used statistical technique [35,36] revealed that the single factor accounted for only 28.16% of the variance, well under the 50% threshold. This indicates that common method bias is unlikely to be a major concern for the measurements in this study.

4.2. Descriptive Statistics

Table 2 summarizes the means, standard deviations, and correlations of the study variables in expected directions. The statistically significant correlation results suggest that it was appropriate to proceed with formal mediation and moderation analyses of the hypothesized relationships.

4.3. Hypothesis Testing

Hypothesis 1 posited that family member support was positively related to employee well-being. As demonstrated in Table 3, Model 1 indicates that there was a positive relationship between family member support and well-being (B = 0.77, SE = 0.16, p < 0.01). Therefore, Hypothesis 1 is supported.
Hypothesis 2 theorized that the positive relationship between family member support and employee well-being was mediated by psychological capital. Table 3, Model 2 shows that there was a positive relationship between family member support and psychological capital (B = 0.29, SE = 0.05, p < 0.01), and as Model 3 indicates, a positive relationship was also observed between psychological capital and well-being (B = 0.78, SE = 0.22, p < 0.01). Hayes (2018) [20] indicates that mediation requires the indirect effect of the independent variable (family member support) on the dependent variable (well-being) via the mediator (psychological capital) to be significant. A bias-corrected bootstrap result of the mediation showed that the indirect effect of family member support on employee well-being via psychological capital was significant (B = 0.22, SE = 0.08, 95% bias-corrected CI = [0.08, 0.40]). As zero was not contained in the 95% confidence interval of the indirect effect, Hypothesis 2 was also supported. As demonstrated in Table 3, Model 3, when psychological capital was introduced as the mediator, the direct effect of family member support on personal well-being was still statistically significant (B = 0.54, SE = 0.17, p < 0.05), indicating a partial mediation.
Finally, Hypothesis 3 predicted that POS would moderate the relationship between family member support and psychological capital, such that the strength of this relationship was stronger when POS was higher rather than lower. We used Hayes’ (2018) [20] PROCESS analysis (5000 bootstrap samples) to test this moderation hypothesis. The moderation effect was hypothesized to occur at the first stage of our hypothesized model. As shown in Table 3, Model 4, the interaction term of POS * family member support was statistically significant (B = 0.15, SE = 0.07, p < 0.05). To further understand and interpret the moderated effects of POS on the relationship between family member support and psychological capital, we followed Dawson’s (2014) [37] recommendations and plotted the interaction effect of family member support and POS on psychological capital. As shown in Table 4 and Figure 2, the relationship between family member support and psychological capital was stronger when organizational support was above the average (1 + SD above the mean) than below average (1 − SD below the mean). Therefore, these results supported Hypothesis 3.

5. Discussion and Implications

This study examined the internal mechanism of the relationship of employees’ family member support and their well-being via psychological capital and the moderating effect of POS on the family member support–psychological capital relationship. We found that family member support had an indirect relationship with employee well-being via psychological capital. The finding also confirmed that POS moderated the positive relationship between family member support and psychological capital such that this relationship became stronger for those with higher levels of POS. In the following section, we will discuss important theoretical and practical implications for the HR literature.

