Promoting the Sustainable Development of Enterprises: Unraveling the Dual Impact of Informal Communication on Employee Affect and Problem-Solving Capabilities

Abstract

In the contemporary business environment, fostering sustainable development within enterprises necessitates a nuanced understanding of the multifaceted impacts of workplace dynamics, particularly informal communication. This study delves into how informal communication, a pervasive yet underexplored aspect, influences employee emotional well-being and problem-solving capabilities—critical components for sustainable organizational growth. Leveraging theories of interaction rituals and conservation of resources, we employed a three-wave survey and structural equation modeling to dissect the complex relationships between informal communication, work-related rumination, and their subsequent effects on employee performance outcomes. Our findings illuminate that informal communication serves a dual role: it enhances interpersonal harmony, thereby reducing affective rumination, but it also detracts from work-related flow, adversely affecting problem-solving pondering. Furthermore, the ability to focus attention emerged as a significant moderating factor, amplifying or mitigating the effects of informal communication on work-related outcomes. The study contributes to the extant literature by highlighting the nuanced, double-edged-sword nature of informal communication within the context of promoting employee well-being. It underscores the necessity for managers to strategically balance fostering a supportive communication climate against maintaining optimal productivity. Our research proposes actionable strategies for leveraging informal communication as a tool for enhancing work-place well-being and sustaining future organizational growth, offering a new perspective on managing informal interactions to bolster both individual and organizational resilience.

1. Introduction

Communication is one of the top ten critical success factors for achieving corporate innovation and sustainable development [1]. Managers value communication in the workplace because communication is an instrumental factor in the success and continuous improvement of the quality management system [2]. In general, organizations employ various types of communication: formal communication to streamline work processes and discuss strategic directions, and informal communication to foster camaraderie among members and alleviate work-related stress. However, traditional managers often neglect informal communication, and misperceive informal communication as mechanized, insufficient, and meaningless communication [3]. In reality, informal communication accounts for one-third of adult communication and thus is a very important form of communication [4]. Furthermore, this form of communication occurs throughout the whole workplace [5]. With the broadening perspectives of modern managers, management systems increasingly emphasize the potential impact of informal communication on the sustainable development of enterprises. This focus encompasses understanding the dynamics of workplace dynamics within organizations and how informal communication shapes employee emotional well-being and problem-solving capabilities, thereby promoting the long-term stability and continuous development of organizations.

One of the reasons informal communication can drive sustainable development in enterprises is because it plays a crucial role within the organizations [6]. At its most basic, informal communication conveys simple linguistic meaning. Language conveys three main types of meaning: ideological language focuses on the transmission of content and the expression of experience; interpersonal language embodies the social relationships between communicating parties; and textual language directly conveys information through the content and structure of conversations [7]. Not only does informal communication enable the transfer of linguistic meaning; it also serves as a communication condiment for ideology and messaging, helping employees move fluidly into and out of a conversation. In addition, informal communication is instrumental to an employee’s realization of interaction rituals [5]. Informal communication can consist of simple, ritualistic questions, such as “Where did you go on vacation?”, “The shirt you’re wearing today really suits you”, or “It might rain today”. These elements of informal communication are not meaningless; they serve as vital interaction rituals that assist organizational members in establishing and maintaining interpersonal relationships, while also symbolizing a nurturing climate in the workplace. Moreover, informal communication optimizes formal communication and shapes employees’ perceptions of work quality and competence. For example, employees attending meetings can engage in social interactions and clarify group identities through informal communication before the start of the formal meeting. The information, emotions, and social contacts that are constructed during informal communication affect the process and outcome of the formal meeting and shape employees’ perceptions of the efficiency of the meeting [8]. Even in transaction-oriented work environments, informal communication retains its importance; without it, employees engaged solely in task communication may appear unable to effectively manage the situation. Informal communication can effectively facilitate relational communication, which is important for optimizing workplace cohesion [3]. Additionally, in negotiations, informal communication can contribute to positive negotiation relationships [9].

Given the significant impacts of informal communication, it is necessary and critical to understand how employee informal communication affects perceptions and states at work. However, research into informal communication is still in its initial stage. Research into informal communication has yet to receive the attention it deserves, with a limited number of relevant studies and insufficient depth of research [3]. Using motivation as an overall lens and integrating interaction ritual theory (IRT) and the conservation of resources (COR) theory, this study aims to advance the field of informal communication by examining how informal communication has a significant impact on employee outcomes. Since IRT posits that gaining emotional energy in the work group motivates employees to voluntarily participate in interaction rituals [10], one motivation for employees to participate in informal communication is to build a positive emotional climate. It is now widely agreed that work-related rumination includes both affective rumination and problem-solving pondering [11,12]. Affective rumination refers to intrusive, pervasive, recurrent, and negative emotional thoughts about work [13]. Thus, we expect that informal communication decreases affective rumination through interpersonal harmony. Moreover, a central idea of the COR theory is motivation [14]. Based on the COR theory, when employees consume more resources in informal communication, they are motivated to devote less energy and time to their job. Problem-solving pondering refers to continued psychological analysis of problems at work with the aim of solving problems or improving the content of previous work [13]. Therefore, we expect that informal communication decreases problem-solving pondering via work-related flow. Furthermore, the ability to focus attention can affect employees’ motivations based on IRT and the COR theory, we choose it as the moderator to clarify when informal communication is more likely to influence employee outcomes. We examined our hypotheses through one three-wave survey and used structural equation modeling to test the frame. Data were analyzed by using the software SPSS27.0 and Mplus8.3.

