Next Article in Journal
The GHG Intensities of Wind Power Plants in China from a Life-Cycle Perspective: The Impacts of Geographical Location, Turbine Technology and Management Level
Previous Article in Journal
Effect of the Digital Economy on Farmers’ Household Income: County-Level Panel Data for Jilin Province, China
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Mediating Role of Entrepreneurial Work-Related Strains and Work Engagement among Job Demand–Resource Model and Success

by
Qifan Wang
1,
Sajjad Nawaz Khan
2,
Muhammad Sajjad
3,
Irshad Hussain Sarki
4 and
Muhammad Noman Yaseen
3,*
1
School of Economics, Jiangxi University of Finance and Economics, Nanchang 330013, China
2
Department of Management Sciences, The Islamia University Bahawalpur (RYK), Rahim Yar Khan 64200, Pakistan
3
Department of Management Sciences, Vehari Campus, COMSATS University Islamabad, Vehari 61100, Pakistan
4
NCBA&E Lahore Sub Campus Rahim Yar Khan, Rahim Yar Khan 64200, Pakistan
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2023, 15(5), 4454; https://doi.org/10.3390/su15054454
Submission received: 12 January 2023 / Revised: 20 February 2023 / Accepted: 24 February 2023 / Published: 2 March 2023

Abstract

:
Post-COVID-19 working conditions have been the primary reason behind increased stress among business owners. There is an ever-rising need for entrepreneurial work engagement in their jobs to mitigate the increased entrepreneurial work pressures caused by uncontrolled digitization, enhanced consumer power, and brutal competition. Therefore, this study intends to respond to the existing practical and empirical gaps by investigating the relationships between entrepreneurial job demands (EJD), work-related stress, entrepreneurial job resources (EJR), and entrepreneurial work engagement (WE) for their role in generating entrepreneurial success (ES), especially in the Chinese context. It also tested the mediating role of work-related stress and entrepreneurial work engagement on the relationship between job demands, job resources, and entrepreneurial success. Structured questionnaires were circulated among the targeted respondents (i.e., business owners across China) using quantitative techniques, followed by PLS-SEM for data analysis, as these are the best-suited techniques, considering the context and time constraints. The results verified the impact of job demands on work-related strain, followed by the inverse direct impact of work-related strain on entrepreneurial success. This study found the significant impact of entrepreneurial job resources on entrepreneurial work engagement, followed by the positive impact of WE on entrepreneurial success. Likewise, work engagement’s mediating role was validated, while work-related strain could only negatively mediate the relationship between EJD and ES. Likewise, this study has practical and empirical implications for practitioners and researchers to be mindful of their employees’ emotional states by providing sufficient resources and psychological interventions to ensure business success.

1. Introduction

With the outbreak of a pandemic such as COVID-19, both traditional and entrepreneurial firms have faced serious concerns regarding increased job demands and stress due to unprecedented disruptions [1,2]. Stress among entrepreneurs and managers has become quite common in the present situation. Moreover, almost 50–70% of prevailing psychological strains are stress-specific [3]. Stress can also inversely affect individuals’ and entrepreneurs’ performance abilities [4]. Previous studies have discussed working conditions, certain leadership styles, and rising job demands as the prime reasons behind increased entrepreneurial stresses. Such stresses usually result from internal and external environment-related indicators, adversely affecting an entrepreneur’s corporate performance [5]. In post-COVID-19 circumstances, business owners have been forced to opt for digitized operations to cater to consumers’ needs, making their job more demanding [6]. China, the epicenter of the COVID-19 outbreak, was hit hardest by the phenomena at hand and it brought jeopardy for entrepreneurs. With such a sudden shift in how operations were to be managed, many entrepreneurs were faced with the stresses of reaching breakeven and avoiding defaults, which ultimately caused compromised entrepreneurial performance across China [7]. While research on the subject matter is full of contradictory outcomes regarding the impact of stress caused by increasing job demands on entrepreneurs and their businesses [8], some studies portrayed entrepreneurs as strong enough to bear such stresses and still succeed.
In contrast, other researchers have considered entrepreneurs to be those who have succumbed to the prevailing increased stresses caused by the post-COVID-19-related new normal working conditions [9,10]. Therefore, it is vital to explore the association between the variables (entrepreneurial job demands and entrepreneurial job resources) and to look for mitigating strategies to counter such job-bound stresses for entrepreneurs to make them perform [11]. Apparently, it is evident that stresses of all sorts can affect an individual’s ability to perform, both in personal and professional endeavors. Therefore, the continuous rising job demands and widespread panic caused by COVID-19 have attracted researchers’ interest to probe the phenomena, and its potential to hinder a professional’s performances. In line with the previous studies, this study considered entrepreneurial job demand-bound stresses, which have been detrimental to an entrepreneur’s success. Conversely, others consider entrepreneurs strong enough to sacrifice their self-being to protect their venture’s well-being [12,13]. Therefore, it was necessary to start unlocking the entrepreneurial success concept, mainly across China, considering its significance in the overall entrepreneurial global canvas. Still, it is crucial to be mindful that the effect of considered variables on ES is contextual and subjective.
Likewise, for some entrepreneurs, no matter how many changing job demands they face, they remain in a better position to counter such stresses and ensure their venture’s success because of their dynamic personalities. Consequently, studies have conceived factors reflecting increased job demands and entrepreneurial stress (i.e., increased workload, pressing deadlines, nonexistent leadership, poor work atmosphere, conflicts, a negligible delegation of authority, etc.). In line with these studies, an entrepreneur’s well-being, enablers, and consequences have lately attracted researchers’ attention. This study intended to examine the impact of increased entrepreneurial job demands on work stresses and its inverse impact on an entrepreneur’s success [14,15,16].
Therefore, to bridge the empirical gap, where studies have mainly shown entrepreneurs who endure all the hardships and do not face stress, this study tests the impact of increasing entrepreneurial job demands on entrepreneurs’ stress levels and then the impact of stress on their performance outcomes. Additionally, this study propagates that it is equally important to realize that along with increasing job demands, this COVID-19 pandemic has also brought specific resources (i.e., digital technologies) which have eliminated the element of space and time and have engaged entrepreneurs with their jobs even more. Therefore, this study tested another empirical gap by examining the impact of entrepreneurial job resources on an entrepreneur’s work engagement and the engagement effects on an entrepreneur’s performance. There has been a recent rising interest among researchers in examining the effect of entrepreneurial engagement on individual and organizational performance levels [17]. According to job demand–resource (JD–R) theory, job resources have more comparative potential to promote work engagement than increasing job demands. Therefore, JD–R theory is this study’s primary underpinning interpretive lens to formulate the conceptual, empirical model [18].
Along with the inconclusive insights on the impact of entrepreneurial job demands on entrepreneurial stress levels, this study will address the empirical gaps by testing the impact of entrepreneurial job resources and job demands on job stress and work entrepreneurial engagement, respectively. At the same time, previous studies have primarily failed to test the interrelationship between the above-stated constructs [19]. Hence, the central question has been whether entrepreneurial job resources are the antecedent to entrepreneurial work engagements across multiple jobs and entrepreneurial settings. It will also be of theoretical and practical use to test the simultaneous impact of entrepreneurial job demands on job stress and entrepreneurial job resources on work engagement across multiple operational and contextual settings within the Chinese entrepreneurial spectrum [20].

2. Conceptualization of the Constructs

2.1. Literature Review

2.1.1. Job Demands

Recent empirical investigations have discussed the ever-increasing job demands for managers and entrepreneurs, and COVID-19 has played its part in making job-related dynamics even more competitive and demanding. Prevailing job demands are cognitive and emotional, which can cause job stress and require specific, meaningful psychological input from entrepreneurs [21]. Hence, the literature raises concerns over the role of job demands in making entrepreneurs perform in a particular manner. Specifically, job demands are the extent of work required to be undertaken and the time limitations attached to the work [22].

2.1.2. Job Stress

Likewise, ever-increasing high-paced industrialization has led to several factors that can cause stress among the masses. COVID-19 has been one such phenomenon that has disrupted supply chains and has brought businesses to a standstill, ultimately increasing undue stress for entrepreneurs [11,23]. True entrepreneurs fight against all odds and in certain situations (i.e., full of resources), endure all the hardships, and keep themselves from stress [24]. Stress is regarded as the supposed entrepreneurial strain as the detrimental emotional and physical reactions in situations where job expectations are not aligned with entrepreneurial abilities, resources, and requirements [25,26].

