本文基于资源保存理论和工作投入的心理条件理论，探究员工在闲暇时间从事省力休闲和休闲重塑对工作投入影响的差异，及个体职业发展压力对这一基于休闲的恢复路径的调节机制。通过对我国武汉、北京、上海、广州等多个地区企业的232名员工的问卷调查，结果显示：第一，参与休闲有益于促进员工工作投入，且休闲重塑比省力休闲的正向作用更强；第二，休闲活动以恢复体验为中介机制，影响员工工作投入的恢复效果；第三，职业发展压力正向调节恢复体验对休闲与工作投入的关系。本研究重点区分两类休闲方式对工作投入的影响，强调休闲对工作的积极意义，提出企业科学看待休闲，有效帮助员工学会休闲，以提升其工作投入；此外，建议企业消除“加班文化”，科学安排工作时间，使员工工作与生活达到相互促进的效果，从而有效提升员工工作绩效。
Abstract
People tend to have a richer material and cultural life, so leisure activities become more and more abundant. In addition, leisure activities can create "psychological availability" for employees to maintain work commitments and enable employees to obtain the physical, cognitive and emotional resources needed to achieve role performance. However, the prevailing "996" working system limits the positive impact of leisure on work, which leads to the unsustainability of human capital development. Therefore, it is necessary to explore the impact of leisure activities on work engagement, which helps enterprises to implement leisure time management, identify, screen and implement appropriate leisure projects, and help employees to use their leisure time more effectively and promote the sustainable use of human capital.
It may be easily found from systematic review of related literature that leisure participation can indeed increase the work engagement of employees. However, the influence on work engagement is different between the individual′s low-effort activities characterized by high passivity and low resource consumption and the leisure crafting characterized by goal setting, interpersonal relationship construction, learning and personal development. In other words, different types of leisure activities have different effects on job engagement. However, previous studies have not compared the impact of various types of leisure activities, and unclear classification standards also lead to many types of leisure activities being ignored.
According to the conservation of resources theory, people will try their best to maintain, protect and accumulate various resources. Work needs a lot of resources. Individuals can supplement resources by temporarily reducing pressure sources, or invest other resources to obtain new resources, and then put into a new round of work in a full state. According to the psychological conditions of personal engagement at work, the extent to which employees bring themselves into work roles is affected by three psychological conditions, which are psychological meaning, psychological security and psychological availability, leisure participation can enhance the psychological availability of employees. This paper explores the mediating effects of recovery experience in the relationship between leisure activities and employees′ work engagement, and the moderating role of career development pressures in it. Based on the consumption of leisure activities on the individual′s physical and mental resources and the motivation for leisure participation, it distinguishes between two types of leisure methods of low-effort activities and leisure crafting, and explores the significance of low-effort activities and leisure crafting for work engagement.
Based on relevant theories, this study puts forward research hypotheses and theoretical models, and selects a scale with good reliability and validity to conduct a questionnaire survey on 232 employees from Chinese companies in Wuhan, Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou and other regions. A total of 265 questionnaires were collected, remove 33 questionnaires with obvious problems, and 232 valid questionnaires were finally obtained. Then through SPSS 22.0, Amos 23.0 and Mplus7.0 software to analyze the data, through the intermediary effect test, regression analysis and adjustment test, the results show that: first, low-effort activities and leisure crafting can help to improve the work engagement of employees, and leisure crafting can improve the work engagement of employees more than low-effort activities. Second, recovery experience plays an intermediary role in the low-effort activities and leisure crafting the positive relationship to work engagement, but the ultimate recovery effect of employees depends on how much recovery experience can be brought by leisure activities. Third, the mediated effects of low-effort activities and leisure crafting on work engagement is moderated by the employees′ career development stressors.
There are three main theoretical contributions of this study: First, this paper confirms the positive correlation between leisure participation and work engagement, enriching the research on the relationship between leisure and professional happiness. Furthermore, this paper integrates the perspective of hedonism and self-determination of leisure study, and explores the leisure ways that are more conducive to improving professional happiness. Previous studies have suggested that "hedonism" and "self-determination" are different in the importance of happiness. This study further proves that there are differences in the effectiveness of these two different motivation-driven leisure styles on work engagement. At last, this paper enriches the study of the interactions between the psychological conditions of work engagement. The recovery path of leisure mainly plays a role by increasing the "psychological availability" of work engagement. This study found that career development pressure will affect the "psychological sense" of work, and this psychological condition has also been proved to be the most effective psychological condition for predicting work engagement.
In general，this paper reached some valuable conclusions but there were still some limitations to be improved as follows: Firstly, this research uses a cross-sectional research design. Because the data of each variable collected at the same time, there may have common variance biases and other problems, we can use multi time point data collection design in the future, which can be used to better explore the robustness of causal effect and avoid the potential impact of common variance. Secondly, the exploration of leisure can be integrated with economics. From the perspective of sociology, management and organizational behavior, and explore the leisure lifestyle scale in Chinese context. Thirdly, this paper emphasizes the motivation of leisure participation. In the future, the research can explore whether these characteristics affect the recovery effect of leisure participation from the aspects of leisure quality and leisure satisfaction. At last, we can explore the influence of family on individual recovery process in the future.