This research offers crucial theoretical contributions. First, the current research is among the first to investigate the relationship between employee informal communication and work-related rumination, thereby expanding the scope of the outcomes of employee informal communication. Second, the present research enriches the research on the double-edged-sword effects of informal communication. As past studies have mainly revealed the positive consequences of informal communication, researchers know little about the potential negative consequences of informal communication. However, informal communication may be a negative factor at work because engaging in informal communication may interrupt employees’ work [5]. Hence, an urgent need exists to advance the discussion of what negative implications informal communication may have on employees. This research adds to the literature on both informal communication’s positive consequences (i.e., increasing interpersonal harmony and decreasing affective rumination in this case) and informal communication’s negative consequences (i.e., decreasing work-related flow and problem-solving pondering in this case). Third, this research expands the discussion on the field of informal communication from the perspective of motivation by integrating IRT and the COR theory. Specifically, we investigate the effects of informal communication through the motivation for building rapport based on IRT and the motivation for retaining and protecting resources based on the COR theory. Fourth, the current research advances the literature on the antecedents of work-related rumination by examining informal communication as the antecedent and distinguishing the antecedents of problem-solving pondering and affective rumination. It also discusses the moderating role of the ability of focus attention on the subsequent effects of informal communication. Fifth, this study can help organizations understand the double-edged-sword effect of informal communication, thereby advancing organizational sustainable development strategies. This research also assists organizations in knowing the influencing factors of work-related rumination and then taking effective measures to enhance employees’ problem-solving pondering and to decrease employees’ affective rumination, which can benefit employees’ health and well-being and organizations’ sustainability and development.

Employee work-related rumination can strongly influence health and well-being, such as positive and negative affect, sleep quality, fatigue, and vigor, which can further affect corporate sustainability [15,16,17]. An extensive amount of research has demonstrated that affective rumination can cause adverse results, such as negative affect, burnout, and fatigue [15,17,18]. However, problem-solving pondering can lead to positive outcomes, such as work engagement, thriving, satisfaction with life, and flourishing [18]. In terms of practical contributions, this study regulates work-related rumination through the management of informal communication, which provides effective suggestions for employee management as well as enterprise sustainability development.

2. Theory and Hypotheses

2.1. Interaction Ritual Theory and the Conservation of Resources Theory

IRT is a theory of ritualized, personal interaction that refers to the voluntary performance of appropriately patterned behaviors to symbolically influence or participate in life [19]. Rituals have been a focal thesis of traditional sociological and anthropological studies. Scholars of religious rituals have concluded that rituals are modes of behavior that arise in the context of assembled groups, and that they are bound to stimulate, maintain, or reshape certain psychological states in the group [20]. Subsequent studies have further extended the idea by formalizing the concept of “interactive rituals”, which secularizes and universalizes rituals to refer to a symbolic way of presenting an object of special value [21]. Interactive rituals assume that rituals arise from situational co-presence, where one person’s actions have an impact on others in the scene, which in turn affects the overall interactive process [21].

Interaction rituals assign deeper meaning to the relationships between group members, much like religious rituals lead believers to have emotional exchanges. IRT analyzes how social interactions allow people to evolve from shared experiences to the creation of emotional experiences. Individuals who participate in an interaction ritual develop a sense of identity within the group, which in turn motivates them to participate actively in the next interaction ritual, ultimately creating a virtuous chain of interaction rituals [10]. Informal communication fits into three characteristics of interaction rituals. First, employees who engage in informal communication are in the same scenario and influence each other. Second, employees partaking in informal communication focus on each other by discussing everyday events such as weather and sports. Finally, individuals have an innate intention to fit into the group [22]. Employees are under pressure to comply with organizational norms, which fosters their inclination to assimilate into the organization. To fit in, employees adhere to the organization’s social etiquette through occasional participation in informal communication. Therefore, from the IRT perspective, informal communication among employees is an interactive ritual in the workplace that requires emotional input and output. Employees voluntarily participate in informal communication, which affects their subsequent perceptions and behaviors [23].

The basis of the COR theory is motivation, specifically, the motivation to prevent threats to, loss of, or the inaccessibility of key resources, which stems from the human quest to survive and evolve [14]. The COR theory thus assumes that individuals endeavor to acquire, retain, and protect resources that represent their core values. Employees are therefore motivated to make sure that they have enough time to work and that they are not interrupted when they experience work-related flow. However, engaging in informal communication in the workplace consumes employee resources such as occupying work time, engaging in additional task switching, and decreasing work-related flow experiences. Therefore, the COR theory can be referred to interpret the motivation and state of employees’ participation in the informal communication process.

2.2. Informal Communication and Interpersonal Harmony

Interpersonal harmony, closely related to employee emotions, refers to the absence of negative emotions like anxiety or anger in daily interactions among employees [24]. Previous discussions on informal communication suggest that it helps employees relax and foster social connections. Coupland claims that informal communication contributes to employee social connectedness [3]. Other research has shown that informal communication is a skillful way to mask unpleasant issues in work interactions [25]. Thus, from the perspective of promoting positive interpersonal interactions, informal communication is a pivotal element of workplace communication. Research has confirmed the significant role of informal communication in fostering interpersonal interactions among employees. For example, when employees engage in casual conversations, the primary focus of these interactions is actually the establishment and maintenance of interpersonal relationships. Therefore, the willingness to establish a friendly atmosphere and the social function that informal communication conveys are more important than the superficial information it provides. Informal communication among employees brings laughter to the normally serious workplace, which creates a pleasant workplace climate. Particularly for multicultural companies, informal communication establishes a positive social tone among employees with diverse cultural beliefs, which helps employees exchange information, understand each other’s cultural background, and establish amicable terms. Leaders often employ informal communication, such as discussing breaking news, fitness tips, or sporting events, as a “fusion agent” to guide their workgroups in fostering harmonious interpersonal relationships.