2.1.3. Job Resources

With the advent of the post-COVID-19 e-commerce boom, it is assumed that entrepreneurs have more resources available than ever before. Researchers have tried investigating the impact of such job resources on managers’ performance [27]. In the same way, the present study has opted to probe its impact on promoting job engagement. In the context of job resources, it is deemed to be the work engagement, inspiration, and optimistic work-related structure characterized by vigor, dedication, and engagement [28]. Several other studies have studied its impact on overall performance-related outcomes.

2.1.4. Work Engagement

Work engagement is “a positive, fulfilling, work-related state of mind characterized by vigor, dedication, and absorption” [29]. Therefore, engaged individuals usually have uphill energy, are comparatively focused, and are happily involved in whatever work they are asked to undertake. While, with a particular extent of entrepreneurial engagement, their ventures end up performing in a much better manner. Similarly, by being engaged, entrepreneurs remain in a leading position to feel more passionate, dedicated, and enthusiastic about whatever they have to undertake.

2.1.5. Entrepreneurial Performance

Entrepreneurial success compares entrepreneurs’ achievements, in line with their financial and non-financial performance outcomes, followed by the extent of their satisfaction. Entrepreneurial success has always been a topic of interest for researchers and entrepreneurs themselves. Similarly, scholars have keenly focused on factors generating and inhibiting the entrepreneur’s success. This topic has gained more popularity since the recent spread of the COVID-19 pandemic. Likewise, different studies have elaborated entrepreneurial success in their own way, keeping contextual aspects at hand.

2.2. Hypothesis Development

2.2.1. The Association between Entrepreneurial Job Demands and Entrepreneurial Success

With rising consumer power and competitive forces, entrepreneurs face increasing job demands. Entrepreneurs across China have been under constant pressure to cope with dynamic consumer expectations, along with countering competitive actions. Such an increase in entrepreneurial job demands has jeopardized entrepreneurs’ potential for success. The present study explicitly intends to fill the empirical gap by investigating the connection between entrepreneurial job demands and entrepreneurial success. In the ever-changing organizational setting, job demands negatively impact performance [30]. Specifically, job-related stressors have hindered positive feelings and ignited negative ones in Chinese entrepreneurs, adversely affecting their well-being and performance outcomes [31,32]. Certain studies have found a negative impact of job stressors on employees and business performance.
In contrast, others showed mixed findings, which means the results are mainly inconclusive [33], setting the direction for future empirical investigations [34]. It is why there is a need to empirically test the impact of rising job demands on entrepreneurial well-being and performance [35]. The recent emergence of the digitized global business market has given rise to borderless economies with an overall increase in business competitiveness [35,36], which has resulted in increased innovation and led to the exit of those who remained unable to cope with this fast-paced change [37].
Stressors are considered to be a vital aspect of any firm’s landscape; hence, they have been under enormous scrutiny across the literature: Stressors mostly have a critical negative impact on the overall economic landscape of a firm; this is the reason why it has gained researchers’ recent attention, especially in health [38], education [39], entrepreneurship [40], and other areas of work. China, one of the biggest economic markets, has observed that employee performance is deemed the most fundamental and important factor of concern for firms working within Chinese settings because of the increasingly competitive business market. Such hype in job demands has equally dented entrepreneurs’ performance and ability to compete. Several other related studies have investigated certain factors which hold the ability to affect entrepreneurial business performance, including work–life balance [41], job demands [42], job insecurity, ability, job satisfaction, organizational virtuousness, and employee well-being [43].
According to resource conservation theory (COR), various stressful actions (i.e., conflict, dissatisfaction, and withdrawal behavior) take place when the free flow of resources is halted, or when individuals are faced with the threat of being lost, or when individuals cannot observe the certainty of return on investment. Thus, increased job demands can lead to hostile work attitudes, resulting in decreased performance [44]. The study’s results prove that rising entrepreneurial job demands significantly affect an entrepreneur’s performance [45].
H1: 
There is a negative relationship between entrepreneurial job demands and entrepreneurial success.

2.2.2. Relationship between Entrepreneurial Job Demands and Work-Related Stress

Researchers have shown increased interest in probing factors facilitating and hindering entrepreneurial success within the Chinese market. Recently, entrepreneurship has been deemed to play an enormous role in even the economic well-being of any particular nation [46]. To encourage entrepreneurship, educational institutes have taken landmark initiatives through governmental support to provide entrepreneurs with all the possible facilitating elements and to eliminate all the available inhibitors [47]. Studying factors causing stress among entrepreneurs is important because stress can reasonably impede entrepreneurial success.
The outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic across China and worldwide has added to the dwindling business landscape. It means that entrepreneurs and corporates across China face uphill job demands, causing a diminishing in managers’ psychological state. Likewise, increased entrepreneurial job demands top the list if one has to probe the reasons behind increased work-related strains. Furthermore, it is essential to understand that there can simultaneously be context-specific and generic job demands [48]. The term “demand” itself is self-explanatory and discusses sustained psychological and physical efforts by entrepreneurs in all business settings. Entrepreneurs face specific job demands like all other corporate initiatives [49]. Being one’s boss, they used to be responsible for actions such as identifying the prevailing business opportunities, formulating strategies to cater to them, and providing superior products and services to their target consumers. Likewise, entrepreneurs face additional pressures due to the typical extent of uncertainty, responsibility, and social acceptability they face [50].
Likewise, studies have stated that several situational aspects within a firm, including the working atmosphere, leadership support, and increased job demands, can be the reason behind work-related stresses in China. Most research on the connection between job demands and stress has largely been inconclusive. This study will contribute to the body of knowledge by studying multiple entrepreneurial job demands and their impact on an entrepreneur’s job stress [51]. Others have tried to distinguish and build a connection between the job demands managers and entrepreneurs face and their impact on stress [5]. Entrepreneurs may or may not be sharing all the job demands with their employees, but they are subjected to continuous increases. Therefore, this study measures the impact of such increased entrepreneurial job demands on entrepreneurs’ work-related stress.
H2: 
There is a positive relationship between entrepreneurial job demands and work-related stress.

2.2.3. Relationship between Work-Related Stress and Entrepreneurial Success

Furthermore, many empirical studies have focused on studying the adverse effects of work-related stresses on an entrepreneur’s performance and success level [52]. Similarly, studies have observed multifold triggers [53,54] varying in both the extent and intensity of severity, which can disrupt the routine procedures of an individual’s personal and professional lives [55,56]. The increasing potential of organizational and work-related stresses has gained researchers’ attention, so the extent of their adverse effects can be studied. With post-COVID-19 changes in working conditions, entrepreneurs face unique stressors, which they must overcome to ensure their venture’s sustenance [57,58].
Entrepreneurs face notable stresses from the highly uncertain environment and job-related demands [59,60]. Likewise, the ingrained pressure to innovate and develop offerings, which must enable them to stand apart from competitors, has always been the source of psychological strains for them [60]. Similarly, job stress and the threat of failure adversely affect an entrepreneur’s ability to endure all the hardships of a competitive market and stay competitive and productive [61]. Therefore, there is a dire need for an extensive exploration of the relationship between these two phenomena so that some special countermeasures and contingencies could be introduced to tone down the negatives of job stresses among Chinese entrepreneurs.
H3: 
There is a negative relationship between work-related stress and entrepreneurial success.