5.1. Theoretical Implications

First, this study advances the literature on quality of life and positive psychology by revealing the internal mechanism of how employees’ relational resources are linked to their well-being. We found that the quality of employees’ lives can be improved by their positive psychological state [10], driven by social support in work and non-work domains. Adopting the COR theory [9,23], we investigated and explicated how an employee’s psychological capital links their social relational resources from non-work reservoirs (i.e., family members’ support) to their quality of life.
Second, we contribute to contemporary research on an employee’s psychological and social resources by modeling and testing the role of organizational support as a boundary condition for the relationship of family members’ support with employee well-being. Considering that organizational support indicates one of the employee’s key contextual and relational attributes [8], we argued that when employees perceive more support from their organization, it is likely they will amplify the favorable effect of social support from their family members. This, in turn, can increase their psychological resources (i.e., psychological capital). This is significant to note because organizations and families are the two primary settings in which employees spend most of their time—consuming and gaining a variety of their resources [8]. In light of the COR theory, these resources affect their performance, organizational effectiveness, and well-being [9,23].
Third, this study also extends to the field of human resource management (HRM), as the findings present insights that can inform managerial employee welfare policies and practices as well as employee relations. For instance, managers could implement policies that enhance employees’ perceived organizational support. Practices boosting employees’ sense of support from the organization can positively influence core HRM functions and organizational goals such as job satisfaction [8] and work motivation. Therefore, this study contributes to HRM by highlighting how perceptions of organizational support might constructively affect employee attitudes and behaviors, aligning with human resource objectives and HRM policies in organizations.
Finally, our study extends and enhances our understanding of whether and how the role of resources is universally valued across cultural boundaries. Specifically, to test our mediation model and the moderation effect of POS on the family member support–psychological capital link based on the COR theory, we used a sample of full-time working employees in the Vietnamese manufacturing sector. Vietnam is a major emerging economy with a collectivistic culture [38], which means the Vietnamese place greater value on a sense of harmony based on Confucianism and supporting each other within their extended family [7,8,22]. The current study advances the literature on the COR theory by providing a more cross-cultural explanation of how an employee’s resources influence their quality of life in the context of a significant emerging economy. In this regard, Halbesleben and colleagues [26] noted that most research based on the COR theory has been conducted in the Western context and that it would be helpful to consider cultural differences between individualistic and collectivistic cultures to better understand the role of resources in the COR theory. They argue that social support is appreciated and valued differently according to an individual’s cultural context, and call for management researchers to further investigate how an individual’s resources function across cultural contexts. Thus, our study contributes to the COR literature by empirically testing and finding, from a sample of Vietnamese employees, that an employee’s relational resources from work domains (i.e., companies) can boost the effectiveness of their social resources from non-work domains (i.e., family). This can also advance their positive psychological state of development (i.e., psychological capital), possibly leading to greater well-being and quality of life.

5.2. Practical Implications

This study also offers important practical implications for organizational managers and leaders on how organizations can boost employee well-being, attitude, commitment, and behavior toward achieving organizational goals. Aligned with prior research [10,27,39], we also recommend that an employee’s psychological capital is a source of an organization’s competitive advantage that can be augmented through organizational support. To do so, organizations may consider designing HR practices, training, and mentoring programs through which employees can develop self-efficacy, hope, optimism, and resilience, or in other words, their overall psychological capital. For example, training programs with socialization sessions can be offered for new employees [40] along with follow-up sessions to foster their level of psychological capital [39]. Consequently, when individual employees interact at work with greater psychological capital, they are more likely to enhance overall organizational performance.
Our research also highlights the important role of supervisors in enhancing employee well-being by helping them develop their psychological capital. Positive and supportive supervisors and organizational climate [32,39] are likely to inspire employees to increase their psychological capital more effectively in the workplace. Such a supportive climate is found to increase employee self-confidence, morale, and optimism [39] which can form and elicit positive attitudes and behaviors, leading to improved organizational performance. Managers and leaders can design and launch psychological capital-enhancing interventions such as coaching, mentoring, or buddying programs to better support employees [41]. Such relationship-building interventions with role models can offer an avenue for emotional support and employee growth. In addition, HR professionals can use these interventions to mitigate the negative impact of an employee’s emotional behaviors that can arise during organizational challenges and difficulties, such as restructuring, layoffs, and others [39]. In sum, it is crucial for HR practitioners to provide adequate organizational support and supervision to boost employees’ psychological capability and well-being for sustainable competitive advantage.