Informal communication serves as a transitional tool, commonly used to establish emotional connection before engaging in discussions on significant topics [26]. For example, employees usually gather in the meeting room before the meeting starts. While waiting for all attendees to arrive, they briefly greet everyone to show their positive working attitude and as a friendly gesture. Before official work begins, some leaders will politely engage in informal communication, such as asking subordinates about their holidays, or discuss other issues not related to work. This demonstrates their cordiality and friendliness, narrows the psychological distance in group, and contributes to the promotion of interpersonal harmony. In addition, informal communication is often used to suspend, cover up, and transition into intense conversations. For example, when an employee makes a suggestion that the leader does not agree with, informal communication becomes a means of implicitly ignoring the other person and transitioning or ending the unpleasant conversation [25]. Hence, informal communication avoids the coldness and remoteness that result from talking only about work. It can also effectively reduce communication conflicts and promote interpersonal harmony. This is expressed it the following hypothesis:

H1. 

Informal communication correlates positively with interpersonal harmony.

2.3. Informal Communication and Affective Rumination

From the perspective of motivation, interaction rituals determine an individual’s emotional, symbolic, and value-oriented behavior, which contributes to consolidating the emotional exchange in the group. This is one of the most important motivations for individuals to perform interaction rituals [27]. IRT proposes that interaction rituals stimulate individuals’ emotional energy and that individuals allocate their time rationally to maximize emotional energy. As a result, informal communication plays a role in shaping individual cognition and behavior as an important interactive ritual in the workplace. Furthermore, individuals with high emotional energy tend to be the top performers in interactions, receiving more attention from others and share emotions with them. Under certain conditions, the top performers in social interactions may even develop into charismatic group leaders. Therefore, employees who perform well in informal communication gain higher emotional energy, and employees with high emotional energy tend to remain pleasant during and after work and are less likely to experience affective rumination after work.

Human beings are social creatures and, although people have different personalities, they all share an innate tendency to join groups. The social environment and groups in which they live shape their perceptions and behaviors [22]. Excellent employees who can gain group identification are often expected to establish rapport with other members of the group, which in turn stimulates the social motivation of these employees. Therefore, an essential motivation for employees to participate in informal communication is to integrate into a group, establish emotional ties, and optimize the emotional climate of the work environment. Employees who actively participate in informal communication complete the interaction rituals of the organization, enhance their sense of organizational identity, and establish cordial social relationships with other members of the organization, thus lowering the likelihood of affective rumination. This is expressed in the following hypothesis:

H2. 

Informal communication correlates negatively with affective rumination.

2.4. Interpersonal Harmony and Affective Rumination

Rumination is a type of response by individuals to cope with stress [28]. Affective rumination predicts employee exhaustion and negative emotions and leads to employee embitterment, which in turn develops into a chronic and unhealthy mental state that is difficult to alleviate [15,29,30]. Affective rumination profoundly affects employees’ sustainable outcomes, which makes the question of how to alleviate affective rumination an important topic of employee management.

Work stress has been posited as an important source of affective rumination for employees. For instance, unfinished tasks induce a state of affective rumination in employees, impairing their sleep [31]. Interpersonal conflict is also a common hindrance stressor. Research suggests that challenge stressors inhibit employee affective rumination, whereas hindrance stressors exacerbate it [12]. This is because hindrance stressors activate the employee’s information-processing mechanisms related to emotions, leading to repetitive intrusive and diffuse negative emotional feedback [15]. Therefore, interpersonal conflict can stress employees and trigger affective rumination. In contrast, interpersonal harmony may reduce employees’ hindrance stressors, thereby minimizing work-related negative emotions and alleviating affective rumination among employees. A study of university employees shows that the stability of social relationships and the collegial climate of the work group both reduce affective rumination, whereas work stress exacerbates affective rumination [32]. Therefore, interpersonal harmony is expected to optimize employee interaction by creating a friendly and mutually supportive work atmosphere.

To summarize, employee participation in informal communication implements important interactive rituals, enhances emotional energy, produces interpersonal resources, promotes a positive emotional climate among employees, and facilitates interpersonal harmony. Subsequently, it provides psychological resource support and creates experience-expression pathways that inhibit affective rumination. This is expressed in the following hypotheses:

H3. 

Interpersonal harmony correlates negatively with affective rumination.

H4. 

Interpersonal harmony mediates the correlation between informal communication and affective rumination.

2.5. Informal Communication and Work-Related Flow

Work-related flow refers to the experience of being fully focused on work—a state of consciousness that challenges an individual’s potential [33]. Employees in a state of work-related flow maximize concentration and focus entirely on the task at hand, feeling a sense of fluidity and control in their work [34]. However, from a work-fluency and time-management perspective, informal communication is a disruptive intrusion that interrupts employees’ workflow with continually interjecting pauses [35].

Whether employees experience work-related flow depends on the employee’s work status and task characteristics [36]. Both thoughts and states are interrupted when an employee’s attention is shifted from work to informal communication, which is not conducive to maintaining the employee’s work-related flow. For example, during a nine-ball game, a billiard player who experiences negative perceptions of feedback will be disturbed by poor performance, making it more difficult for them to perform at their true level and to experience the flow state [37]. Individuals place more attention on the task once they are in the flow, but the flow can be disrupted if the individual focuses on activities not related to the work task [38]. Work-related flow implies that employees ignore the current work environment and focus on advancing their work, whereas informal communication divides employee attention between interpersonal interactions and non-work topics, disrupting the work-related flow.

Additionally, work resources foster the employee flow experience [39], whereas employee participation in informal communication and their return-to-work status after informal communication consumes task-switching resources. In particular, when an employee is working, the intervention of informal communication decreases the work status by forcing employees to switch from solving work tasks to thinking about interpersonal interaction. Such cognitive transfer and task switching are costly because they increase the reaction time when employees devote their minds to work again, thereby increasing the chances of mistakes [40]. Informal communication in work scenarios can interrupt the work mindset, which is a negative experience in which employees must tend to external secondary tasks while performing their primary work tasks. Such interruptions can lead to discontinuity and low fluency in task completion [41]. Individuals lose task fluency when multitasking and employees are negatively impacted by task switching, making it difficult to achieve the state of work-related flow [34]. In an empirical study, subjects were required to partake in informal communication with their supervisors about non-work-related topics while composing an e-mail, the results indicate that employees compensate for work progress by completing e-mails faster in this case, although they used fewer words and perceived increased time pressure, exhaustion, frustration, and perceptions of effort [42]. Based on the COR theory, engaging in informal communication in the workplace consumes employee resources by imposing additional task switching. Moreover, thoughts and states are interrupted, making it difficult to experience work-related flow. This reasoning leads to the following hypothesis:

H5. 