2.2.4. Relationship between Job Resources and Entrepreneurial Success

Entrepreneurs always need creative, out-of-the-box, and innovative resources, ultimately giving them a competitive edge over their competitors [62]. In the recent post-COVID-19 digitization, information technology has proved to be a resource that, if used correctly, can enable entrepreneurs to secure the desired success. Entrepreneurs across China have taken the lead in introducing the latest technologies for managing their business operations. Therefore, researchers have been over-conscious about those vital resources that can enable entrepreneurs to succeed. Similarly, personality-related aspects, cognitive abilities [63], or conscientiousness [64] are equally relevant to business performance.
In the same way, other studies have observed that in the present era of interdependence, businesses can use integrated processes and deal in resource sharing with their channel members to secure the desired performance level [62]. Such an increased need for success has made entrepreneurs realize the importance of human resources as one of the primary resources, which can perform wonders for them through cutting-edge skills. Therefore, firms across China have been critically focused on hiring the right employees for the right job by ensuring the person’s job fit.
Likewise, other studies have stressed the importance of other resources, including the delegation of authority and teamwork, which assist entrepreneurs in managing smooth goal attainment, reducing work-specific strains, and enabling the firms to achieve desired growth [18]. In line with the job demand–resource theory [65], job resources significantly affect performance. With the right resources, entrepreneurs feel more motivated and often engage more with their jobs, contributing to the desired performance [66]. Nonetheless, researchers believe that job resources cannot generate the desired performance outcomes, especially in the case of infrequent activities across organizations [20] and types of performance [62]. For instance, certain studies have considered a delegation of authority as a resource that contributes to an entrepreneur’s performance [67], while others believe that with increased delegation, workers sometimes become distracted from the actual purpose of contributing toward the entrepreneurial venture’s success [68]. It shows the nature of the contradiction available across the previous literature.
Similarly, scholars have recently started questioning entrepreneurial job resources’ universality and impact on an entrepreneur’s performance. Likewise, ref. [20] argues that company activity levels condition job resources’ positive role. In addition, ref. [62] propagated the significance of unboxing the multiple categories of performances when exploring workplace resources.
H4: 
There is a positive relationship between entrepreneurial job resources and entrepreneurial success.

2.2.5. Relationship between Entrepreneurial Job Resources and Entrepreneurial Work Engagement

Work engagement has been studied as a basic premise for achieving organizational performance [69]. Studies have tried to investigate factors enabling and promoting the work engagement of entrepreneurs for better performance outcomes [69,70]. However, the literature on the role of entrepreneurial job resources in promoting entrepreneurial work engagement has largely been inconclusive and scarce. Likewise, other investigations have stated that job resources are essential in predicting work engagement. Additionally, in line with JD–R theory, multifold job resources may define the direction of occupational work engagement, leading to improved performance outcomes [71]. In a highly uncertain competitive business environment, nontraditional electronic technologies have been deemed competitive resources, which help entrepreneurs fully involve and engage their channel members to harmonize their operations and improve the overall entrepreneurial performance [72].
Therefore, embedding such information technologies across entrepreneurial value chains will help increase entrepreneurial work engagements, enhancing entrepreneurial firms’ ability to respond more to their customers’ expectations through prompt responses [73]. The literature has essentially combined multiple job resources and has remained chiefly unable to probe the relative significance of each specific resource [74]. As mentioned above, it indicates the inconclusive nature of the interaction, which surely needs further meaningful investigation, specifically in post-COVID-19 times. Likewise, some other empirical investigations have also talked about the positive impact of job resources in boosting overall work engagement. China, the country of initiators, has always facilitated its business markets with proper resources for improved economic performance.
Empirically, studies have reflected that multiple types of job resources may engage employees at different levels of the job [75]. Furthermore, despite several studies on the subject matter, the literature has remained unable to measure the impact of entrepreneurial job resources on entrepreneurial work engagement. It is the reason why the present study hypothesized that:
H5: 
There is a positive relationship between entrepreneurial job resources and entrepreneurial work engagement.

2.2.6. Relationship between Entrepreneurial Work Engagement and Entrepreneurial Success

Research has observed a positive relationship between engaged employees and a firm’s performance. Similarly, the literature has discussed the positive relationship between entrepreneurial engagement and success [76]. Entrepreneurial success is not only to an individual’s advantage but also to society’s benefit because of its ability to provide its customers with innovative financial and employment opportunities [77]. Similarly, China, the nation of the most disciplined, engaged, and dedicated individuals, believes in undertaking things with sheer enthusiasm. Entrepreneurship is no different, but factors such as increased economic scarcity and hyper-competitive intensity have maintained researchers’ interest in entrepreneurial work engagement for entrepreneurial success. It is therefore of great significance to investigate mechanisms associated with entrepreneurial success across China. It is also to be kept in mind that it is not only the financial, but rather the psychological aspects which have a notable role to play in the anticipated outcomes.
There is a piece of reasonable evidence on the association between entrepreneurs’ characteristics and the success of their venture [78]. At the same time, most previous studies focused on static entrepreneurial traits for their role in rendering them successful [79]. There is a scarcity of focus on dynamic entrepreneurial traits (i.e., work engagement) as the antecedents of entrepreneurial success. Additionally, work engagement was proposed as a “positive, fulfilling, work-related state of mind characterized by vigor, dedication, and absorption” [80].
Moreover, empirical validation exists that employees’ work engagement is significantly associated with performance [17,28]. In contrast, such a work engagement and business performance connection are still in the doldrums for entrepreneurs [81]. Some studies have generically tried to validate the above-stated connection in the case of self-employed business owners [82]. While the engagement–entrepreneurial success relationship still awaits further investigation.
H6: 
There is a positive relationship between entrepreneurial work engagement and entrepreneurial success.

2.2.7. Mediating Role of Work-Related Stress on a Relationship between Entrepreneurial Job Demands and Entrepreneurial Performance

In terms of entrepreneurial and firm performance, specific benchmarks always exist that individuals must achieve to reach a certain level of success. In all sorts of corporate or entrepreneurial formations, the leader always sets predetermined performance standards related to the knowledge base, discipline, and psychological promptness [83,84]. All the above-stated standards are usually dynamic because of competitive, legal, and social changes. Similarly, individuals must remain able to meet all the job demands within the prescribed time frame and quality standards, and their performance is considered up to the mark, as advised by Iskamto et al. (2019) [48]. At the same time, it is crucial to understand that rising entrepreneurial job demands adversely affect entrepreneurial performance because of increased psychological strains.
Likewise, job demands that an employee or an entrepreneur face cause undue stress for them [85,86]. Furthermore, such existing work-related stress can harm the venture’s chances of success by increasing burnout and an overall decrease in productivity and performance levels [85]. Researchers have deemed job stress a contextual phenomenon with different implications for employees’ performance depending on their situation. The adversity of job stress usually emerges because of physical, psychological, and emotional symptoms caused by prolonged, emotionally demanding circumstances [87]. It is in line with the objectives of the present study, which propagates the prominent role of increasing entrepreneurial job demands on increasing the stress level among entrepreneurs, which ultimately hinders their chances to perform.
In the present post-COVID-19 lifestyle, stress has emerged as a well-known phenomenon that negatively affects individual and business well-being [88]. With post-COVID-19 disruptions, lockdowns, and abrupt digitization, entrepreneurs have been subjected to dynamic job demands, which are daunting. Such increased pressure to compete, innovate, and sustain has caused increased stress across organizations, irrespective of their size, geographical context, and type of industry [89]. Workplace stress is common, but a recent increase in entrepreneurial job demands has added to the pressure to achieve performance goals. It has increased researchers’ interest in the entrepreneurial job demand-bound mental health conditions of entrepreneurs on their performance [90]. Weaker conceptualization of the concept of entrepreneurial stress has attracted the interest of researchers for upcoming empirical explorations. Therefore, the study postulates that:
H7: 
Work-related stress negatively mediates the relationship between job demands and entrepreneurial success.

