Flow Experience as a Mediator between Antecedents and Extra-Role Performance among Hotel Employees in Sarawak, alaysia

  • Authors

    • Mark Kasa
    • Zaiton Hassan
    • Jackelyn Ng
    https://doi.org/10.14419/ijet.v7i4.28.22573

    Received date: November 30, 2018

    Accepted date: November 30, 2018

    Published date: November 30, 2018

  • Abstract

    Employees who go beyond their job description are regarded as highly prized employees by organizations. This extra-role performance is often seen as a key indicator of whether employees are performing well in their job. Past studies linked engagement to be positively related to job performance, yet there are a limited number of studies on flow and performance, particularly on extra-role performance. This study was conducted on 290 hotel employees in Kuching, Sarawak, Malaysia to examine the correlation between flow experience and extra-role performance. In addition, this study also looked into flow as the mediator between the antecedents (job demand and job resources) and extra-role performance. The study hypothesized that flow experience is instrumental in employees’ extra-role performance. The results of the study suggested that flow correlated with the employees’ directional behaviour at work and flow mediates the correlation between job resources and extra-role performance. It was also discovered that flow did not mediate the correlation between job demand and extra-role performance. The findings indicated the benefits and practicality of flow experience on the employees’ extra-role performance and also the pros of retrospective flow experience.

  • References

    1. Tsaur S, Lin Y. Promoting service quality in tourist hotels: the role of HRM practices and service behavior. Tour Manag. 2004;25(4):471–81.
    2. Schneider B, Bowen DE. Employee and customer perceptions ofservice in banks: Replication and extension. J Appl Psychol 70(3), 423–433. 1985;70(3):423–33.
    3. Motowidlo SJ, Van Scotter JR. Evidence that task performance should be distinguished from contextual performance. J Appl Psychol. 1994;79:475– 480.
    4. Moorman RH, Niehoff BP, Organ DW. Treating employees fairly and organizational citizenship behavior: Sorting the effects of job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and procedural justice. Empl Responsib Rights J. 1993;6:209–225.
    5. Organ DW. Organizational citizenship behavior. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books; 1988.
    6. Hartline MD, Ferrell OC. The management of customer-contact service employees: an empirical investigation. J Mark. 1996;60:52–70.
    7. Kelley SW, Hoffman K. An investigation of positive affect, pro-social behaviors and service quality. J Retail. 1997;73(3):407–27.
    8. Bakker AB, Demerouti E, De Boer E, Schaufeli WB. Job de-mands and job resources as predictors of absence duration and frequency. J Vocat Behav. 2003;(62):341–356.
    9. Bakker AB, Demerouti E, Verbeke W. Using the job demands: resources model to predict burnout and performance. Hum Resour Manage. 2004;43:147–54.
    10. Hockey GJ. Compensatory control in the regulation of human per-formance under stress and high workload: A cognitive – energeti-cal framework. Biol Psychol. 1997;45:73–93.
    11. Demerouti E, Bakker A, Nachreiner F, Schaufeli W. The job de-mands-resources model of burnout. J Appl Psychol. 2001;86(3):499–512.
    12. Edwards JR. An examination of competing versions of the per-son-environment fit approach to stress. Acad Manag J. 1996;39(2):292–339.
    13. Karasek RA. Job demands, job decision latitude, and mental strain: Implications for job design. Adm Sci Q. 1979;24:285–308.
    14. Demerouti E. Job resources, work-related flow and performance. J Occup Health Psychol. 2006;11(3):266–80.
    15. Csikszentmihalyi M. Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experi-ence. New York: Harper and Row; 1990.
    16. Ghani JA, Deshpande SP. Task characteristics and the experience of optimal flow in human computer interaction. J Psychol. 1994;128:381–391.
    17. Seligman M, Csikszentmihalyi M. Flow. In: Positive psychology: An introduction. Springer, Netherlands; 2014. p. 279–98.
    18. Clarke SG, Haworth JT. Flow experience in the lives of six-form college students. Br J Psychol. 1994;(85):511–523.
    19. Ellis GD, Voelkl JE, Morris C. Measurements and analysis issues with explanation of variance in daily experience using the Flow model. J Leis Res. 1994;26:337–356.
    20. Bakker AB. Flow among music teachers and their students: The crossover of peak experiences. J Vocat Behav. 2005;66:26–44.
    21. Csikszentmihalyi, M. Abuhamdeh S, Nakamura J. Flow. In: Elliot AJ, Dweck CS, editors. Handbook of competence and motivation. New York: Guilford Publications, Inc.; 2005. p. 598–608.
    22. Schüler J. Arousal of Flow Experience in a Learning Setting and Its Effects on Exam Performance and Affect. Zeitschrift Für Pädagogische Psychol. 2007;21(3/4):217–27.
    23. Fullagar CJ, Kelloway EK. Flow at work: An experience sampling approach. J Occup Organ Psychol. 2009;82:595–615.
    24. Kasa M, Hassan Z. Antecedent and consequences of flow: Les-sons for developing human resources. Procedia - Soc Behav Sci. 2013;97:209–13.
    25. Riketta M. Attitudinal organizational commitment and job per-formance: a meta‐analysis. J Organ Behav. 2002;23(3):257–66.
    26. Bakker AB, Demerouti E. Towards a model of work engagement. Career Dev Int. 2008;13:209–30.
    27. Salanova M, Agut S, Peiro JM. Linking organizational resources and work engagement to employee performance and customer loyalty: the mediation of service climate. J Appl Psychol. 2005;90(6):1217.
    28. Seeley TA. The impact of followship dimensions on affective commitment and in-role and extra-role performance. Diss Abstr Int Sect B Sci Eng. 2007;68:662.
    29. Csikszentmihalyi M. Good Business, Leadership, flow, and the making of meaning. USA: Penguin Books; 2003.
    30. Hakanen JJ, Bakker AB, Schaufeli W. Burnout and work en-gagement among teachers. J Sch Psychol. 2006;43:495–513.
    31. Schaufeli WB, Bakker AB. Job demands, job resources, and their relationship with burnout and engagement: a multi-sample study. J Organ Behav. 2004;25:293–315.
    32. Kaiser HF. An Index of Factorial Simplicity. Psychometrika. 1974;39:31–6.
    33. Preacher KJ, Hayes AF. SPSS and SAS Procedures for estimating indirect effect in simple mediation models. Behav Res Methods, Instruments, Comput A J Psychon Soc Inc. 2004;36(4):717–31.
    34. Mackinnon DP, Fairchild AJ, Fritz MS. Mediation analysis. Annu Rev Psychol. 2007;58:593–614.
    35. Rich B, Lepine J, Crawford E. Job Engagement: Antecedents and Effects on Job performance. Acad Manag J. 2010;53(3):617–35.
    36. Cropanzano R, Wright TA. When a “happy” worker is really a “productive” worker: A review and further refinement of the hap-py-productive worker thesis. Consult Psychol J Pract Res. 2001;53 (3)(18).
    37. Ng GC, Tay A. Does work engagement mediate the relationship between job resources and job performance of employees? Afri-can J Bus Manag. 2010;4(9):1837–43.
    38. Karatepe OM. Procedural justice, work engagement, and job out-comes: evidence from Nigeria. J Hosp Mark Manag. 2011;20(8):855–78.
    39. Kim HJ, Shin KH, Swanger N. Burnout and engagement: a com-parative analysis using the Big Five personality dimensions. Int J Hosp Manag. 2009;28(1):96–104.

  • Downloads

  • How to Cite

    Kasa, M., Hassan, Z., & Ng, J. (2018). Flow Experience as a Mediator between Antecedents and Extra-Role Performance among Hotel Employees in Sarawak, alaysia. International Journal of Engineering and Technology, 7(4.28), 168-171. https://doi.org/10.14419/ijet.v7i4.28.22573