6. Limitations and Implications for Future Research

This study has some limitations that will serve as avenues for future research. First, the sample size of this study (N = 231) may limit its validity as a representative sample of the Vietnamese workforce and its generalizability to the entire workforce. Small sample sizes may be also subject to sampling error and bias [42]. Thus, future research should aim for more extensive and representative sample sizes to address this limitation.
Second, this study used a cross-sectional approach to collect data from full-time Vietnamese employees; this was because of the difficulty in obtaining responses from employees working in labor-intensive manufacturing facilities. Therefore, a limitation of this study is its ability to fully guarantee the causal relationships between the study variables and not being entirely free of the potential issues of common method variance [36]. We encourage future researchers to replicate the relationships and findings of this study by using longitudinal data to determine whether the results from our model change over time.
Third, this study collected self-reported responses from Vietnamese employees. When answering the survey questions, these employees may have responded in a socially desirable way to form a positive self-image [43]. Future researchers could address this limitation caused by self-report by using different data sources. For example, the issue of social desirability in a self-report may be minimized or eliminated by also using rating responses from managers and employees. Finally, this study only examined the impact of family and organizational support on employee well-being through psychological capital. We encourage researchers to extend or replicate this study by examining other antecedents of employee well-being, such as leadership practices [44] and other leadership-related behaviors.
Finally, demographic data on participant marital status, education level, and organizational role were not collected. These factors may moderate the relationships between POS, family member support, and well-being outcomes. For instance, the impacts of family support on well-being likely differ between employees with spouses and children versus single individuals. Additionally, more highly educated workers may receive different POS levels compared to less educated staff in lower positions. Future studies should gather data on marital status, education, and organizational role and test whether these variables influence associations among POS, family member support, and employee well-being. Capturing this information will provide a more nuanced understanding of how various demographic factors shape the effects of POS and family member support on workers’ overall welfare.

7. Conclusions

Our study demonstrates the important role of relational support at work and at home in influencing employees’ resource gaining and conservation to benefit their well-being in the Vietnamese workplace. A key finding is that the COR theory’s spiral argument is applicable to the collectivistic context in which organizational members place greater emphasis on their relationships and ties with others in the organization. It is also important to note that the effect of family member support on psychological capital can be intensified when employees perceive or experience high organizational support. It is hoped that our findings will encourage and motivate more scholars to research the impacts of support from work and non-work domains on employees’ positive psychology and well-being in collectivistic work contexts.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, H.L. and I.K.; Methodology, H.L.; Formal analysis, I.K.; Writing—original draft, H.L., N.G., J.L., I.K., A.H. and V.Y.; Writing—review & editing, H.L., N.G., J.L., I.K. and V.L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, and approved by the Ethics Committee of Deakin University (Approval number: BL-EC 37-15) on 7 September 2015 for studies involving humans.

Data Availability Statement

Data and data analysis are available upon the request of the Editor-in-Chief.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict to interest.