2.2.8. Mediating Role of Entrepreneurial Work Engagement in a relationship between Entrepreneurial Job Resources and Entrepreneurial Success

Many studies have investigated job resources’ tentative role in promoting work engagement among employees and entrepreneurs. Despite the number of empirical investigations, there exists reasonable contradiction among investigators on the outcome of the above-stated relationships. This study adds to the existing literature by unlocking the entrepreneurial job resources and work engagement relationship by testing entrepreneurial work engagement as a mediator in a relationship between JR and entrepreneurial success in a Chinese context. Studies focus on using the JD–R model to craft operational strategies to encourage employee engagement and entrepreneurial success [28]. In order to further understand the mediating role of entrepreneurial work engagement, research has encouraged other investigators to probe the antecedents, consequences, and role of contingent variables concerning entrepreneurial work engagement [91]. Others have also relied on the JD–R model to examine further the above-stated web of relationships encircling work engagement [71].
Work engagement is usually a positive and wholesome psychological condition backed by vigor, dedication, and absorption that helps managers excel in comparatively challenging circumstances. Research has indicated that individuals with higher levels of work engagement usually have a state of mind, considering obstacles part of their overall learning curve. Such entrepreneurs and managers are mostly more energetic, self-efficacious, dedicated, and mentally challenging, enabling them to outperform others [92]. Such engaged individuals mainly deal with a positive mindset, using all available resources to their advantage [93]. Like normal individuals, they also go through states of tiredness, but for them, such conditions are the source of mere enjoyment [94]. Likewise, this study states that with post-COVID-19, where individuals are subjected to ever-changing competitive and consumer expectations, they are also provided with advanced resources in the form of information technology.
Moreover, such technology has helped entrepreneurs engage in their ventures and also helped them keep an even closer eye on changing competitive and consumer trends. The literature also suggests that entrepreneurs’ psychological and physical characteristics make them succeed in China.
Most of the earlier literature has observed entrepreneurial phenomena from a static, trait-like viewpoint and has largely remained unable to conceptualize it in line with the dynamic aspects responsible for entrepreneurial initiatives. Likewise, there exists the need for a concrete justification for unboxing the relationship between entrepreneurs’ characteristics and performance and to explore the intervening processes more carefully [15]. Therefore, it is suggested that:
H8: 
Entrepreneurial engagement positively mediates the relationship between entrepreneurial job resources and entrepreneurial success.
Figure 1 represents the theoretical framework.

3. Research Methodology

3.1. Data Collection Methodology

This study used quantitative techniques to collect data from Chinese entrepreneurs across the autonomous regions of Beijing, Tianjin, Hebei, Liaoning, Shanghai, Jiangsu, Zhejiang, Fujian, Shandong, Guangdong, and Hainan province (eastern part of China). The purpose was to explore the connection between the multiple variables considered in this study. Data were collected through survey techniques because of certain ingrained benefits (time and cost efficiency). Therefore, the structured questionnaire was developed, on a five-point Likert scale, to collect data from the considered respondents. However, the scale items for this study were taken and adapted from previous credible studies. In this study, the data were collected from entrepreneurs operating across China. Notably, 450 questionnaires were provided to the respondents, whereas 376 usable questionnaires were returned.

3.2. Measures

The questionnaire was adopted from the past literature; the entrepreneurial job demand scale was measured based on three dimensions and adopted from Dijkhuizen et al. (2014) [23]. The first dimension of time was measured with a five-item scale, whereas the second dimension of uncertainty and risk was measured with a six-item scale, and the last dimension of responsibility was measured with a three-item scale. Further, the entrepreneurial resource was measured with three dimensions and adopted from Huang (2016) [43]. Each dimension of entrepreneurial resource was measured with a four-item scale, including owner funds, human capital, and network ties. Further, work-related strains were measured with an eight-item scale and adopted from Mohr et al. (2006) [68].
Moreover, work engagement was measured by adopting a scale from the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale of Schaufeli et al. (2006) [84]. It consists of nine items bifurcated into three reflective dimensions, with three items tapped in each: vigor, dedication, and absorption, adopted from Van De Voorde et al. (2016) [95]. Lastly, Dzogbenuku and Keelson (2019) [25] adopted a four-item scale of entrepreneurial success. Details of all the constructs used are above shared in Figure 1 of research framework.

4. Research Findings

4.1. Measurement Model Assessment

This present section of the manuscript looks into the convergent validity outcomes to ensure the reliability and validity of the construct scales employed within the structured questionnaire. Therefore, PLS algorithm calculations have been used to check the factor loadings, composite reliability (CR), and average variance extracted (AVE) provided. Furthermore, the values of the factor loadings for every item were found to be less than 0.60, as suggested by experts. Likewise, the values for CR were equally significant at 0.70 for all the constructs used. Similarly, the values for AVE for each scale item were significant at 0.50, as a rule of thumb. Therefore, the result reflects a reasonable extent of both the reliability and validity (see Table 1).
In the present study, PLS-SEM was used, as a tool for data analysis, in order to find out the values for the validity and reliability of each construct, and the results for the present pursuit are enclosed in Table 2. In the same way, as per the outcomes shared in Figure 2, it reveals structural model assessment and the causal relation among the variables. Further, the reliability, and validity are self-evident. In this regard, all the composite reliability values (CR) were more significant than 0.70, as [95] recommended. Furthermore, all the average variance extracted (AVE) values were more significant than 0.60, as [96] recommended. Therefore, the results reveal an apparent validity and reliability between the constructs used in this study to collect the data from the respondents.

Discriminant Validity

Additionally, to test the discriminant validity for the scale items of each construct, the present study opted for the HTMT method, which is considered most appropriate for the present purpose. Furthermore, PLS-SEM has been used to validate the values of HTMT further to determine the variation between the scale items utilized for each study construct. As per the results reflected in Table 2, the outcome values of the DV have been within the prescribed threshold of 0.90 [97]. The results reflect the discriminant validity of the variables used in the research work to fetch data from the targeted respondents. Moreover, the explanation concerning the effect size and R-square is also evident in Table 3 and Table 4, respectively.

4.2. Structural Model Assessment

This study used PLS-SEM to analyze the interrelationship between the variables mentioned in the theoretical framework (Figure 1). This method is a family of “variance-based” methods of structural equation modeling (SEM), which has become appealing to behavioral researchers due to its efficiency in estimating complex models with a large number of constructs, indicator variables, and structural paths without imposing data normality assumptions. The authors of [34] argue that “PLS-SEM is a causal-predictive approach to structural equation modeling (SEM) that emphasizes prediction in estimating statistical models, whose structures are designed to provide causal explanations”. Initially, H1 tested the relationship between entrepreneurial job demands on entrepreneurial success, with the results favoring the proposed hypothesis. H2 and H3 tested the relationship between entrepreneurial JD and work stress, followed by the impact of entrepreneurial WS on entrepreneurial success. Later on, this study tested the impact of entrepreneurial job resources on entrepreneurial work engagement, which was found to be positive. It was followed by the impact of entrepreneurial WE on entrepreneurial success (all the direct relationship hypotheses are shown in Table 5). While this study also tested and examined the mediating role of entrepreneurial work engagement and job stress. Moreover, entrepreneurial work engagement was positively mediated, with work stress inversely mediating the proposed relationships, which are also shown in Table 6.

5. Discussions

This study has examined entrepreneurial job demands, job stress, entrepreneurial job resources, and entrepreneurial work engagement to examine their impact on entrepreneurial success empirically. This study’s findings confirmed the significant positive impact of rising entrepreneurial job demands on job stress, followed by the inverse impact of job stress on entrepreneurial success [98,99]. Likewise, the results validated the positive impact of entrepreneurial job resources on entrepreneurial work engagement and ES, followed by the positive impact of work engagement on entrepreneurial success. This study also tested the mediating role of work-related stress and work engagement on the relationship between JD–R and entrepreneurial success. At the same time, the results indicated only the positive mediating role of entrepreneurial work engagement, followed by the inverse mediating role of work-related stress, especially in the case of entrepreneurs across China. In the present post-COVID-19 era of hyper-digitization and increased competition, entrepreneurs are psychologically strained to achieve success. Therefore, there was a critical need to validate the relationship between the constructs used here to assist entrepreneurs and policymakers in taking meaningful actions for improved outcomes concerning entrepreneurs [94]. These results align with previous studies that consider job demands as job expectations, which usually include excessive time pressure, adverse working conditions, and increased workload. The results are in congruence with earlier investigations that have found the negative impact of increased job demands on an individual’s job satisfaction and performance. However, the present study’s findings have empirical novelty, along with the contextual one, where the combination of variables used was primarily tested in the Chinese market context.
While, with such increased job stress, the leader or manager must provide their workers with proper job resources to help them endure all the hardships inflicted by increased workload [98,99]. Proactive thinking on the part of entrepreneurs will also help them, to manage certain important elements of job training, to arrange technological facilities and to align monetary incentives to keep workers engaged, and to assist in improving overall entrepreneurial success [94]. Similarly, this study tested the relationship between entrepreneurial job resources and entrepreneurial work engagement. One must be mindful that with increased available resources (both tangible/intangible and financial/non-financial), entrepreneurs feel more motivated to perform, which promotes their increased engagement with the tasks they perform. Resultantly, such an increased work performance helps achieve increased entrepreneurial success. Likewise, previous studies have favored resource-based interventions and their role in generating entrepreneurial success. Therefore, this study gives readers a better understanding of the factors contributing to overall entrepreneurial business success. Other studies have also agreed on the significant role of the timely availability of resources in promoting work engagement and business success.
Likewise, with competitive corporate pressures, entrepreneurs are also faced with increased job demands because consumers these days have become demanding. It also requires entrepreneurs to be more engaged with their jobs, producing products and services that hold their creative content and enable entrepreneurs to perform better [80]. At the same, it is essential to understand that this increased competition and power of consumers have resulted in specific psychological pressures for entrepreneurs, which cause entrepreneurial job stress [100]. Furthermore, with busy minds and stresses, it becomes difficult for entrepreneurs to perform up to the mark. Therefore, with the above-stated findings, this study holds some meaningful implications (i.e., both practical and theoretical) for practitioners and academicians to dig deep into the elements affecting an entrepreneur’s success.