Informal communication correlates negatively with work-related flow.

2.6. Informal Communication and Problem-Solving Pondering

Problem-solving pondering is the psychological analysis that aims to figure out work problems or improve work content [13]. So, problem-solving pondering consumes employees’ resources from the perspective of the COR theory. However, the total resources available to employees during work hours are limited, and energy allocated to informal communication is energy not allocated to formal work. Thus, informal communication is expected to have a negative impact on problem-solving pondering.

When informal communication occurs, employees concentrating on their work have their rhythm disrupted by the subsequent social activities, and their sense of time and attention is perturbed, negatively impacting their working conditions [35]. Once disturbed, it is difficult for employees to regain full concentration on their work. In this situation, employees tend to compromise on either their work time or quality and reduce their thinking process to catch up with the original time schedule and work plan [42]. These abandoned thinking processes include both preparatory thinking before work, alternative thinking during work, and reduced problem-solving pondering after work due to lower attention and commitment to the work task. Moreover, work interruptions affect employees not only at the present moment but continuously. For example, if a worker experiences a machine breakdown that results in a work interruption, the negative impact of this interruption on productivity continues the next day [43]. Similarly, the thought-disrupting effect of informal communication continues until the end of the workday [5]. As a result, informal communication interrupts employees’ work thinking, interferes with work progress, hinders or delays the progress of work tasks, makes employees with limited resources to reduce ruminations related to work content, and diverts energy from problem-solving pondering. Thus, informal communication may have a detrimental effect on problem-solving pondering, which gives the following hypothesis:

H6. 

Informal communication correlates negatively with problem-solving pondering.

2.7. Work-Related Flow and Problem-Solving Pondering

Work-related flow is a positive, active, and engaged working state. Compared with a loose working state, work-related flow is equivalent to injecting energy into one’s “resource storage box”, and work-related flow is often accompanied by positive emotions, high work efficiency, and high output. Flow experience has three dimensions: absorption, enjoyment, and intrinsic motivation. Absorption refers to the total commitment and concentration in the event, enjoyment refers to the positive state of individual cognitive and emotional experience, and intrinsic motivation refers to the state in which individuals pursue and accomplish an activity due to internal motivation rather than external motivation [44]. Flow experience implies a higher level of subjective well-being because flow itself is a positive emotional experience [45]. This means that the positive state of work-related flow for employees is an important work resource that is expected to enhance employee problem-solving pondering.

There are two possible explanations for the hypothesis that the flow experience enhances employee problem-solving pondering. On the one hand, it can be explained by the broaden-and-build theory, in which the positive emotions accompanying flow broaden the individual’s momentary thought-action repertories, creating positive conditions for constructing physical, mental, and social resources. Additionally, employees who experience flow enable them to work better [46]. These positive conditions motivate employees to be more engaged in their work and actively engage in problem-solving pondering. On the other hand, research shows that work-related flow facilitates organizational commitment [47]. Employees with a high degree of organizational commitment usually have a sense of responsibility and belonging to the organization, are more attentive in completing their work, and are more likely to expect continuous improvement in their future work. This makes them more likely to reflect on their work results after work is completed or even to engage in problem-solving pondering during their non-working time. Therefore, work-related flow can increase an employee’s propensity for problem-solving pondering.

Informal communication undoubtedly consumes a portion of employees’ energy. When the same activity is performed with less energy, employees tend to complete the task quickly but with lower quality because they think for shorter periods and therefore at a shallower depth [42]. Yet shallow thinking processes and perfunctory motivation for completion imply that employees do not think deeply, which makes it more difficult to stimulate subsequent problem-solving pondering. This reasoning leads to the following two hypotheses:

H7. 

Work-related flow correlates positively with problem-solving pondering.

H8. 

Work-related flow mediates the correlation between informal communication and problem-solving pondering.

2.8. Ability to Focus Attention

The ability to focus attention refers to an individual’s ability to focus attention and cognitive resources on value-creating activities or tasks rather than on the use of power by others in the organization [48]. This ability involves dimensions such as the amount and intensity of an individual’s cognitive resources [48,49,50]. According to IRT, interaction rituals are significantly affected by an individual’s attention and work better when the individual receives more attention from others or more shared emotions [27]. When participating in interaction rituals, gaining attention from others enhances the production of shared emotions, which in turn allows interacting members to devote more attention to the group, strengthening bonds between group members and producing more emotional energy and collective symbols, both of which affect physiological feedback, cognition, and the behavioral conduct of interacting members. Based on IRT, building rapport within the workplace is one crucial motivation for employees to engage in informal communication. In this situation, employees tend to regard establishing harmonious relationships as one value-creating task and then pay attention to this task. Thus, employees with a stronger ability to focus attention are more likely to experience interpersonal harmony due to informal communication, because they are inclined to pay more attention to how to establish rapport. In contrast, employees with a weaker ability to focus attention are less likely to improve interpersonal harmony because of informal communication, as they are inclined to not care about how to build rapport.