关键词
休闲重塑 /
省力休闲 /
工作投入 /
职业发展压力
Key words
leisure crafting /
low-effort activity /
work engagement /
career development stressor
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.content}}
参考文献
[1] KAHN W A. Psychological Conditions of Personal Engagement and Disengagement at Work[J]. The Academy of Management Journal, 1990, 33(4):692-724.
[2] PETROU P, BAKKER A B, HEUVEL M V D. Weekly job crafting and leisure crafting: Implications for meaning-making and work engagement[J]. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 2017, 90(2): 129–152.
[3] DEMEROUTI E, BAKKER A B, SONNENTAG S, et al. Work-related flow and energy at work and at home: A study on the role of daily recovery[J]. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 2012, 33: 276–295.
[4] PETROU P, BAKKER A B. Crafting one’s leisure time in response to high job strain[J]. Human Relations, 2016, 69(2): 507–529.
[5] Hobfoll S E. Conservation of resources. A new attempt at conceptualizing stress.[J]. Am Psychol, 1989, 44(3):513.
[6] BAKKER A B, DEMEROUTI E. Towards a model of work engagement[J]. Career Development International, 2008, 13, 209–223.
[7] ?SCHAUFELI W B, SALANOVA M, GONZáLES-ROMá V, et al. The measurement of engagement and burnout: a two sample confirmatory factor analytic approach[J]. Journal of Happiness Studies, 2002, 3: 71-92.
[8] GREENHAUS J H, POWELL G N. When work and family are allies: A theory of work-family enrichment[J]. Academy of Management Review, 2006, 31(1): 77–92.
[9] XANTHOPOULOU D, BAKKER A B, DEMEROUTI E, et al. Work engagement and financial returns: A diary study on the role of job and personal resources[J]. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 2009, 82, 183–200.
[10]? SONNENTAG S, MOJZA E J, DEMEROUTI E, et al. Reciprocal relations between recovery and work engagement: The moderating role of job stressors.[J]. Journal of Applied Psychology, 2012, 97(4):842-853.
[11] SONNENTAG S. Work, Recovery Activities, and Individual Well-Being: A Diary Study[J]. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 2001, 6(3): 196–210.
[12] OERLEMANS W G M, BAKKER A B. Burnout and daily recovery: A day reconstruction study[J]. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 2014, 19(3): 303–314.
[13] TEN BRUMMELHUIS L L, TROUGAKOS J P. The recovery potential of intrinsically versus extrinsically motivated off-job activities[J]. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 2014, 87(1): 177–199.
[14] BINNEWIES C, SONNENTAG S, MOJZA E J. Feeling Recovered and Thinking About the Good Sides of One’s Work[J]. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 2009, 14(3): 243–256.
[15] BOSCH C, SONNENTAG S, PINCK A S. What makes for a good break? A diary study on recovery experiences during lunch.
[16] 曲怡颖, 任浩. 恢复体验对员工创造力影响的作用机制研究[J]. 软科学, 2017, 31(4): 57-60.
[17] SONNENTAG S, MOJZA E J, BINNEWIES C, et al. Being engaged at work and detached at home: A week-level study on work engagement, psychological detachment, and affect[J]. Work & Stress, 2008, 22(3): 257–276.
[18] FRITZ C, SONNENTAG S, SPECTOR P E, et al. The weekend matters: Relationships between stress recovery and affective experiences[J]. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 2010, 31(8): 1137–1162.
[19] Hahn V C, Binnewies C, Haun S. The role of partners for employees' recovery during the weekend.[J]. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 2012, 80(2):288-298.
?[20] SONNENTAG S. Recovery, work engagement, and proactive behavior: A new look at the interface between nonwork and work.[J]. Journal of Applied Psychology, 2003, 88(3):518-528.
[21] TROUGAKOS J P, BEAL D J, GREEN S G, et al. Making the Break Count: An Episodic Examination of Recovery Activities, Emotional Experiences, and Positive Affective Displays[J]. Academy of Management Journal, 2008, 51(1): 131–146.
[22] TEN BRUMMELHUIS L L, BAKKER A B. Staying engaged during the week: The effect of off-job activities on next day work engagement[J]. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 2012, 17(4): 445–455.
[23] ESCHLEMAN K J, MADSEN J, ALARCON G, et al. Benefiting from creative activity: The positive relationships between creative activity, recovery experiences, and performance-related outcomes[J]. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 2014, 87(3): 579–598.
[24] TUISKU K, VIRTANEN M, DE BLOOM J, et al. Cultural leisure activities, recovery and work engagement among hospital employees[J]. Industrial Health, 2016, 54, 254–262.
[25] TKACH C, LYUBOMIRSKY S. How do people pursue happiness? Relating personality, happiness-increasing strategies, and well-being[J]. Journal of Happiness Studies, 2006, 7, 183–225.