5.1. Theoretical Implications

The massive increase in competitive pressure posed by post-COVID-19 dynamics has brought businesses to a unique but daunting situation. Entrepreneurs compete for survival, and with most of them going bankrupt, few have stood firm against this severe medical, social, and economic calamity. It is where researchers have focused on assessing certain aspects concerning entrepreneurship, which hold the potential for both causing failures and ensuring success for them (if managed). At the same time, this study adds to the list of existing empirical studies by considering the impact of both e-job demands and e-job resources on entrepreneurial success for Chinese entrepreneurs simultaneously. This study looks into the impact of job stress posed by the post-COVID-19 change. Therefore, the present study has much to offer to researchers and practitioners within and beyond China, where they can use the tested concepts for managing aspects concerning the anxiety level of entrepreneurs, ensuring their prosperity. It also propagates that by providing entrepreneurs with sufficient resources to keep their businesses on track, one can significantly maintain their interest in the business.
Similarly, it also sheds light on the fact that though digitization is often considered a valuable tool for operational efficiency, it can instantly become a source of stress for managers at work. The same has happened in the post-COVID-19 era of abrupt digitization, where businesses were forced to shut down due to government precautionary measures. It caused severe disruptions for businesses, giving birth to the unique concept of working from home, which meant 24/7 availability of the business for their customers. On the one hand, it worked in favor of customers. On the other hand, it increased psychological pressure for entrepreneurs, where some felt it was an invasion of their personal lives, while others resisted this change because of their personality and competency-related concerns. Likewise, literature [101] has also talked about the inhibiting role of multiple stressors, for overall firm’s performance. Anyhow, the present situation added to the job stress for most business owners. In line with the present argument, this study is very relevant and will assist entrepreneurs in understanding how serious the repercussions of entrepreneurial job stress can be for their overall success. Therefore, this study has a visible and apparent theoretical implication for the researcher’s future empirical pursuits.

5.2. Practical and Managerial Implications

The findings of the present study hold several practically meaningful implications for practitioners, researchers, and entrepreneurs, looking for factors both positively and negatively affecting entrepreneurs’ success in China and worldwide. Furthermore, with the rising Chinese digital economy and increased consumer power, factors causing stress for entrepreneurs have also been rising, and increased stress usually inversely affects an entrepreneur’s performance. Therefore, future entrepreneurs and firms with a corporate entrepreneurial mindset will have to understand that such rising entrepreneurial job demands are causing stress for managers and entrepreneurs, which, if not managed, will adversely affect their chances to succeed. Other researchers have also agreed with this study’s results that the increased psychological stressors felt by entrepreneurs and business owners because of rising job demands are regarded as the antecedent of decreased entrepreneurial success.
On the other hand, this study has practical implications for policymakers that, with facilities, resources, and support, entrepreneurs will perform comparatively better. It also reflects that one can achieve increased entrepreneurial engagement with increased resources, positively affecting entrepreneurial success. Therefore, policymakers need to provide entrepreneurs and business owners with sufficient resources to increase their interest in the job they have to perform, which will help them perform better. Previous studies have also discussed the significance of work engagement as a principal antecedent of an entrepreneur’s success. In the same way, it is propagated that entrepreneurs must be engaged through both traditional and nontraditional resources for better performance outcomes.

6. Conclusions

The post-COVID-19 era of increased competitive pressure, dynamic working conditions, and uncontrolled digitization has brought entrepreneurs to a fix, where they need to meet the changing market demands to succeed. In this regard, this study added to the body of knowledge and provided entrepreneurs with updated novel insights on the effects of increased job demands (JD) on job-related stress, followed by the impact of job stress on an entrepreneur’s success. Increased consumer and organizational demands have increased the performance pressure on entrepreneurs, which has caused undue stress for them. Therefore, empirical studies must be pursued to address and validate the above-stated proposed relationships. Likewise, researchers and practitioners alternatively call for looking into the other side of the same coin (i.e., job resources), provided by apparently adverse post-COVID-19 circumstances. Therefore, this study simultaneously responded to the alternative empirical gap by testing the impact of increased job resources (JR) on an entrepreneur’s work engagement, followed by investigating the impact of work engagement (WE) on entrepreneurial success.
Researchers [102] had contradictory viewpoints on how COVID-19-bound working conditions impact an entrepreneur’s potential to succeed. Therefore, this study must be of monumental practical and empirical aid to those managing their business ventures. Likewise, this study also validated that entrepreneurs have been provided with additional resources (i.e., Ever dynamic, information technology) along with increased job demands. Such resources have kept them engaged within their businesses 24/7, irrespective of the limitations of time and space, enabling them to perform in a much-improved manner. Hence, future researchers and business individuals can fruitfully use these study results at hand and positively ensure their and their employees’ engagement by reducing their stress levels to achieve the desired level of entrepreneurial success.

7. Limitations and Future Research

Despite diligently exploring the phenomena at hand, this study has faced certain limitations, which, if looked into, would set the tone for future research endeavors. Firstly, this study opted for a cross-sectional data collection technique through the quantitative methodology. Therefore, it proposes that future researchers try unlocking the phenomena of work engagement and work-related stress that entrepreneurs feel through longitudinal, qualitative techniques. It will help them generate results in two different time slots and will help increase the generalizability of the research findings. Secondly, this study used a couple of mediating constructs (i.e., work-related stress and work engagement). Future research must opt for other mediating constructs to further explore the phenomena of entrepreneurial success. Lastly, the present study did not use any contingent or moderating construct. Therefore, it is suggested that researchers consider bringing certain moderating variables within the present empirical formation to validate further or strengthen the output generated.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, Q.W.; Methodology, S.N.K. and M.N.Y.; Software, Q.W. and Irshad Hussain; Validation, M.S.; Formal analysis, S.N.K. and I.H.S.; Investigation, S.N.K. and M.S.; Resources, Q.W.; Data curation, M.S.; Writing—original draft, S.N.K.; Writing—review & editing, I.H.S. and M.N.Y.; Visualization, I.H.S.; Supervision, M.S.; Project administration, M.N.Y.; Funding acquisition, Q.W. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Participation in the survey was purely on a voluntary basis. Participants were given freedom to quit the survey anytime without assigning any reason.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The author declares no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Abadi, M.B.H.; Taban, E.; Khanjani, N.; Konjin, Z.N.; Khajehnasiri, F.; Samaei, S.E. Relationships between job satisfaction and job demand, job control, social support, and depression in Iranian nurses. J. Nurs. Res. 2021, 29, e143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Ahmed, A.E.; Ucbasaran, D.; Cacciotti, G.; Williams, T.A. Integrating Psychological Resilience, Stress, and Coping in Entrepreneurship: A Critical Review and Research Agenda. Entrep. Theory Pract. 2022, 46, 497–538. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Anning-Dorson, T.; Nyamekye, M.B. Engagement capability, innovation intensity and firm performance: The role of competitive intensity. J. Afr. Bus. 2020, 21, 493–508. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Bailey, C.; Madden, A.; Alfes, K.; Fletcher, L.; Robinson, D.; Holmes, J.; Currie, G. Evaluating the evidence on employee engagement and its potential benefits to NHS staff: A narrative synthesis of the literature. Health Serv. Deliv. Res. 2015, 3, 1–424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  5. Bakker, A.B.; Albrecht, S. Work engagement: Current trends. Career Dev. Int. 2018, 23, 4–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Bakker, A.B.; Demerouti, E. Job demands–resources theory: Taking stock and looking forward. J. Occup. Health Psychol. 2017, 22, 273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Bani-Hani, M.A.; Hamdan-Mansour, A.M. The moderation effect of locus of control on the relationship between job demand and job satisfaction among nurses. Int. J. Nurs. Pract. 2021, 27, e12876. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Baron, R.A.; Franklin, R.J.; Hmieleski, K.M. Why entrepreneurs often experience low, not high, levels of stress: The joint effects of selection and psychological capital. J. Manag. 2016, 42, 742–768. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Bejlegaard, M.; Sarivan, I.-M.; Waehrens, B.V. The influence of digital technologies on supply chain coordination strategies. J. Glob. Oper. Strateg. Sourc. 2021, 14, 636–658. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Bilotta, I.; Cheng, S.; Davenport, M.K.; King, E. Using the job demands-resources model to understand and address employee well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic. Ind. Organ. Psychol. 2021, 14, 267–273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Binder, M.; Coad, A. How satisfied are the self-employed? A life domain view. J. Happiness Stud. 2016, 17, 1409–1433. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  12. Bliese, P.D.; Edwards, J.R.; Sonnentag, S. Stress and well-being at work: A century of empirical trends reflecting theoretical and societal influences. J. Appl. Psychol. 2017, 102, 389. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  13. Burhaein, E.; Tarigan, B.; Budiana, D.; Hendrayana, Y.; Phytanza, D.T.P.; Lourenço, C.; Festiawan, R. Dimensions in The Learning Implementation and Strategies of Adapted Physical Education for Children with Special Needs during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Literature Review & Grounded Theory. Sport Sci. 2021, 15, 189–201. [Google Scholar]
  14. Cardon, M.S.; Patel, P.C. Is stress worth it? Stress-related health and wealth trade-offs for entrepreneurs. Appl. Psychol. 2015, 64, 379–420. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Carpini, J.A.; Parker, S.K.; Griffin, M.A. A look back and a leap forward: A review and synthesis of the individual work performance literature. Acad. Manag. Ann. 2017, 11, 825–885. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Casanova, L.; Miroux, A. Emerging market multinationals reshaping the business landscape. Trans. Corp. Rev. 2018, 10, 288–298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Cavanaugh, M.A.; Boswell, W.R.; Roehling, M.V.; Boudreau, J.W. An empirical examination of self-reported work stress among US managers. J. Appl. Psychol. 2000, 85, 65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  18. Chadwick, I.C.; Raver, J.L. Psychological resilience and its downstream effects for business survival in nascent entrepreneurship. Entrep. Theory Pract. 2020, 44, 233–255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Christian, M.S.; Garza, A.S.; Slaughter, J.E. Work engagement: A quantitative review and test of its relations with task and contextual performance. Pers. Psychol. 2011, 64, 89–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  20. Cubbon, L.; Darga, K.; Wisnesky, U.D.; Dennett, L.; Guptill, C. Depression among entrepreneurs: A scoping review. Small Bus. Econ. 2021, 57, 781–805. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. de Jonge, J.; Spoor, E.; Sonnentag, S.; Dormann, C.; van den Tooren, M. “Take a break?!” Off-job recovery, job demands, and job resources as predictors of health, active learning, and creativity. Eur. J. Work Organ. Psychol. 2012, 21, 321–348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. De Mol, E.; Ho, V.T.; Pollack, J.M. Predicting entrepreneurial burnout in a moderated mediated model of job fit. J. Small Bus. Manag. 2018, 56, 392–411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Dijkhuizen, J.O.; Van Veldhoven, M.A.R.C.; Schalk, R.E.N.É. Development and validation of the entrepreneurial job demands scale. Int. J. Knowl. Innov. Entrep. 2014, 2, 70–89. [Google Scholar]
  24. Dijkhuizen, J.; Gorgievski, M.; van Veldhoven, M.; Schalk, R. Feeling successful as an entrepreneur: A job demands—Resources approach. Int. Entrep. and Manag. J. 2016, 12, 555–573. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Dzogbenuku, R.K.; Keelson, S.A. Marketing and entrepreneurial success in emerging markets: The nexus. Asia Pac. J. Innov. Entrep. 2019, 13, 168–187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  26. Fernet, C.; Guay, F.; Senécal, C. Adjusting to job demands: The role of work self-determination and job control in predicting burnout. J. Vocat. Behav. 2004, 65, 39–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Foss, L.; Henry, C.; Ahl, H.; Mikalsen, G.H. Women’s entrepreneurship policy research: A 30-year review of the evidence. Small Bus. Econ. 2019, 53, 409–429. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  28. Ganster, D.C. Executive job demands: Suggestions from a stress and decision-making perspective. Acad. Manag. Rev. 2005, 30, 492–502. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  29. Ganster, D.C.; Rosen, C.C. Work stress and employee health: A multidisciplinary review. J. Manag. 2013, 39, 1085–1122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Gawke, J.C.; Gorgievski, M.J.; Bakker, A.B. Employee intrapreneurship and work engagement: A latent change score approach. J. Vocat. Behav. 2017, 100, 88–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Gorgievski, M.J.; Moriano, J.A.; Bakker, A.B. Relating work engagement and workaholism to entrepreneurial performance. J. Manag. Psychol. 2014, 29, 106–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Granziera, H.; Collie, R.; Martin, A. Understanding teacher well-being through job demands-resources theory. In Cultivating Teacher Resilience; Springer: Singapore, 2021; pp. 229–244. [Google Scholar]
  33. Hair, J.F., Jr.; Sarstedt, M.; Hopkins, L.; Kuppelwieser, V.G. Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). Eur. Bus. Rev. 2014, 26, 106–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Hakanen, J.J.; Bakker, A.B.; Schaufeli, W.B. Burnout and work engagement among teachers. J. Sch. Psychol. 2006, 43, 495–513. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Halbesleben, J.R. A meta-analysis of work engagement: Relationships with burnout, demands, resources, and consequences. Work Engagem. Handb. Essent. Theory Res. 2010, 8, 102–117. [Google Scholar]
  36. Harris, J.A.; Saltstone, R.; Fraboni, M. An evaluation of the job stress questionnaire with a sample of entrepreneurs. J. Bus. Psychol. 1999, 13, 447–455. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Harrop, E.; Mann, M.; Semedo, L.; Chao, D.; Selman, L.E.; Byrne, A. What elements of a systems’ approach to bereavement are most effective in times of mass bereavement? A narrative systematic review with lessons for COVID-19. Palliat. Med. 2020, 34, 1165–1181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Hasan, N.; Miah, S.J.; Bao, Y.; Hoque, M.R. Factors affecting post-implementation success of enterprise resource planning systems: A perspective of business process performance. Enterp. Inf. Syst. 2019, 13, 1217–1244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Hassan, M.; Azmat, U.; Sarwar, S.; Adil, I.H.; Gillani, S.H.M. Impact of job satisfaction, job stress and motivation on job performance: A case from private universities of karachi. Kuwait Chapter Arab. J. Bus. Manag. Rev. 2020, 9, 31–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Hatak, I.; Chang, M.; Harms, R.; Wiklund, J. ADHD symptoms, entrepreneurial passion, and entrepreneurial performance. Small Bus. Econ. 2021, 57, 1693–1713. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Henseler, J.; Fassott, G. Testing moderating effects in PLS path models: An illustration of available procedures. In Handbook of Partial Least Squares; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2010; pp. 713–735. [Google Scholar]
  42. Hervé, A.; Schmitt, C.; Baldegger, R. Digitalization and internationalization of micro-, small, and medium-sized enterprises: An overall conceptual process. J. Int. Counc. Small Bus. 2022, 3, 329–336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Huang, H.C. Entrepreneurial resources and speed of entrepreneurial success in an emerging market: The moderating effect of entrepreneurship. Int. Entrep. Manag. J. 2016, 12, 1–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Iftikhar, A.; Islam, M.; Shepherd, S.; Jones, S.; Ellis, I. Is RAS the link between COVID-19 and increased stress in Head and Neck cancer patients? Front. Cell Dev. Biol. 2021, 9, 1925. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Irawanto, D.W.; Novianti, K.R.; Roz, K. Work from home: Measuring satisfaction between work–life balance and work stress during the COVID-19 pandemic in Indonesia. Economies 2021, 9, 96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Iskamto, D. Stress and Its Impact on Employee Performance. Int. J. Soc. Manag. Stud. 2021, 2, 142–148. [Google Scholar]
  47. Iskamto, D.; Ghazali, P.L.; Afthanorhan, A. A conceptual framework for entrepreneur competence and entrepreneur performance: The role of gender. J. Manag. Theory Pract. 2020, 1, 1–4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Iskamto, D.; Ghazali, P.L.; Aftanorhan, A.; Bon, A.T. Effect Contextual Factor Toward Entrepreneurial Intention Among Young Educated. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, 26–28 November 2019. [Google Scholar]
  49. Iskamto, D.; Yapentra, A.; Ansori, P.B.; Jupri, M. Effect of Working Discipline Toward Performance: An Empirical Investigation. KnE Soc. Sci. 2020, 2020, 492–501. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Jamal, M.T.; Anwar, I.; Khan, N.A.; Saleem, I. Work during COVID-19: Assessing the influence of job demands and resources on practical and psychological outcomes for employees. Asia-Pac. J. Bus. Adm. 2021, 13, 293–319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Jansen in de Wal, J.; van den Beemt, A.; Martens, R.L.; den Brok, P.J. The relationship between job demands, job resources and teachers’ professional learning: Is it explained by self-determination theory? Stud. Contin. Educ. 2020, 42, 17–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  52. Juchnowicz, M.; Kinowska, H. Employee well-being and digital work during the COVID-19 pandemic. Information 2021, 12, 293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Kabir, I.; Ibrahim, U.A. Effect of job stress on commitment of female entrepreneurs: Evidence from Abuja, Nigeria. Int. J. Res. Bus. Soc. Sci. 2021, 10, 28–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Klotz, A.C.; Hmieleski, K.M.; Bradley, B.H.; Busenitz, L.W. New venture teams: A review of the literature and roadmap for future research. J. Manag. 2014, 40, 226–255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  55. Kniffin, K.M.; Narayanan, J.; Anseel, F.; Antonakis, J.; Ashford, S.P.; Bakker, A.B.; Choi, V.K. COVID-19 and the workplace: Implications, issues, and insights for future research and action. Am. Psychol. 2021, 76, 63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  56. Kurnia, C.; Widigdo, A.M.N. Effect of work-life balance, job demand, job insecurity on employee performance at PT Jaya Lautan Global with employee well-being as a mediation variable. Eur. J. Bus. Manag. Res. 2021, 6, 147–152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Kwon, K.; Kim, T. An integrative literature review of employee engagement and innovative behavior: Revisiting the JD-R model. Hum. Resour. Manag. Rev. 2020, 30, 100704. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Laguna, M.; Razmus, W.; Żaliński, A. Dynamic relationships between personal resources and work engagement in entrepreneurs. J. Occup. Organ. Psychol. 2017, 90, 248–269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Lerman, M.P. Appraising Opportunities to Better Understand Well-Being and Performance in the Organizational Sciences. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN, USA, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  60. Lerman, M.P.; Munyon, T.P.; Williams, D.W. The (not so) dark side of entrepreneurship: A meta-analysis of the well-being and performance consequences of entrepreneurial stress. Strateg. Entrep. J. 2021, 15, 377–402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Linnenluecke, M.K. Resilience in business and management research: A review of influential publications and a research agenda. Int. J. Manag. Rev. 2017, 19, 4–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Mache, S.; Bernburg, M.; Vitzthum, K.; Groneberg, D.A.; Klapp, B.F.; Danzer, G. Managing work–family conflict in the medical profession: Working conditions and individual resources as related factors. BMJ Open 2015, 5, e006871. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  63. Madian, A.; Abdelaziz, M.; Ahmed, H. Level of stress and coping strategies among nursing students at Damanhour University, Egypt. Am. J. Nurs. Res. 2019, 7, 684–696. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Mäkiniemi, J.-P.; Ahola, S.; Nuutinen, S.; Laitinen, J.; Oksanen, T. Factors associated with job burnout, job satisfaction and work engagement among entrepreneurs. A systematic qualitative review. J. Small Bus. Entrep. 2021, 33, 219–247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Maroney, N.; Williams, B.J.; Thomas, A.; Skues, J.; Moulding, R. A stress-coping model of problem online video game use. Int. J. Mental Health Addict. 2019, 17, 845–858. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Mazzetti, G.; Robledo, E.; Vignoli, M.; Topa, G.; Guglielmi, D.; Schaufeli, W.B. Work engagement: A meta-analysis using the job demands-resources model. Psychol. Rep. 2021, in press. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  67. Min, P.G. Problems of Korean immigrant entrepreneurs. Int. Migr. Rev. 1990, 24, 436–455. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Mohr, G.; Müller, A.; Rigotti, T.; Aycan, Z.; Tschan, F. The assessment of psychological strain in work contexts: Concerning the structural equivalency of nine language adaptations of the irritation scale. Eur. J. Psychol. Assess. 2006, 22, 198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  69. Muda, I.; Rafiki, A.; Harahap, M.R. Factors influencing employees’ performance: A study on the Islamic Banks in Indonesia. Int. J. Bus. Soc. Sci. 2014, 5, 2. [Google Scholar]
  70. Ng, S.; Lo, H.H.; Yeung, A.; Young, D.; Fung, M.H.; Wang, A.M. Study protocol of brief daily body-mind-spirit practice for sustainable emotional capacity and work engagement for community mental health workers: A multi-site randomized controlled trial. Front. Psychol. 2020, 11, 1482. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Novrandy, R.A.; Tanuwijaya, J. Pengaruh Work-Family Conflict dan Work Engagement terhadap Task Performance dan Turnover Intention dengan mediasi Supervisor Support. JMBI UNSRAT 2022, 9, 1. [Google Scholar]
  72. Osei, A.M.; Opoku, A.C.; Seth, A.; Justice, A.O. Redefining service quality dimensions in electronic banking from extant theories. Br. J. Econ. Manag. Trade 2016, 11, 1–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Park, Y.J.; Choe, Y.J.; Park, O.; Park, S.Y.; Kim, Y.-M.; Kim, J.; Kim, S.S. Contact tracing during coronavirus disease outbreak, South Korea, 2020. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 2020, 26, 2465. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Pourteimour, S.; Yaghmaei, S.; Babamohamadi, H. The relationship between mental workload and job performance among Iranian nurses providing care to COVID-19 patients: A cross-sectional study. J. Nurs. Manag. 2021, 29, 1723–1732. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Rauch, A.; Fink, M.; Hatak, I. Stress processes: An essential ingredient in the entrepreneurial process. Acad. Manag. Perspect. 2018, 32, 340–357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  76. Ricciardelli, R.; Carleton, R.N. A qualitative application of the Job Demand-Control-Support (JDCS) to contextualize the occupational stress correctional workers experience. J. Crime Justice 2022, 45, 135–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Salas-Vallina, A.; Alegre, J.; López-Cabrales, Á. The challenge of increasing employees’ well-being and performance: How human resource management practices and engaging leadership work together toward reaching this goal. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2021, 60, 333–347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Sanchez-Ruiz, M.-J.; El Khoury, J. A model of academic, personality, and emotion-related predictors of university academic performance. Front. Psychol. 2019, 10, 2435. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  79. Sandberg, J.; Rouleau, L.; Langley, A.; Tsoukas, H. Skillful Performance: Enacting Capabilities, Knowledge, Competence, and Expertise in Organizations; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2017; Volume 7. [Google Scholar]
  80. Sariwulan, T.; Suparno, S.; Disman, D.; Ahman, E.; Suwatno, S. Entrepreneurial performance: The role of literacy and skills. J. Asian Financ. Econ. Bus. 2020, 7, 269–280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Schaufeli, W.B. Applying the job demands-resources model. Organ. Dyn. 2017, 2, 120–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Schaufeli, W.B.; Bakker, A.B. Job demands, job resources, and their relationship with burnout and engagement: A multi-sample study. J. Organ. Behav. Int. J. Ind. Occup. Organ. Psychol. Behav. 2004, 25, 293–315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  83. Schaufeli, W.B.; Taris, T.W. A critical review of the job demands-resources model: Implications for improving work and health. In Bridging Occupational, Organizational and Public Health; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2013; pp. 43–68. [Google Scholar]
  84. Schaufeli, W.B.; Bakker, A.B.; Salanova, M. The measurement of work engagement with a short questionnaire: A cross-national study. Educ. Psychol. Meas. 2006, 66, 701–716. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Schaufeli, W.; Salanova, M. Work engagement. Manag. Soc. Eth. Issues Organ. 2007, 135, 177. [Google Scholar]
  86. Shepherd, D.A.; Williams, T.A.; Patzelt, H. Thinking about entrepreneurial decision making: Review and research agenda. J. Manag. 2015, 41, 11–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Shin, J.C.; Jung, J. Academics job satisfaction and job stress across countries in the changing academic environments. High. Educ. 2014, 67, 603–620. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  88. Sigala, M.; Kyriakidou, O. Creativity and innovation in the service sector. Serv. Ind. J. 2015, 35, 297–302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Soni, K.; Rastogi, R. Psychological capital augments employee engagement. Psychol. Stud. 2019, 64, 465–473. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Stephan, U. Entrepreneurs’ mental health and well-being: A review and research agenda. Acad. Manag. Perspect. 2018, 32, 290–322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  91. Sule, R.; Thadasare, H.; Sonavane, S.; Shah, N.; De Sousa, A. A study of Job satisfaction, job stress and quality of life in auxiliary health care workers of a public tertiary general hospital. J. PsychoSoc. Rehabil. Mental Health 2017, 4, 23–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Syed, S.; Ashwick, R.; Schlosser, M.; Jones, R.; Rowe, S.; Billings, J. Global prevalence and risk factors for mental health problems in police personnel: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Occup. Environ. Med. 2020, 77, 737–747. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  93. Tetteh, S.; Dei Mensah, R.; Opata, C.N.; Mensah, C.N. Service employees’ workplace fun and turnover intention: The influence of psychological capital and work engagement. Manag. Res. Rev. 2021, 45, 363–380. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Ucbasaran, D.; Shepherd, D.A.; Lockett, A.; Lyon, S.J. Life after business failure: The process and consequences of business failure for entrepreneurs. J. Manag. 2013, 39, 163–202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Van De Voorde, K.; Veld, M.; Van Veldhoven, M. Connecting empowerment-focused HRM and labour productivity to work engagement: The mediating role of job demands and resources. Hum. Resour. Manag. J. 2016, 26, 192–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Van den Heuvel, M.; Demerouti, E.; Bakker, A.B.; Hetland, J.; Schaufeli, W.B. How do employees adapt to organizational change? The role of meaning-making and work engagement. Span. J. Psychol. 2020, 23, e56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Van Iddekinge, C.H.; Aguinis, H.; Mackey, J.D.; DeOrtentiis, P.S. A meta-analysis of the interactive, additive, and relative effects of cognitive ability and motivation on performance. J. Manag. 2018, 44, 249–279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  98. Van Praag, C.M.; Versloot, P.H. What is the value of entrepreneurship? A review of recent research. Small Bus. Econ. 2007, 29, 351–382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  99. Van Veldhoven, M.; Van den Broeck, A.; Daniels, K.; Bakker, A.B.; Tavares, S.M.; Ogbonnaya, C. Challenging the universality of job resources: Why, when, and for whom are they beneficial? Appl. Psychol. 2020, 69, 5–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Wach, D.; Stephan, U.; Gorgievski, M.; Wegge, J. Entrepreneurs’ achieved success: Developing a multi-faceted measure. Int. Entrep. Manag. J. 2020, 16, 1123–1151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  101. Wach, D.; Stephan, U.; Weinberger, E.; Wegge, J. Entrepreneurs’ stressors and well-being: A recovery perspective and diary study. J. Bus. Ventur. 2021, 36, 106016. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Zhou, T.; Xu, C.; Wang, C.; Sha, S.; Wang, Z.; Zhou, Y.; Tian, T. Burnout and well-being of healthcare workers in the post-pandemic period of COVID-19: A perspective from the job demands-resources model. BMC Health Serv. Res. 2022, 22, 284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Figure 1. Theoretical framework.
Figure 1. Theoretical framework.
Sustainability 15 04454 g001
Figure 2. Structural model.
Figure 2. Structural model.
Sustainability 15 04454 g002
Table 1. Reliability, validity, loadings, VIF (variance inflation factor).
Table 1. Reliability, validity, loadings, VIF (variance inflation factor).
ConstructsItems LoadingsCronbach’s AlphaComposite ReliabilityAverage Variance Extracted (AVE)VIF
Entrepreneur SuccessES1 0.860.8080.8750.6362.20
ES2 0.77 1.73
ES3 0.80 1.89
ES4 0.76 1.65
Entrepreneurial ResourcesHuman Capital 0.880.8400.9040.7592.22
Network Ties 0.92 2.74
Owner Funds 0.81 1.73
Entrepreneurial Job DemandResponsibility 0.850.8630.9160.7851.96
Time 0.94 2.21
Uncertainty and Risk 0.87 2.43
Work EngagementWE1 0.710.8960.9160.5502.89
WE2 0.77 2.25
WE3 0.74 2.02
WE4 0.52 1.42
WE5 0.77 2.60
WE6 0.84 2.88
WE7 0.81 2.05
WE8 0.76 2.27
WE9 0.71 1.85
Work-Related StrainWRS1 0.810.9120.9300.6552.87
WRS2 0.81 2.46
WRS3 0.77 2.00
WRS4 0.79 2.15
WRS6 0.81 2.65
WRS7 0.83 2.86
WRS8 0.84 2.88
Table 2. Discriminant validity (HTMT).
Table 2. Discriminant validity (HTMT).
ESEJDERWEWRS
Entrepreneur Success
Entrepreneurial Job Demand0.812
Entrepreneurial Resources0.7540.651
Work Engagement0.7430.5520.744
Work-Related Strain0.8320.5940.7300.693
Table 3. Effect size (F-square).
Table 3. Effect size (F-square).
ESEJDERWEWRS
Entrepreneur Success
Entrepreneurial Job Demand0.043 1.228
Entrepreneurial Resources0.272 6.976
Work Engagement0.034
Work-Related Strain0.303
Table 4. R Square.
Table 4. R Square.
R SquareR Square Adjusted
Entrepreneur Success0.8330.831
Work Engagement0.8750.874
Work-Related Strain0.5510.550
Table 5. Hypotheses testing (direct)—high order (two-stage approach).
Table 5. Hypotheses testing (direct)—high order (two-stage approach).
Hypotheses Testing (High Order)BetaSDT Statsp ValuesDecision
Entrepreneurial Job Demand -> Entrepreneur Success−0.2190.1022.1510.016Significant
Entrepreneurial Job Demand -> Work-Related Strain0.7420.03521.240.000Significant
Work-Related strain -> Entrepreneur Success−0.3640.0487.6220.000Significant
Entrepreneurial Resources -> Entrepreneur Success0.6490.1304.9870.000Significant
Entrepreneurial Resources -> Work Engagement0.9350.007141.80.000Significant
Work engagement -> Entrepreneur Success0.2640.1571.6830.046Significant
Table 6. Mediation hypotheses.
Table 6. Mediation hypotheses.
Mediation HypothesesBetaSDT Statsp Values5.00%95.00%Decision
Entrepreneurial Resources -> Work engagement -> Entrepreneur Success0.2470.1471.6790.0470.4820.004Mediation
Entrepreneurial Job Demand -> Work-Related strain -> Entrepreneur Success−0.2700.0338.3070.000−0.214−0.32Mediation
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

Wang, Q.; Khan, S.N.; Sajjad, M.; Sarki, I.H.; Yaseen, M.N. Mediating Role of Entrepreneurial Work-Related Strains and Work Engagement among Job Demand–Resource Model and Success. Sustainability 2023, 15, 4454. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15054454

AMA Style

Wang Q, Khan SN, Sajjad M, Sarki IH, Yaseen MN. Mediating Role of Entrepreneurial Work-Related Strains and Work Engagement among Job Demand–Resource Model and Success. Sustainability. 2023; 15(5):4454. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15054454

Chicago/Turabian Style

Wang, Qifan, Sajjad Nawaz Khan, Muhammad Sajjad, Irshad Hussain Sarki, and Muhammad Noman Yaseen. 2023. "Mediating Role of Entrepreneurial Work-Related Strains and Work Engagement among Job Demand–Resource Model and Success" Sustainability 15, no. 5: 4454. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15054454

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