Furthermore, Han et al. emphasizes the allocation of attention in their definition of ability to focus attention in office politics, specifically as concerns employees who do not focus on the distribution of power in the organization [48]. This is an important guarantee to promote so that informal communication exerts a positive influence on interpersonal harmony. When employees focus on the distribution of power in the organization, they sense strong workplace political pressure, in which case informal communication may be given stronger connotations by employees beyond casual chatting and daily interpersonal interactions. For example, informal communication may become a way of purposefully flattering the leader or a means to gang up on a colleague. Such workplace politics may be detrimental to a cooperative workplace climate and to harmonious interpersonal relationships in organizations. Therefore, employees with a stronger ability to focus attention could achieve a better state of interpersonal harmony. This is expressed it the following hypothesis:

H9. 

The relationship between informal communication and interpersonal harmony is moderated by the ability to focus attention, that is, the positive effects of informal communication are stronger for employees with a stronger ability to focus attention.

Individuals are often distracted by irrelevant events that interfere with their ability to concentrate on completing a task, which often results in frustration and problems with attention, decreasing the quality of life, interfering with normal work and study, and even causing safety accidents [51]. However, the ability to focus attention varies from employee to employee. Employees who excel at focusing on their work task block out irrelevant and distracting factors [52]. When employees cannot focus on their work tasks, their reaction time is lengthened, the likelihood increases of making mistakes on the job, and the mind wanders [53]. This scenario also applies to employees who engage in informal communication during work. Employees distracted by informal communication focus less on the task at hand, making it difficult for them to experience work-related flow. Therefore, employees with a strong ability to focus attention are less likely to experience negative interference from informal communication and can better balance work and interpersonal interactions than other employees. Conversely, employees with a low ability to focus attention are more negatively distracted by informal communication, resulting in these employees being unable to focus on their work tasks and having longer reaction times, increasing the likelihood of making mistakes on the job and wandering thoughts [54].

In addition, experiments reveal that when employees have a strong ability to focus attention, the benefit on working memory is more pronounced [54]. This also means that employees with a strong ability to focus attention are more adept at reallocating attention and recalling the work content, thus better mitigating the negative disruptions to work-related flow caused by informal communication. This is expressed it the following hypothesis:

H10. 

The relationship between informal communication and work-related flow is moderated by the ability to focus attention such that the negative effects of informal communication are weaker for employees who are better able to focus attention on their work tasks.

3. Materials and Methods

3.1. Participants and Procedure

We sampled the employees using the Questionnaire Star platform, a widely used questionnaire collection platform, and employed the snowball sampling method to invite subjects. Participation was voluntary and anonymous, and all procedures satisfied the ethical standards of the institutional and national research committees. We used a cross-lagged design to minimize the potential common method variance. Data were collected at three time points and each subject was expected to complete the survey three times, with a two-week interval between each time point. Informal communication, ability to focus attention, work stress (control variable), and demographic variables were measured at Time 1; work-related flow and interpersonal harmony at Time 2; and problem-solving pondering and affective rumination at Time 3. A total of 290 sets of data were eventually obtained. Specifically, we distributed questionnaires to 369 participants at Time 1, and a total of 345 valid questionnaires were collected; at Time 2, there were 307 valid questions; at Time 3, 290 valid questionnaires were collected, and the validity rate of questionnaire collection was 78.59%.

Data were analyzed using the software SPSS27.0 and Mplus8.3. The statistical techniques mainly involved descriptive statistics, common method variance analysis, measurement model analysis, structural equation modeling, and bootstrap analysis. In survey research, one of the most common methods for calculating sample size is G*power [55]. Therefore, to determine the minimum sample size, G*power was used to calculate the minimum sample size for this study. According to the high standard, we set the effect size to 0.3, set a probability of error of 5%, and achieved a statistical power of 95%. The final calculations showed that the minimum sample size required for this study was 46. Furthermore, the sample to variable ration of this study exceeds the 20:1 ratio recommended in the field of organizational behavior, which means that the sample size is larger than 120 in this study [56]. CB-SEM was used in this study, and the sample size of CB-SEM depends on the researcher’s model. If the research model is not too complicated, 100 subjects is a small sample size, 200 subjects is a medium sample size, and more than 200 subjects is a large sample size [57]. The final number of valid subjects for this study was 290, which exceeds the standard for a large sample size. Therefore, the sample size of 290 for this study was adequate.

Demographic variables included gender, age, level of education, organizational type, job type, and organizational tenure. In the final sample, 143 (49.31%) subjects were male and 147 (50.69%) subjects were female. For age, 10 (3.45%) subjects were younger than 21 years old; 125 (43.10%) subjects were aged between 21 and 30 years old; 74 (25.52%) subjects were aged between 31 and 40 years old; 62 (21.38%) subjects were aged between 41 and 50 years old; and 19 (6.55%) subjects were over 50 years old. In terms of education, 44 (15.17%) subjects held a high school degree; 169 (58.28%) subjects held a bachelor’s degree; and 77 (26.55%) subjects held a postgraduate degree. Regarding organizational type, 60 (20.69%) subjects worked in state-owned enterprises; 163 (56.21%) subjects worked in private enterprise; 12 (4.14%) subjects worked in foreign investment and joint ventures; and 55 (18.97%) worked in other types of organizations. Additionally, 46 (15.86%) subjects had 1 year or less of job experience; 170 (58.62%) subjects had 1–5 years of job experience; 60 (20.69%) subjects had 6–10 years of job experience; and 14 (4.83%) subjects had 10 years or more.

It is widely acknowledged that work stress has a significant effect on employees’ work-related rumination [58]. Therefore, work stress was added to the control variables of this study, in addition to demographic variables. Control variables contribute to excluding other extraneous factors and enhancing the accuracy and scientific validity of the study. The conceptual model is shown in Figure 1.

3.2. Measures

3.2.1. Informal Communication

Informal communication was assessed using the four-item scale developed by Methot et al. [5]. Participants indicated their frequency of informal communication experienced on a seven-point scale. An example item is “My coworkers and I had small talk”.

3.2.2. Work-Related Flow

Employees’ work-related flow was measured by the thirteen-item scale of Bakker [44]. Participants responded to these items through a seven-point scale. An example includes “I get carried away by my work”.

3.2.3. Interpersonal Harmony

The interpersonal harmony scale developed by De Clercq et al. was adopted [24]. The scale includes four items, such as “My colleagues and I often get angry while working together”. Participants were asked about their perceptions of interpersonal harmony in the workplace on a seven-point scale.

3.2.4. Problem-Solving Pondering and Affective Rumination

A two-dimensional scale developed by Cropley et al. was used. The specific items of problem-solving pondering include “I find solutions to work-related problems in my free time [13]”. The specific items of affective rumination include “Are you irritated by work issues when not at work?” Both problem-solving pondering and affective rumination dimensions were evaluated by five items on a seven-point scale.

3.2.5. Ability to Focus Attention

Employees’ ability to focus attention was assessed by six-items scale of Han et al. [48]. Participants were evaluated about their ability to focus attention on a seven-point scale. A sample item is “There are issues in this company which take my attention away from doing my job”.

3.2.6. Control Variable

Control variables included demographic variables and work stress. Demographic variables consisted of gender, age, education, type of organization, type of job, and organizational tenure. Work stress was measured by the eleven-item scale of Cavanaugh et al. [59]. An example item is “The number of projects and/or assignments I have”. This work stress scale has been applied in several empirical studies and has been shown to exhibit good reliability and validity.

4. Results

4.1. Common Method Variance

In order to examine Common Method Variance (CMV), Harmon’s one-way test was conducted. Harmon’s one-way test result showed that there were six factors with eigenvalues greater than 1. The first factor accounted for 34.101% of the total variance, which is less than the recommended value of 40%, suggesting that there were no significant CMV issues.

4.2. Measurement Model

Referring to the results of confirmative factor analysis, the fit degree of the six-factor model is the best (χ² (614) = 764.606, RMSEA = 0.029, SRMR = 0.038, CFI = 0.984, TLI = 0.983). All the standardized factor loadings of the indicators on their latent variables were significant at p < 0.001 level, ranging from 0.848 to 0.909 for informal communication, ranging from 0.760 to 0.857 for work-related flow, ranging from 0.641 to 0.834 for interpersonal harmony, ranging from 0.861 to 0.913 for problem-solving pondering, ranging from 0.831 to 0.880 for affective rumination, and ranging from 0.880 to 0.925 for the ability to focus attention.

4.3. Hypothesis Test

The hypothesis was tested by examining a structural equation model. To begin with,

Table 1. Descriptive statistics and correlations.

Variables	M	SD	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12	13
1. gender	1.507	0.501	--
2. age	2.928	1.222	−0.002	--
3. education	4.769	1.255	0.038	−0.047	--
4. organizational type	2.093	0.816	−0.040	0.135 *	−0.036	--
5. job type	1.448	0.700	0.050	0.374 ***	−0.094	0.181 **	--
6. organizational tenure	2.162	0.788	−0.051	0.426 ***	−0.168 **	0.073	0.501 ***	--
7. work stress	3.975	1.066	0.085	0.027	−0.086	0.025	−0.012	0.065	--
8. informal communication	4.847	1.442	0.011	0.026	0.078	0.055	0.058	−0.002	−0.366 ***	--
9. work-related flow	4.129	1.491	−0.014	0.014	−0.061	0.058	−0.018	0.100	0.690 ***	−0.346 ***	--
10. interpersonal harmony	4.973	1.137	−0.048	−0.125 *	0.011	0.030	−0.001	−0.069	0.042	0.420 ***	0.065	--
11. problem-solving pondering	4.110	1.621	−0.050	−0.061	−0.033	−0.012	−0.122 *	−0.082	0.362 ***	−0.340 ***	0.515 ***	−0.058	--
12. affective rumination	2.832	1.218	−0.038	0.005	−0.069	−0.043	−0.086	0.063	0.183 **	−0.404 ***	0.219 ***	−0.395 ***	0.098	--
13. ability to focus attention	4.514	1.607	−0.094	−0.003	−0.038	−0.038	−0.019	0.005	0.047	0.007	0.337 ***	0.027	0.275 ***	0.070	--

N = 290, M = means, SD= standard deviations, * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001.

presents the means, standard deviations, and Pearson correlations of the main variables. The results initially support all our hypotheses—for instance, informal communication correlates significantly with work-related flow (β = −0.346, p < 0.01), interpersonal harmony (β = 0.420, p < 0.01), problem-solving pondering (β = −0.340, p < 0.01), and affective rumination (β = −0.404, p < 0.01).

Furthermore, we tested the direct model, including the direct paths from informal communication to work-related flow, interpersonal harmony, problem-solving pondering, and affective rumination; the direct paths from work-related flow to problem-solving pondering; and the direct paths from interpersonal harmony to affective rumination.

Table 2. Direct model test result.

Variables	Work-Related Flow (DV)	Interpersonal Harmony (DV)	Problem-Solving Pondering (DV)			Affective Rumination (DV)
	Model 1	Model 2	Model 3	Model 4	Model 5	Model 6	Model 7	Model 8
Control variable
gender	−0.182	−0.180	−0.232	−0.154	−0.137	−0.059	−0.154	−0.117
age	−0.035	−0.133	−0.015	0.001	0.003	0.013	−0.047	−0.030
education	0.020	−0.014	−0.008	−0.030	−0.018	−0.027	−0.042	−0.031
organizational type	0.092	0.007	0.017	−0.054	−0.031	−0.018	−0.030	−0.016
job type	−0.087	0.091	−0.150	−0.118	−0.105	−0.214	−0.186	−0.184
organizational tenure	0.163	−0.083	−0.142	−0.233	−0.227	0.172	0.135	0.145
work stress	0.910 ***	0.259	0.437	0.028	−0.038	0.040	0.225 ***	0.124
Independent variable
informal communication	−0.112 **	0.403 ***	−0.259 ***		−0.201 ***	−0.322 ***		−0.191 ***
work-related flow				0.557 ***	0.522 ***
interpersonal harmony							−0.434 ***	−0.325 ***
R2	0.498	0.251	0.200	0.289	0.316	0.181	0.216	0.250
ΔR2	0.010	0.224	0.045	0.269	0.116	0.158	0.159	0.226
F	34.792	11.748	8.801	14.311	14.384	7.761	9.701	10.367
ΔF	5.573	83.908	15.924	53.172	47.419	42.551	57.184	25.745

N = 290, DV = dependent variable, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001.

shows the final models. The results indicated that informal communication was significantly related with work-related flow (β = −0.112, p < 0.01), interpersonal harmony (β = 0.403, p < 0.001), problem-solving pondering (β = −0.259, p < 0.001), and affective rumination (β = −0.322, p < 0.001). Furthermore, work-related flow was significantly related with problem-solving pondering (β = 0.557, p < 0.001), and interpersonal harmony was significantly related with affective rumination (β =−0.434, p < 0.001). Hence, Hypothesis 1, Hypothesis 2, Hypothesis 3, Hypothesis 5, Hypothesis 6, and Hypothesis 7 were supported.

Next, we performed a bootstrap analysis with 5000 bootstrap samples to test indirect effects since the bias-corrected percentile bootstrap method mitigates Type-II errors [60]. The bootstrap analysis revealed that the indirect effect of informal communication on problem-solving pondering through work-related flow is 99% CI = [−0.335, −0.110], and the indirect effect of informal communication on affective rumination through interpersonal harmony is 95% CI = [−0.256, −0.038]. Therefore, the mediation hypotheses H3 and H6 are both valid.

We also evaluated whether the ability to focus attention moderates the association between informal communication and work-related flow and between informal communication and interpersonal harmony. The results indicate that informal communication negatively affects work-related flow, and the ability to focus attention mitigates the effect of informal communication on work-related flow (β = 0.108, p < 0.01). In addition, informal communication positively affects interpersonal harmony, and the ability to focus attention boosts the effect of informal communication on interpersonal harmony (β = 0.183, p < 0.01).

5. Discussion and Conclusions

Drawing on IRT and the COR theory, the present research examined the impact of employee informal communication on work-related rumination from the perspective of motivation with one survey study and showed the double-edged-sword effects of informal communication. In terms of the motivation for building rapport, this research revealed that informal communication decreased affective rumination via interpersonal harmony based on IRT. Specifically, informal communication positively predicted interpersonal harmony, and interpersonal harmony negatively predicted affective rumination. Moreover, in terms of the motivation for retaining and protecting resources, this research indicated that informal communication decreased problem-solving pondering via work-related flow based on the COR theory. Specifically, informal communication negatively predicted work-related flow, and work-related flow positively predicted problem-solving pondering. Furthermore, the current research identified the moderating effect of the ability to focus attention. Specifically, this research found that the relationship between informal communication and interpersonal harmony was stronger when the ability to focus attention was stronger. This research also revealed that the relationship between informal communication and work-related flow was weaker when the ability to focus attention was stronger.

5.1. Theoretical Contributions

The present research provides several significant theoretical contributions. First, this study integrates the perspectives of IRT and the COR theory from a motivational angle, broadening the cognitive view of informal communication in organizational behavior, and elucidates that informal communication within organizational contexts serves as significant interactive rituals where employees derive emotional energy, but this also potentially reduces their engagement in job tasks. Employees, being social beings, particularly within work groups, are motivated to establish harmonious interpersonal relationships [61]. According to IRT, gaining emotional energy through interactions within work groups encourages voluntary participation in interactive rituals [10]. Thus, one motivation for employees to engage in informal communication is to foster workplace relationships and even demonstrate leadership charisma, both of which contribute to emotional energy gain. A core idea of the COR theory is motivation [14]. Therefore, when employees expend more resources in informal communication, they often invest less effort and time into work to maintain work-life balance and may even reduce work quality to meet deadlines. This study identifies conflicting motivations for employees to participate in informal communication and advances the understanding of employees’ motivations toward participation in informal communication from the perspectives of IRT and the COR theory.

Second, this study supports the view that informal communication is not devoid of significance, complementing the dual-edge effect research of informal communication and recognizing that seemingly inconsequential conversations can have lasting impacts on employees. Methot and colleagues argued that informal communication is an essential social ritual in the workplace [5]. Despite being crucial for atmosphere regulation and interpersonal communication tools at work, the field of informal communication research has not received the attention it deserves due to the informal and superficial conversational content of informal communication [3]. Past studies have mainly focused on the positive outcomes of informal communication and have demonstrated that informal communication can foster positive negotiation relationships and positive social emotions, while neglecting its negative effects [5,9]. This study finds that while informal communication helps employees promote interpersonal harmony and reduce affective rumination, it also hinders their capacity to experience work-related flow and decreases problem-solving pondering, thereby adding new dimensions to the study of the dual-edge effect of informal communication. Furthermore, few studies discuss the enduring effects of informal communication. For example, the research of Methot and colleagues has focused on the impact of daily informal communication on employees’ daily outcomes of the same day [5]. However, we collected each round of data at two-week intervals, and the findings show that the effect of informal communication is not only valid on the same day but also in the short term. This means that the impact of informal communication on employees is not confined to the day of the conversation.

Third, this study extends the exploration of work-related rumination into the domain of informal communication and finds that the ability to focus attention significantly moderates the subsequent effects of informal communication among employees. Most previous studies focus on how work stress negatively affects work-related rumination [62,63]. Furthermore, some prior studies discuss work-related rumination without distinguishing between problem-solving pondering and affective rumination, simply concluding that work-related rumination has negative effects on employees. However, research has indicated that work-related rumination is not entirely negative; problem-solving pondering can actually have positive effects on employees [64]. Therefore, it is essential to separately discuss problem-solving pondering and affective rumination. Building upon this foundation, this study enriches research on work-related rumination by exploring how informal communication influences problem-solving pondering and affective rumination separately, thereby extending the exploration of antecedents of work-related rumination to the domain of informal communication. Additionally, we find that the ability to focus attention helps employees mitigate the negative impact of informal communication on work-related flow and promotes positive effects on interpersonal harmony. These findings are consistent with IRT and the COR theory, suggesting that employees with a strong ability to focus attention can switch more smoothly between different contexts. Therefore, this study enriches the intersectional research on employee interpersonal communication and individual differences. Moreover, these findings are directly relevant to corporate sustainability, as the emotional well-being of employees and their effective problem-solving skills are crucial for the long-term stability and growth of organizations. From an employee perspective, this study expands the theoretical guidance for corporate sustainability.

5.2. Managerial Implications

In terms of managerial insights, this study is dedicated to advancing business innovation from the perspective of informal communication, providing effective recommendations for improving sustainable outcomes of employees, regulating organizational climate by managers, and fulfilling corporate social responsibility by organizations. To be specific:

First, based on the results of the presented research, employees can adjust their behaviors of initiating and participating in informal communication, so as to boost well-being and promote work progress. Specifically, when employees need to promote work progress, they could consider skipping out on the informal communication to help themselves enter the work-related flow; when employees need to improve interpersonal harmony, they could initiate and participate in informal communication more often and flexibly utilize informal communication channels. Employees’ flexible control of informal communication can provide effective help to employees. For example, new employees are not familiar with the interpersonal environment, and when new employees need to establish a friendly relationship with leaders and colleagues, informal communication channels are often effective in promoting a harmonious relationship. Those who need to urgently promote the progress of the work can skip an informal communication strategy. This strategy can not only save more resources for them to achieve work-related flow but also conveys to the other members that their workload is heavy; they do not want to be disturbed; and they might need help. Therefore, employees could determine how often to engage in informal communication on a case-by-case basis, ultimately harmonizing interpersonal well-being with work progress.

Second, informal communication serves as an effective tool for managers to administer their employees, which assists managers in achieving a balance between rationally coordinating work team goals and employee well-being. For two possible reasons, it is generally agreed that work-related rumination is an important sustainable outcome for employees. One reason is that affective rumination leads to problems such as negative emotions, burnout, and fatigue [15,17,18]. It prevents employees from regaining a positive state of mind during non-work time and may start a vicious cycle of fatigued work patterns, which is detrimental to the achievement of sustainable work outcomes. Another reason is that problem-solving pondering is an important work resource that assists employees in solving problems or reflecting on previous ways of working, which in turn influences subsequent work styles and outcomes [13]. According to the findings of this study, informal communication correlates negatively with both affective rumination and problem-solving pondering. This means that informal communication is an effective tool for regulating employees’ sustainable outcomes. However, informal communication cannot be wholly advocated or entirely banned. Instead, it should be flexibly adjusted according to the state of the employees and organizational environment. Specifically, when a positive work atmosphere must be established, managers can proactively initiate informal communication to reduce employees’ affective rumination; when there is an urgent need to improve team performance or complete a work assignment, managers may reduce their own informal communication behavior and stress upward mobility, reserving more resources for employees to devote to formal work. Contingency theory supports this approach of managers [65]. That is, managers may adjust their informal communication management strategies with reference to situational factors to ensure management effectiveness. It is recommended that managers refer to the results of this study to implement contingent management in order to reach employees’ sustainable outcomes and their team’s long-term development goals.

Thirdly, organizational sustainability can utilize informal communication as a management tool, leveraging its dual-edge-sword effect to enhance organizational resilience and adaptability in pursuing organizational goals. Referring to the conclusion of this study, informal communication has a significant effect on interpersonal harmony, work-related flow, and work-related rumination. Thus, informal communication helps to harmonize the relationship between organizational development and employee well-being. Incorporating informal communication into the organizational management system can promote employees’ emotional well-being and problem-solving capabilities, as well as help organizations effectively enhance competitiveness, ensure sustainable development, and create value for stakeholders. In order to achieve these goals, organizations should develop employees’ ability to focus attention, both to improve the positive effects of informal communication on interpersonal harmony and to inhibit the negative effects of informal communication on work-related flow. For example, organizations can include relevant contents in staff training, set up an e-learning platform, or organize activities such as mindfulness training. In addition, the organization can arrange a public space to enhance environmental well-being and provide a place for employees with informal communication needs to meet, such as a spacious and open public pantry.

5.3. Limitations and Directions for Future Research

The study has several limitations. First, the data in this study are all from China, so it remains to be seen whether the findings of this study apply to other regions. Future research could examine whether the effect of informal communication is influenced by country and culture. Second, the CMV should be a general concern in view of data collected from a single, self-reported source. To address this issue, our research collected data in three stages to minimize CMV. Although the result of Harmon’s one-way test showed that CMV was not a serious threat in this research, we recommend that future studies utilize other methods to further examine CMV, such as the design of the unmeasured latent method construct and the design of the marker variable [66]. Third, although this study advances the literature on informal communication by revealing the short-term impact of informal communication instead of the impact of informal communication on the day it occurs, as is the case in past research, we recommend that future studies use case studies or longitudinal data to further validate the long-run impact of informal communication. Fourth, as we focus on the degree of the occurrence of informal communication, this research ignores the form of informal communication. Since different forms of informal communication (e.g., informal communication related to personal hobbies and informal communication related to weather) may differently influence employees [5], future studies are encouraged to examine both the occurrence and the form of informal communication. Fifth, the questionnaire in this study was filled out entirely by employees, so cognitive bias may be a problem. For example, different employees may have different perceptions of interpersonal harmony in their organization. Future research should thus consider introducing team- or organization-level variables to understand the effect of informal communication more objectively.