[26]? Csikszentmihalyi? M, Hunter J. Happiness in Everyday Life: The Uses of Experience Sampling[J]. Journal of Happiness Studies, 2003, 4(2):185-199.
[27] SCHUELLER S M, SELIGMAN M E P. Pursuit of pleasure, engagement, and meaning: Relationships to subjective and objective measures of well-being[J]. Journal of Positive Psychology, 2010, 5(4): 253–263.
[28] BENNETT A A, BAKKER A B, FIELD J G. Recovery from work-related effort: A meta-analysis[J]. Journal of ?Organizational Behavior, 2018, 39(3): 262–275.
[29] SONNENTAG S, FRITZ C. The Recovery Experience Questionnaire: Development and Validation of a Measure for Assessing Recuperation and Unwinding From Work[J]. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 2007, 12(3): 204–221.
[30] RAGSDALE J M, BEEHR T A. A rigorous test of a model of employees’ resource recovery mechanisms during a weekend[J]. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 2016, 37: 911–932.
[31] FREDRICKSON B L, BRANIGAN C. Positive emotions broaden the scope of attention and thought-action repertoires[J]. Cognition and Emotion, 2005, 19(3): 313–332.
[32] HAHN V C, BINNEWIES C, DORMANN C. The role of partners and children for employees’ daily recovery[J]. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 2014, 85(1): 39–48.
[33] SILTALOPPI M, KINNUNEN U, FELDT T. Recovery experiences as moderators between psychosocial work characteristics and occupational well-being[J]. Work and Stress, 2009, 23(4): 330–348.
[34] SONNENTAG S, NIESSEN C, NEFF A. Recovery: Nonwork Experiences That Promote Positive States[M]. The Oxford Handbook of ?Positive Organizational ?Scholarship, 2012.
[35] RYAN R M , DECI E L. On Happiness and Human Potentials: A Review of Research on Hedonic and Eudaimonic Well-Being[J]. Annual Review of Psychology, 2001, 52(1):141-166.
[36] MOJZA E J, LORENZ C, SONNENTAG S, et al. Daily recovery experiences: the role of volunteer work during leisure time[J]. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 2010, 15(1): 60–74.
[37] VITTERS?. Recreate or Create? Leisure as an Arena for Recovery and Change[M]. Positive Psychology as Social Change. Springer Netherlands, 2011.
[38] ESCHLEMAN K J, MADSEN J, ALARCON G, et al. Benefiting from creative activity: The positive relationships between creative activity, recovery experiences, and performance-related outcomes[J]. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 2014, 87(3): 579–598.
[39] NEWMAN D B, TAY L, DIENER E. Leisure and Subjective Well-Being: A Model of Psychological Mechanisms as Mediating Factors[J]. Journal of Happiness Studies, 2014, 15(3): 555–578.
[40] KINNUNEN U, MAUNO S, SILTALOPPI M. Job insecurity, recovery and well-being at work: Recovery experiences as moderators[J]. Economic and Industrial Democracy, 2010, 31(2): 179–194.
[41] 杨巍. 工作压力源、组织支持感知与工作投入关系x研究[D]. 浙江大学, 2008.
[42] VOGEL R M, RODELL J B, LYNCH J W. Engaged and productive misfits: How job crafting and leisure activity mitigate the negative effects of value incongruence[J]. Academy of Management Journal, 2016, 59(5): 1561–1584.
[43] FRITZ C , LAM C F , SPREITZER G M . It’s the Little Things That Matter: An Examination of Knowledge Workers’ Energy Management[J]. Academy of Management Executive, 2011, 25(1):28-39.
[44] SPREITZER G, PORATH C. Self-determination as Nutriment for Thriving: Building an Integrative Model of Human Growth at Work[M]. In Gagne Oxford Handbook of Work Engagement, Motivation, and Self-Determination Theory, New York: Oxford University Press, 2013.
[45] SPREITZER G, SUTCLIFFE K, DUTTON J, et al. A Socially Embedded Model of Thriving at Work[J]. Organization Science, 2005, 16(5):537-549.
[46]? 曹静. 管理人员工作压力源与工作倦怠的关系及其影响因素研究[D]. 同济大学, 2006.
[47] 吴艳, 温忠麟. 结构方程建模中的题目打包策略[J]. 心理科学进展, 2011, 19(12): 1859-1867.
[48] 温忠麟, 叶宝娟. 有调节的中介模型检验方法：竞争还是替补?[J]. 心理学报, 2014, 46(5): 714-726.
?[49] RAGSDALE J M, BEEHR T A. A rigorous test of a model of employees’ resource recovery mechanisms during a weekend[J]. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 2016, 37: 911–932.
基金
国家社会科学基金青年项目：“可持续创业的驱动因素与发展机制研究”（16CGL005）；全国教育科学“十二五”规划教育部青年项目：“创业教育的演进机制及其对大学生创业影响的跟踪研究”（EIA150416）；湖北省教育科学规划一般课题：“大学生创业体验、创业承诺与创业退出行为的关联机制研究”（2016GB010）。
PDF(336 KB)