References

  1. Le, H.; Jiang, Z.; Radford, K. Leader-member exchange and subjective well-being: The moderating role of metacognitive cultural intelligence. Pers. Rev. 2021, 50, 954–970. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Richardson, K.M.; Rothstein, H.R. Effects of occupational stress management intervention programs: A meta-analysis. J. Occup. Health Psychol. 2008, 13, 69–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Lau, A.L.; Cummins, R.A.; Mcpherson, W. An investigation into the cross-cultural equivalence of the Personal Wellbeing Index. Soc. Indic. Res. 2005, 72, 403–430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Steel, P.; Taras, V.; Uggerslev, K.; Bosco, F. The happy culture: A theoretical, meta-analytic, and empirical review of the relationship between culture and wealth and subjective well-being. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Rev. 2018, 22, 128–169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Newman, A.; Nielsen, I.; Smyth, R.; Hirst, G. Mediating role of psychological capital in the relationship between social support and wellbeing of refugees. Int. Migr. 2018, 56, 117–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Tuzovic, S.; Kabadayi, S. The influence of social distancing on employee well-being: A conceptual framework and research agenda. J. Serv. Manag. 2021, 32, 145–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Chan, A. Confucianism and development in East Asia. J. Contemp. Asia 1996, 26, 28–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Le, H.; Lee, J.; Nielsen, I.; Nguyen, T.L.A. Turnover intentions: The roles of job satisfaction and family support. Pers. Rev. 2022; ahead-of-print. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Hobfoll, S.E. The Ecology of Stress; Taylor & Francis: New York, NY, USA, 1988. [Google Scholar]
  10. Luthans, F.; Avolio, B.J.; Avey, J.B.; Norman, S.M. Positive psychological capital: Measurement and relationship with performance and satisfaction. Pers. Psychol. 2007, 60, 541–572. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Lim, S.; Lee, A. Work and nonwork outcomes of workplace incivility: Does family support help? J. Occup. Health Psychol. 2011, 16, 95–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. McCarthy, J.M.; Trougakos, J.P.; Cheng, B.H. Are anxious workers less productive workers? It depends on the quality of social exchange. J. Appl. Psychol. 2016, 101, 279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Hobfoll, S.E.; Halbesleben, J.; Neveu, J.P.; Westman, M. Conservation of resources in the organizational context: The reality of resources and their consequences. Annu. Rev. Organ. Psychol. Organ. Behav. 2018, 5, 103–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Semmer, N.K.; Elfering, A.; Jacobshagen, N.; Perrot, T.; Beehr, T.A.; Boos, N. The emotional meaning of instrumental social support. Int. J. Stress Manag. 2008, 15, 235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Abendroth, A.K.; Den Dulk, L. Support for the work-life balance in Europe: The impact of state, workplace, and family support on work-life balance satisfaction. Work. Employ. Soc. 2011, 25, 234–256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Huffman, A.H.; Casper, W.J.; Payne, S.C. How does spouse career support relate to employee turnover? Work interfering with family and job satisfaction as mediators. J. Organ. Behav. 2014, 35, 194–212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Cummins, R.A.; Gullone, E.; Lau, A.L.D. A Model of Subjective Well-Being Homeostasis: The Role of Personality. In The Universality of Subjective Wellbeing Indicators: Social Indicators Research Series, 16; Gullone, E., Cummins, R.A., Eds.; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Hakanen, J.J.; Bakker, A.B.; Jokisaari, M. A 35-year follow-up study on burnout among Finnish employees. J. Occup. Health Psychol. 2011, 16, 345. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Kwok, S.Y.; Cheng, L.; Wong, D.F. Family emotional support, positive psychological capital and job satisfaction among Chinese white-collar workers. J. Happiness Stud. 2015, 16, 561–582. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Bandura, A.; Cioffi, D.; Taylor, C.B.; Brouillard, M.E. Perceived self-efficacy in coping with cognitive stressors and opioid activation. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 1988, 55, 479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. Mao, Y.; He, J.; Morrison, A.M.; Andres Coca-Stefaniak, J. Effects of tourism CSR on employee psychological capital in the COVID-19 crisis from the perspective of conservation of resources theory. Curr. Issues Tour. 2021, 24, 2716–2734. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Vu, M.C. How the contextual constraints and tensions of a transitional context influence individuals’ negotiations of meaningful work–the case of Vietnam. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2022, 33, 835–861. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Hobfoll, S.E. The influence of culture, community, and the nested-self in the stress process: Advancing conservation of resources theory. Appl. Psychol. Int. Rev. 2001, 50, 337–421. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Kauffeld, S.; Spurk, D. Why does psychological capital foster subjective and objective career success? The mediating role of career-specific resources. J. Career Assess. 2022, 30, 285–308. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Ghafoor, A.; Haar, J. Does job stress enhance employee creativity? Exploring the role of psychological capital. Pers. Rev. 2021, 51, 644–661. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Halbesleben, J.R.; Neveu, J.P.; Paustian-Underdahl, S.C.; Westman, M. Getting to the “COR” understanding the role of resources in conservation of resources theory. J. Manag. 2014, 40, 1334–1364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Newman, A.; Ucbasaran, D.; Zhu, F.; Hirst, G. Psychological capital: A review and synthesis. J. Organ. Behav. 2014, 35, S120–S138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Nielsen, I.; Newman, A.; Smyth, R.; Hirst, G.; Heilemann, B. The influence of instructor support, family support and psychological capital on the well-being of postgraduate students: A moderated mediation model. Stud. High. Educ. 2017, 42, 2099–2115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Eisenberger, R.; Huntington, R.; Hutchison, S.; Sowa, D. Perceived Organizational Support. J. Appl. Psychol. 1986, 71, 500–507. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Ahmed, I.; Nawaz, M.M. Antecedents and outcomes of perceived organizational support: A literature survey approach. J. Manag. Dev. 2015, 34, 867–880. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Yang, H.; van Rijn, M.B.; Sanders, K. Perceived organizational support and knowledge sharing: Employees’ self-construal matters. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2020, 31, 2217–2237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Luthans, F.; Norman, S.M.; Avolio, B.J.; Avey, J.B. The mediating role of psychological capital in the supportive organizational climate-employee performance relationship. J. Organ. Behav. 2008, 29, 219–238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Aryee, S.; Luk, V.; Leung, A.; Lo, S. Role stressors, interrole conflict, and well-being: The moderating influence of spousal support and coping behaviors among employed parents in Hong Kong. J. Vocat. Behav. 1999, 54, 259–278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Hayes, A.F. Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-Based Approach; The Guilford Press: New York, NY, USA, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  35. Fuller, C.M.; Simmering, M.J.; Atinc, G.; Atinc, Y.; Babin, B.J. Common methods variance detection in business research. J. Bus. Res. 2016, 69, 3192–3198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Podsakoff, P.M.; MacKenzie, S.B.; Lee, J.Y.; Podsakoff, N.P. Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. J. Appl. Psychol. 2003, 88, 879–903. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Dawson, J.F. Moderation in management research: What, why, when, and how. J. Bus. Psychol. 2014, 29, 1–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Le, H.; McKay, J. Chinese and Vietnamese international students in Australia. Int. J. Educ. Manag. 2018, 32, 1278–1292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Nolzen, N. The concept of psychological capital: A comprehensive Review. Manag. Rev. Q. 2018, 68, 237–277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Saks, A.M.; Gruman, J.A. Organizational socialization and positive organizational behaviour: Implications for theory, research, and practice. Can. J. Adm. Sci. 2011, 28, 4–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Nigah, N.; Davis, A.J.; Hurrell, S.A. The impact of buddying on psychological capital and work engagement: An empirical study of socialization in the professional services sector. Thunderbird Int. Bus. Rev. 2012, 54, 891–905. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Stone, D.L.; Rosopa, P.J. The advantages and limitations of using meta-analysis in human resource management research. Hum. Resour. Manag. Rev. 2017, 27, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Steenkamp, J.B.E.; De Jong, M.G.; Baumgartner, H. Socially desirable response tendencies in survey research. J. Mark. Res. 2010, 47, 199–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Haque, A.; Fernando, M.; Caputi, P. The Relationship Between Responsible Leadership and Organisational Commitment and the Mediating Effect of Employee Turnover Intentions: An Empirical Study with Australian Employees. J. Bus. Ethics 2019, 156, 759–774. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Sustainability 15 15808 g001
Figure 1. The proposed conceptual model.
Figure 1. The proposed conceptual model.
Sustainability 15 15808 g001
Sustainability 15 15808 g002
Figure 2. Moderation.
Figure 2. Moderation.
Sustainability 15 15808 g002
Table 1. CFA Results.
Table 1. CFA Results.
Modelχ2 (df)TLICFIGFIRMSEA90% CISRMR
1-Factor Model2008.81 (350)0.470.510.540.140.13–0.190.13
2-Factor Model1549.05 (349)0.610.640.620.120.11–0.130.11
3-Factor Model1406.96 (347)0.660.680.660.110.11–0.120.11
4-Factor Model765.63 (335)0.860.870.820.070.07–0.080.07
Note: 3-Factor Model: family member support and perceived organizational support loaded into one factor; 2-Factor Model: family member support, perceived organizational support, and psychological capital loaded into one factor.
Table 2. Descriptive Statistics and Zero-Order Correlation.
Table 2. Descriptive Statistics and Zero-Order Correlation.
VariablesMeanSD(1)(2)(3)(4)(5)(6)
(1) Gender0.730.44--
(2) Age41.619.980.03--
(3) Family member support4.210.530.040.05--
(4) Perceived organizational support3.550.560.020.18 **0.24 **--
(5) Psychological capital3.870.420.040.24 **0.37 **0.43 **--
(6) Well-being7.061.34−0.030.040.32 **0.44 **0.33 **--
Note: N = 231. Gender was coded as 1 = male and 0 = female. ** p < 0.01.
Table 3. Regression analysis.
Table 3. Regression analysis.
VariablesModel 1
Well-Being		Model 2
PsyCap		Model 3
Well-Being		Model 4
PsyCap
BSEBSEBSEBSE
Gender−0.160.200.020.06−0.180.190.020.05
Age0.000.010.01 **0.00−0.000.010.01 **0.00
FMS0.77 **0.160.29 **0.050.54 *0.170.24 **0.05
PsyCap 0.78 **0.22
POS 0.27 **0.04
POS × FMS 0.15 *0.07
R20.31 ** 0.18 ** 0.15 ** 0.31 **
(Δ) R² 0.01 *
Note: N = 231. Unstandardized coefficients are reported; perceived organizational support = POS; Psychological capital = PsyCap; family member support = FMS. * p < 0.05. ** p < 0.01.
Table 4. Moderation.
Table 4. Moderation.
Value of Moderator (POS)Indirect EffectSE95%
CI Lower Limit		95%
CI Upper Limit
−1 SD0.150.06 *0.040.26
Mean0.240.04 *0.150.33
+1 SD0.320.07 *0.190.45
* p < 0.05. Bias-corrected bootstrap using 5000 resamples. SE = standard error. CI = confidence interval. The indirect effect size is stronger when perceived organizational support is above the average (+1 SD).
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Le, H.; Gopalan, N.; Lee, J.; Kirige, I.; Haque, A.; Yadav, V.; Lambropoulos, V. Impact of Work and Non-Work Support on Employee Well-Being: The Moderating Role of Perceived Organizational Support. Sustainability 2023, 15, 15808. https://doi.org/10.3390/su152215808

AMA Style

Le H, Gopalan N, Lee J, Kirige I, Haque A, Yadav V, Lambropoulos V. Impact of Work and Non-Work Support on Employee Well-Being: The Moderating Role of Perceived Organizational Support. Sustainability. 2023; 15(22):15808. https://doi.org/10.3390/su152215808

Chicago/Turabian Style

Le, Huong, Neena Gopalan, Joohan Lee, Isuru Kirige, Amlan Haque, Vanita Yadav, and Victoria Lambropoulos. 2023. "Impact of Work and Non-Work Support on Employee Well-Being: The Moderating Role of Perceived Organizational Support" Sustainability 15, no. 22: 15808. https://doi.org/10.3390/su152215808

APA Style

Le, H., Gopalan, N., Lee, J., Kirige, I., Haque, A., Yadav, V., & Lambropoulos, V. (2023). Impact of Work and Non-Work Support on Employee Well-Being: The Moderating Role of Perceived Organizational Support. Sustainability, 15(22), 15808. https://doi.org/10.3390/su152215808

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop