The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

https://www.emerald.com/insight/1935-5181.htm

Psychosocial safety climate and Antecedents of

customer
psychological capital for positive behavioral
intentions
customer behavioral intentions
in service organizations 1
Sahar Siami Received 28 January 2022
Revised 21 July 2022
Department of Business and Creative Industries, University of the West of Scotland, 3 October 2022
Lanarkshire Campus, Blantyre, UK 4 December 2022
Accepted 7 December 2022
Mohammadbagher Gorji
Independent Researcher, Glasgow, UK, and
Angela Martin
University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia

Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to articulate a synergic-mediated model of positive service behaviors
enabled by what could be called a “psychosocial resource caravan” for improved customer behavioral
intentions to help service organizations especially during coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) crisis.
Design/methodology/approach – This paper adopts a multi-level approach and is based on positive
organizational behavior and occupational health and safety literature. An empirical study of synergic-mediated
model of positive service behaviors has been developed and tested using a quantitative approach.
Findings – This paper offers a theoretical framework proposing that a psychosocially safe work environment
(psychosocial safety climate (PSC)) interacts with employees’ positive psychological capital (PsyCap) to
facilitate positive service behaviors that influence customers’ behavioral intentions. As PsyCap and PSC have
origin, respectively, in different organizational levels, those both can combine and create a context for positive
service encounters. The proposed model has been operationalized and then the reliability and validity of the
constructs have been examined. A series of CFAs has been conducted and the fitness of the prosed model was
compared to other possible models. The model showed a better fitness compared to the other plausible models.
All hypotheses of the model were also significant.
Originality/value – The proposed model integrates positive organizational behavior and occupational health
and safety literature to consider the conditions for positive service behaviors. High levels of PsyCap among
team members and a psychosocially safe working environment, i.e. PSC can impact customers through positive
service behaviors. The articulation of the proposed model presented in this paper invites future empirical
research on the synergic nature of psychosocial resources. The paper also suggests some key points to
operationalize “psychosocial resource caravan.”
Keywords Customer behavioral intention, Positive service behaviors, Psychosocial safety climate,
Psychological capital
Paper type Conceptual paper

1. Introduction
Job-related stress among service employees gained considerable attention in marketing and
management studies mainly because of its detrimental effect on both employees’ health and
performance and organizational effectiveness. Studies showed that job-related stress increases
psychological strain and job burnout among service employees. Also, organizational
effectiveness can be affected by job-related stress through (Hendrix et al., 2020) reduction of
American Journal of Business
Vol. 38 No. 1, 2023
The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author, upon pp. 1-21
reasonable request. © Emerald Publishing Limited
1935-5181
The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest. DOI 10.1108/AJB-01-2022-0018
AJB service quality and productivity, increasing lost working days and healthcare costs (Hassard
38,1 et al., 2018). Meeting customer needs specially serving demanding customers, increased
workload (Zhang et al., 2021), job insecurity during economic downturn (Chan and Wan, 2012),
work-family conflict (Mansour and Mohanna, 2018) role conflict and role ambiguity (Lin and
Ling, 2018) are considered as important stressors in service environments. Service employees’
job is recognized as a stressful job in nature, however, with crisis, like coronavirus disease
2019 (COVID-19) pandemic the level of stress among service employees can excessively
2 increase.
Almost all organizations have been heavily impacted by the recent COVID-19 crisis (Gr€ozinger
et al., 2021) especially service businesses which mostly rely on face-to-face interaction such as
hospitality, insurance, banking, telecommunications and restaurants. Fundamental advice to
protect people during the outbreak such as physical distancing, reduction of some operations and
limited contact increase serious challenges for such businesses (Guzman et al., 2020). Restrictions,
lock downs and layoffs during the pandemic which imposed to protect human lives cost many
service employees losing their jobs around the globe. Service employees are exposed to COVID-19
because of the nature of their work and faced with the risk of unemployment causing a disruptive
level of stress (Tomaskovic-Devey et al., 2020; Guzman et al., 2020).
In a service setting where job-related stress is inevitable especially during the crisis, stress
prevention is desirable. Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) theory (Demerouti et al., 2001) posits that
job-related stress is a result of high level of job demands (i.e. things that must be done) and low
level of job resources (i.e. things that contribute in attaining work goals and boosting personal
growth). Many studies used the JD-R model or other stress-related models such as the Demand-
Control model (Karasek, 1979) to explain the effect of job-related stress on employees’ behavior
at work. Although results of a qualitative study showed a need for communication about job-
related stress, supportive work environment and involvement of all organizational level in job-
related stress prevention (Havermans et al., 2018), the effect of more distal contextual and
organizational-level parameters such as organizational climate specifically facet-specific
organizational climate that precedent job demands and job resources on service employees’
performance is understudied. Therefore, considering the inconsistent results of the interaction
between demands and resources in stress models (H€ausser et al., 2010), this study proposes a
direct relationship between a facet-specific aspect of organizational climate, psychosocial safety
climate (PSC, a climate for psychological health and safety) and service employees’ positive
behavior using PSC and conservation of resource theories.
PSC as a higher-level construct concerning a good and healthy work is an indicator of
psychosocial work conditions (Law et al., 2011) which can affect work outcomes. PSC theory
explains the origins of job demands and resources and thereby the “cause of causes” of job-
related stress. Relying on Conservation of Resource Theory (Hobfoll, 2014), PSC theory also
borrowed the notion of resource caravan passageway to explain how a high PSC can act as a
resource passageway to tunnel, funnel and integrate personal, object and organizational
resources to achieve organizational goals (Loh et al., 2018). To overcome the stress caused by
crisis which adds up the normal job-related stress, using PSC theory and its caravan
passageway characteristics, we propose PSC as a facilitator of positive service behavior.
A study by Dollard and Bailey (2021) showed that PSC may be built in times of crisis like the
COVID-19 pandemic.
In line with PSC theory, the study suggests that PSC as a macro-level resource provides
service employees with a work environment that is psychosocially safe; thus, they will be
encouraged to show positive service behaviors. According to Griffin et al. (2007), positive task-
related behaviors are types of behaviors that are valued in organizations and important for
organizational effectiveness. Contextual factors determine whether employees can be effective
by only performing formal job requirements or by adapting to and initiating challenges. When
the work context is risky and uncertain, it is not possible to predict all contingencies, thus
performing formalized tasks are not considered effective by customers (Ilgen and Hollenbeck, Antecedents of
1991). In a challenging work environment, positive task-related behaviors must include customer
discretionary behaviors that emerge in response to turbulent conditions and demands (Griffin
et al., 2007). Therefore, in this study, positive service behaviors are specified as emergent and
behavioral
discretionary behaviors directed at customers, which reflect service employees’ adaption to the intentions
demands and initiation to solve the problems before happening during service interaction
beyond their formal tasks (Netemeyer et al., 2005).
In addition to the organizational-level resources provided by PSC, the study proposes that 3
resource caravan passageway characteristic of PSC can pave the way to incorporate individuals’
personal resources such as psychological capital (PsyCap) in the passageway to promote positive
service behaviors. PsyCap is an individual’s positive psychological state of development,
characterized by hope, efficacy, resilience and optimism (Luthans and Youssef, 2007), which affect
job performance. Several studies examined the effect of personal qualities on employees’
engagement in positive behaviors (Waterwall, 2019; Rabiul et al., 2022; Jundt et al., 2015); however,
the interaction effect of PsyCap as a personal resource and PSC as an organizational resource in a
PSC passageway is an unexplored area. Therefore, the present study suggests that the interaction
between PSC and PsyCap influence positive service behaviors. The study also extends the
resource contribution of the PSC caravan passageway beyond the service organizations’ wall to its
customers. In a high PSC, prosocial management decisions create a climate in which resources are
supplied, integrated and protected maintaining a resources caravan throughout the organization.
Then, the resource caravan can affect customers’ evaluation of the service which shapes their
intentions. The quality of customers’ interaction with service employees largely influences
customer intentions and behaviors which in turn affect organizational effectiveness (Subramony
and Pugh, 2015). When customers appraise the behavior of service employees as positive, they are
likely to positively engage with the organization.
Given the above discussions, we articulate a synergic-mediated model of positive service
behaviors enabled by PSC caravan passageway provided in Figure 1. Specifically, we
develop a theoretical model to unfold how employees’ perceptions of psychosocial safety
policies, practices and procedures in their work environment (i.e. PSC) and their positive
psychological capacities (i.e. PsyCap) jointly influence positive service behaviors that
promote customer behavioral intentions to benefit service organizations, their staff and
customers especially during the crisis. To support the proposed model, scholarship from
theories of PSC and resource caravan passageway concept as an extension to the
Conservation of Resource theory are reviewed and integrated.

2. Theory and hypotheses development

2.1 Psychosocial safety climate of the workgroup
In all organizations, senior managers’ values, beliefs and actions play a fundamental role in
shaping organizational climate (Ahmad et al., 2018), organizational policies, practices
and procedures and organizational members shared perceptions of them (Dollard and

Independent variables Interdependent variable Dependent variable

Psychological
Capital
Customer
× Positive Service
Behavioral Figure 1.
Behavior Synergic-mediated
Intentions
Psychosocial model of positive
Safety Climate service behaviors
AJB McTernan, 2011). Whenever top management puts equal importance on the psychological
38,1 health of employees and the financial goals, the organizational climate reflects a balance
between efficiency and health. The philosophy, values and actions of management give
rise to what is called PSC of an organization, that is, the organizational climate concerning
an efficiency-health balance (Dollard and McTernan, 2011). PSC is defined as a facet-
specific dimension of organizational climate that refers to shared perceptions of “policies,
practices and procedures for the protection of worker psychological health and safety”
4 (Dollard and Bakker, 2010, p. 580). Top managers’ values, philosophies and attitudes form
an up-stream resource known as PSC which through creating a psychosocially safe work
context (i.e. high PSC), well-being and job engagement of employees’ will be affected
(Dollard and Bakker, 2010).
A work environment where managers support and provide psychosocially safe working
conditions for employees is referred to as a high PSC (Mansour and Tremblay, 2018). As a
result, managers guarantee that job demands that exhaust employees’ cognitive, emotional
and physical resources of employees are controlled. Moreover, they redesign the jobs to
ensure that employees access a reliable pool of resources to perform the assigned tasks
(Dollard and McTernan, 2011). High PSC can results in high job engagement and performance
because it provides work environments where job demands including workload,
psychological and emotional demands are manageable and job resources are accessible
(Dollard et al., 2012).
Generally, when senior managers are involved in and committed to stress prevention
using psychological health and safety policies and procedures, firmly established upward
and downward organizational communication systems in relation to psychosocial health
priority a high PSC is in place. In such a high PSC, all levels of the organization are involved in
psychological well-being and stress management (Dollard and McTernan, 2011; Hall et al.,
2010). Dollard and Bakker (2010) suggested that PSC as an organizational resource can affect
work context; thus, high PSC results in well-designed jobs, lower levels of job demands and
strong job performance.
PSC’s positive effect on employees’ health and work engagement (Hall et al., 2013) is
supported in the literature; however, its effect on employees’ positive behavior is still an
unexplored area. In high PSC, when working teams and/or team members conceive the
organizational climate as psychosocially safe, they feel psychosocially supported in taking
the risk of engaging in positive behavior which is specifically important in a service
environment. Through its psychosocial caravan passageway, PSC can provide employees
with a wide range of resources (instrumental, social and emotional resources) that are
required to perform emergent behaviors, also can make up for the deterrent effect of stressors
in work environments specially during hard times such as the COVID-19 pandemic.
PSC is a higher-level organizationally healthy conductive resource (Loh et al., 2021) which
can help individuals, collectives and organizations to thrive. PSC can motivate individuals to
boost their personal resources to flourish and communicate their resources to others,
including managers, colleagues and their customers, and in this way, PSC helps individuals,
collectives and organizations to thrive and achieve their desired goals (Mansour and
Tremblay, 2018). When PSC is in place, employees realize that the organizations support their
psychosocial well-being and there is organizational communication to listen to and act on
their concerns.
High PSC sends safety signals to employees reflecting how secure the organization is (Loh
et al., 2018) to be involved in positive organizational behaviors (Hall et al., 2013) and take the
risk of going extra miles. In a high PSC context, employees can perceive any action to utilize
resources, including asking for feedback, making extra-role decisions, asking for social
support, and/or promotion, will be responded positively. Thus, employees expect a positive
response when taking extra-role actions and making emergent decisions.
 Senior management’s support for psychological well-being in high PSC organizations Antecedents of
(Dollard and Bakker, 2010) would give employees a sense of gratitude and other-focus. customer
Feeling gratitude, being other focused and consequently helping others create positive
emotions among employees broadens their cognitive resources for creative thinking when
behavioral
employees need to provide their customers with novel alternative services (Dutton et al., intentions
2007). Moreover, being other focused can develop employees’ social resources and
cooperation in helping behaviors. Positive emotions in addition to develop cognitive
resources, which are required in positive service behaviors, can act as an interpersonal 5
facilitator (Spreitzer and Sonenshein, 2003). That is, PSC at an organizational level can shape
positive service behaviors. Thus, the first hypothesis based on the proposed model is put
forward.
H1. PSC at organizational-level is positively associated with positive service behavior at
individual level.

2.2 State-like positive psychological capital

“Elevating processes” creating extraordinary performance and achievement are known as
positivity in organizations (Redelinghuys et al., 2019). These processes are specified as
“intentional behaviors that depart from the norm” of the organization (Youssef-Morgan and
Luthans, 2013). Positivity in organizations is a result of the integration and interaction
between positivity in organizational characteristics and positivity among organizational
members. To rephrase it, positivity at an organizational level adds to the positivity of intra-
organization levels (i.e. team and individual levels) and affects extra-organization levels such
as customers (Youssef-Morgan and Luthans, 2013; Friend et al., 2016). Cumulative positivity
of different organizational levels causes positive outcomes for the organizations and their
stakeholders including organizational members and customers.
Psychological capital (PsyCap) is a form of positivity and thus is considered as the focal
construct of “positive organizational behavior” (Luthans et al., 2007a). PsyCap comprises of
state-like positive motivational resources and drives positive and extraordinary
organizational behavior and performance (Friend et al., 2016; Plessis and Boshoff, 2018).
During the crisis like the COVID-19 pandemic, the state-like and thus open to development
characteristic of PsyCap can have a crucial part in developing organizations, employees and
working teams’ ability to adapt (Friend et al., 2016; Tsegaye et al., 2019) to the crisis. In
accordance with the scientific criteria of positive organizational behaviors, PsyCap is
developmental, measurable and manageable for performance improvement. Therefore,
PsyCap is defined as a combination and synergy interaction of positive resources of: Hope
(“persevering towards goals and, when necessary, redirecting paths to goals”); Efficacy
(“having confidence to take on and put in the necessary effort to succeed at challenging
tasks”); Resiliency (“when beset by problems and adversity, sustaining and bouncing
back and even beyond to attain success”) and Optimism (“making a positive attribution
about succeeding now and in the future”) (Luthans et al., 2007b, p. 3). The acronym HERO [1]
is used to emphasize the significance of PsyCap as a positive psychological resource in
creating heroes that not only can perform extraordinarily but also help others to develop
(Youssef-Morgan and Luthans, 2013).
Study results confirmed that workers with high levels of PsyCap showed more positive
outcomes in their workplaces, such as commitment, in-role and extra-role behaviors,
satisfaction and well-being and less negative outcomes including counterproductive
behaviors, stress, anxiety, cynicism and turnover intentions (Avey et al., 2011). Positive
psychological resources which comprise PsyCap and their synergic interactions provide the
underlying mechanism to reveal the positive impact of PsyCap on positive outcomes.
Individuals with high level of PsyCap know that they can accomplish the tasks confidently
AJB even in a challenging environment. They optimistically attribute their success to their
38,1 abilities and permanent causes. They never give up because they hope to reach their goals
(Youssef-Morgan and Luthans, 2013). Finally, when facing problems, they find a way around
and resiliently sustain. In common, HEROs’ own a pool of motivational developmental and
cognitive resources to be persevering, successful and sustainable in doing their various roles.
PsyCap as motivational and behavioral tendency is important for service employees
because of its state-like malleability and its focus on the behavioral performance impact at
6 both individual and collective levels (Dawkins et al., 2015; Friend et al., 2016). In other words,
during increasingly demanding and stressful working condition caused by crisis like COVID-
19 pandemic, the state-like components of PsyCap, namely, self-efficacy, optimism, hope and
resiliency and more importantly their synergic interactions can be a useful valuable personal
resource in dealing with the demands and improving performance of service employees
(Pathak and Joshi, 2021). Therefore, the second hypothesis based on the proposed model is
put forward.
H2. PsyCap at individual level is positively associated with positive service behaviors at
individual-level.

2.3 A synergistic interaction-psychological capital and psychosocial safety climate

Five resource groups of calmness, safety, attachment, hope and efficacy have been
characterized as principal resources that individuals need for self-regulation, maintaining
relationships with others and work activities (Hobfoll, 2014). Conservation of resource (COR)
theory suggests that individuals attempt to gain, develop and conserve their valuable
resources. According to COR theory of caravan, when there is a suitable environment for
developing resources (resource caravan passageway), a synergy and link can be formed
among personal and social resources known as “resource caravan” (Hobfoll, 2011). Resource
caravans are associated, linked resources that can be shared in an organizational setting
accessible to individuals and groups which are created and conserved in “resource caravan
passageways” (Hobfoll, 2014). Resource caravan passageway refers to “the environmental
conditions that support, foster, enrich, and protect the resources of individuals, sections or
segments of workers, and organizations in total, or that detract, undermine, obstruct, or
impoverish people’s or group’s resource reservoirs” (Hobfoll, 2014, p. 118).
Organizational environments which support their staff and provide them with stability
and safety, can be resource caravan passageways supplying, protecting, sharing, fostering
and pooling resources (Hobfoll, 2014). In line with the content of resource caravan
passageway, PSC as an up-stream resource can provide employees with some of these
resources and create a suitable environment for development of others, enabling employees to
engage in positive behaviors such as positive service behaviors. In a high PSC, management
commitment and support of the psychosocial safety of all organizational members, the
priority that management gives to psychological health, along with the communication
between management and employees and participation of all organizational levels in stress
prevention make a suitable environment for supplying many resources and supporting,
fostering, enriching and protecting other resources (Loh et al., 2018). When senior
management supports the psychological well-being of employees, their control over the job
and the freedom to develop new skills will improve (Dollard and Bakker, 2010).
Communicative and supportive organizational climates such as PCS, in addition to their
organizational-level resource nature, can create the passageways to retain and protect
resources and create resource caravans.
In a positive PSC, employees’ psychological resources and organizational-level resources
provided by a PSC, that is, the two sets of similar resources from different levels, can be
combined and developed over time (Dollard and Bakker, 2010). Loh et al. (2018) drawing
on COR theory suggested that PSC can act as a resource caravan passageway and provide an Antecedents of
environment where resources can be joined and supplied. When perceive the organizational customer
climate as psychosocially safe, employees can organize their personal resources including
capabilities, self-confidence and self-esteem and condition resources such as support,
behavioral
rewards, job control provided by the organization and aggregate them in the form of intentions
“resource caravan” to improve the sense of positive self. The consolidation of resources can
motivate them to engage in positive behaviors.
In high PSC, resources provided by top managers can be matched and combined with 7
employees PsyCap creating a constellation of psychosocial resources that can enhance
employees’ motivation to engage in positive behaviors. The notion of resource caravan
explains how condition resources in organizational climate and personal psychological
resources in different levels combine and create a shared pool of psychosocial resource
caravan (Hobfoll, 2014).
Occupational psychology asserts that involving in positive extra-role behaviors is more
resource demanding than performing formal job tasks (Gupta et al., 2017) especially in
unpredictable job of service employees (Karatepe and Karadas, 2015). That is why employees
need to access resources from their work environment in addition to their personal resources
especially when their mental and/or physical health is threatened by a crisis. Brunetto et al.
(2021) confirmed the effect of PSC and PsyCap on innovative behavior of health workers
during the pandemic. Therefore, a synergic interaction between service employees’
individual positive resources embodies as PsyCap and resources provided by a
psychosocially safe work environment can make exhibiting positive service behaviors
possible. The buffer-type (mediation or moderation) effect of PsyCap as a personal resource in
the process of resource building of resource caravans is also studied (Li et al., 2016; Khliefat
et al., 2021). Thus, PsyCap and PSC combine and create a multilevel psychosocial resource
caravan to drive service employees’ positive service behaviors. Thus, the third hypothesis
based on the proposed model is put forward.
H3. A synergic interaction between PsyCap at individual-level and PSC at
organizational-level is associated with positive service behaviors at individual-level.

2.4 Mediating role of employees’ positive service behavior

The basic characteristics of services, including customer-based relationships, customer
involvement in service production and the intangibility and inseparability of production and
consumption, all contribute to the significance of service employees’ role in shaping
customers’ behavioral intentions (Yang et al., 2021; Shahzadi et al., 2018). Customer positive
behavioral intentions towards a service include positive comments about the service,
recommending it to the friends and family and intention to pay a price premium and staying
cognitively loyal to the service indicate a bond with the service (Chang, 2016). Because of the
intangible nature of services, the evaluation of service quality is difficult for customers; thus,
they often consider other aspects of services, such as their relationship with service
employees, to assess the quality of the service as it affects their behavioral intentions
(Robinson et al., 2020). Empirical studies show that pleasant service encounters can affect
customers’ positive behavioral intentions such as positive word of mouth, giving feedback,
citizenship behaviors or helping other customers (Verleye et al., 2016).
For many years, service organizations are confronted with intense competition resulting
in increased customer needs from their service providers (Wilder et al., 2014). In addition,
COVID-19 crisis has severely shifted customer demand in both magnitude and urgency.
Service organizations are trying to respond to the new demands while maintaining economic
competence. Various and quickly evolving customer requirements and expectations (Raub
and Liao, 2012) restrict the effectiveness of formalized work roles in achieving organizational
AJB success (Bowen, 1990; Griffin et al., 2007). Thus, it is important for organizations to identify
38,1 the factors that encourage employees to do more than simply fulfilling formal tasks, but
rather behave beyond the completion of core tasks to meet customer needs and organizational
goals (Nguyen et al., 2016). Therefore, such activities beyond the call of service employees’
duties which are discretionary and emergent to meet customer needs and solving problems
before happening are important for service organizations’ productivity, efficiency and
encouraging customer favorable behavioral intentions (Gupta et al., 2017).
8 Positive service behaviors as a form of discretionary behavior aiming at satisfying
customer needs, are vital in service roles, because formal task elements hardly define the
behaviors that are assessed by customers as positive and useful (Nguyen et al., 2016). In
particular, the contents of positive service behaviors are hard to formalize, pre-design, or
describe success (Griffin et al., 2007; Kang et al., 2020). These behaviors are normally self-
started actions rather than lead or imposed by others (Dong et al., 2022). Positive service
behaviors are emergent and discretionary behaviors directed at customers reflecting service
employees’ endeavor during service interaction beyond their formal tasks to meet customers’
unique needs and expectations (Siami et al., 2022).
In service organizations where customer-based relationships are highly emphasized,
positive service behaviors are important, because employees are expected to deal with and act
in response to unpredictable customer needs and expectations. Sometimes employees need to
be capable of predicting customer needs or problems and act or behave proactively, such as a
service employee who proactively scans the working environment and anticipates service
problems and address them before happening (Nguyen et al., 2016).
Service employees who engage in positive service behaviors are more likely to provide a
suitable and tailor-made service to each customer based on their unique needs and prevent
service problems from happening (Raub and Liao, 2012). Customers who perceive service
employees’ behaviors as positive are more likely to build emotional and social relationship
with the service provider (Subramony et al., 2021). Consequently, customers will be
encouraged to maintain a positive and long-term relationship with the service provider.
According to social exchange theory (Blau, 1964), service employees’ positive behavior
focusing on recognizing customers’ unique needs and providing tailor-made service to satisfy
them, encourages customers to show their appreciation by staying loyal to the service
company. The ability to establish a satisfying relationship and emotional bond between
customers and service employees can escalate the relationship to the stage of engagement
(Pansari and Kumar, 2017). Therefore, employees who show positive service behavior are
more successful in developing long-term relationships with customers and engaging them
with the company.
Earlier in this paper, PSC was introduced as an up-stream organizational resource, which
can encourage positive service behaviors. PsyCap is also proposed to be an antecedent of
positive service behavior. Then a synergic interaction between PCS and PsyCap is also
proposed to be influential in motivating service employees to positively be engaged in service
behaviors. PSC as a resource caravan passageway creates a prosocial environment which
individual (PsyCap) and organizational resources (such as PSC) can be matched and enriched
to empower service employees in doing service behaviors. These propositions suggest that
PSC and PsyCap can indirectly affect customer behavioral intentions via positive service
behaviors. Logically, in service environments, customers cannot directly perceive the
organizational climate aiming at protecting service employees’ psychosocial safety and their
personal PsyCap; therefore, an indirect relationship would be possible. Interaction with
service employees is one of the main determinants of customers’ decisions about future
service relationship and engaging with the company. Customers will be directly affected
by service employees’ positive service behaviors during service delivery. To the extent that
PSC should be related to positive service behavior, it should indirectly positively affect
customer behavioral intentions. Moreover, in resource caravan passageways, resources can Antecedents of
travel and transmit between individuals and groups directly through empathy and indirectly customer
through mediation and moderating mechanisms (Hobfoll et al., 2018). Accordingly, both PSC
and PsyCap resources can transmit in PSC passageway and affect customers’ intentions.
behavioral
Based on this rationale, it can be proposed that: intentions
H4. Positive service behavior of employees at individual-level is associated with
customer behavioral intentions. 9
H5. Positive service behaviors at individual-level mediate the relationship between PSC
and customer behavioral intentions.
H6. Positive service behaviors at individual-level mediate the relationship between
PsyCap at individual-level and customer behavioral intentions.

2.5 Operationalizing the synergic-mediated model of positive service behaviors

PSC caravan passageway can be explained and operationalized by hierarchical multi-level
modeling. These models offer a suitable framework for exploring hierarchical structures in
theory and data and handles clustered/nested data (Buxton, 2008). Hierarchical linear models
assume that team members in a team are likely to show more similarity than people in
different teams; therefore, team members’ observation in the same team can be
interdependent (Dawkins et al., 2018). Disregarding the hierarchical structures in both
theory and analysis can cause unreliable outcomes. These models allow for residual
components at each level in the hierarchy resulting in correct inferences via realistic
estimation of standard errors of regression coefficients and statistical significance
(CentreforMultilevelModelling, 2017). Hierarchical linear models make the estimation of
team effects on individual outcomes as well as estimation of team effects possible
simultaneously with the effects of team-level predictors.
To make the discussion on PSC resource caravan passageway more operationally
sensible, we rely on an illustrative model. Specifically, the data must be hierarchically
structured such that service employees are nested within branches of the service
organization. Both PsyCap and positive service behavior are individual-level (Level-1)
variables, but it is also of interest to investigate the effect of higher-level (Level-2) variables, in
this case PSC. The Level-1 regression equation for the illustrative model is shown in the
formula below.


ðPositive service behaviorij Þ ¼ β0j þ β1j PsyCapij þ eij

β0j is the intercept for branch (group) j, β1j is the regression coefficient for branch (group) j and
eij is the Level-1 residual. The Level-2 formulas for the intercept and slope are as follows:
β0 ¼ γ 00 þ γ 01 ðPSCÞ þ γ 02 ðPsyCapÞ þ γ 03 ðPsyCap * PSCÞ þ u0j
β1 ¼ γ 10 þ γ 11 ðPSCÞ þ u1j

In Level-2 equations intercept and slope of each branch (group) are expressed as a function of
the mean intercept and slope (γ00 and γ10, respectively). u0j and u1j are residual terms that
capture every branch (group)’s deviation from the mean. The interaction effect in level-2
equation represents the “spiral of resources” as one of the principles of COR theory explaining
resource gain process (Hobfoll, 2011). Therefore, PSC resource caravan passageway makes
the resource gain possible and can be operationalized through the interaction effects provided
by Level-2 equations. For a full interaction analyses, we need a direct effect of the Level-2
variable (i.e. PSC) and the interaction term.
AJB PSC in the intercept (β0 equation) represents the direct effect of the PSC on the positive
38,1 service behavior. β1 equation represents the relationship between PsyCap and positive
service behavior. So, when PSC goes in the β1 equation, cross-level interactions are
represented. That is, γ11 indicates cross-level resource interaction. To make sure that a clean
test of the cross-level interaction is done, some variance must be partialed out. The individual-
level predictor (PsyCap) and the cross-product of these two terms (PsyCap * PSC) are
partialed out of the β0 equation. When a successful interaction effect is added to Level-2
10 equations, PSC resource caravan can be operationalized.

3. Method
This paper proposes a research model based on positive organizational behavior and
occupational health and safety literature. As the model and its hypotheses are proposed
based on a theoretical basis, to test the model and its hypotheses, an empirical research with a
small sample size is used. Obviously, a research with a large sample size would provide a
more reliable result.
The study’s hypotheses using a quantitative approach have been conducted. Quantitative
research is a form of research for testing objective theories and hypotheses through
examining the relationship among variables using statistical methods (Stockemer, 2019).
Hypothetic-deductive research tests existing hypotheses by obtaining quantitative data
usually collected though survey technique from a sample size for the purpose of statistical
analysis. In selecting respondents within a population, the quantitative researcher selects a
representative sample which is limited to the study context and environment (Dana and
Dana, 2005). In order to test hypotheses, a small sample including 50 employees and 50
customers of different banks in Iran were chosen. The reliability of the constructs was tested
using Cronbach’s Alpha. A series of CFA [2] has been conducted to evaluate the constructs’
validities and fitness of the proposed model compared to the plausible models. Criterion
validity of the main construct of the proposed model was tested to measures how well this
construct relates to other constructs. Finally, to test the hypotheses of the proposed model,
SPSS v. 24, Process macro and HLM [3] have been employed.

3.1 Study context

Banking industry is one of the most important and strategic components of every economy.
Iran with 36 public (42%) and private (58%) banks including 22,583 branches across the
country is among the top four countries regarding the number of bank branches per 100,000
population (Radiogoftogoo, 2019). From 2000, the number of private banks has increased
rapidly. Today, many economists believe that the rapid increase in branches is not
proportionate to the country’s economy which consequently caused inefficiency in the
banking industry. The Iranian banking industry was deeply impacted by the COVID-19
pandemic same as every other banking industry around the world. On the other hand, at
county-level, this industry suffers from severe sanctions and managerial, operational and
corporate governance issues (Donya-e-eqtesad, 2022).
In addition to macro-level issues that affect the efficiency of the banking industry in Iran,
one of the major challenges at a micro-level is disregarding customers’ motivational needs
and satisfaction. Study results suggest that despite development in the banking industry and
improvement in using electronic banking in delivering services, low rates of customer
satisfaction from services, high waiting time of service delivery and inappropriate employee
behavior are among the most detrimental factors affecting bank performance. Therefore,
understanding customer needs and desires and identifying individual and organizational
factors which shape them can improve their performance (Jahaneghtesad, 2022). Given that,
this service sector has been chosen as the context for the study because delivering services Antecedents of
often requires a high level of human interaction, considerable interpersonal relationships or customer
customer contact (Chan et al., 2010).
behavioral
intentions
3.2 Procedure and sample
Survey data for this study was collected from bank employees and customers in Iran during the
pandemic. The main data-gathering instrument of this study was self-administered surveys. Two 11
separate surveys were conducted: Survey 1 for employees and survey 2 for customers. The present
study has used probability sampling methods. This method is the most valid choice, given that all
sampling units have a known non-zero probability of selection. As the present study did not focus
on specific characteristics of statistical population, a simple random sampling technique employed
for selecting samples. In this technique all sampling units have an equal chance of selection
(Neuman and Robson, 2014). Therefore, 50 employees (13 females and 37 males) and 50 customers
(21 females and 29 males) of 5 largest banks have been randomly selected in a large city. Separate
survey packages for employees and customers were prepared. The survey was initially developed
in English. The questionnaires were translated by accredited translators from English to Persian
then back-translated from Persian to English as suggested by Brislin (1980). Employees and
customers were asked to answer the surveys and returned the survey to a sealed box.
Employees rated the measures for demographics, positive service behavior, PSC and
PsyCap. Positive service behavior adopted and empirically tested by Raub and Liao (2012) was
utilized in this study as positive service behavior. Employees were asked to rate their ability to
anticipate customers’ needs and act beyond their formal job to satisfy their customers. Sample
items include: “I anticipate issues or needs customers might have and proactively develops
solutions” and “I actively create partnerships with other employees to better serve customers”.
Rating scales for this measure were anchored at 1 (strongly disagree) and 7 (strongly agree).
Psychological capital (PsyCap) was measured using a self-rating version of the PsyCap
questionnaire (Luthans and Youssef, 2007). Employees were asked to describe how they might
think about themselves in their job at that time. They rated the measure on a six-point scale,
ranging from “strongly disagree” (1) to “strongly agree” (6). Sample items include: “If I should
find myself in a jam at work, I could think of many ways to get out of it” and “I can be on my own,
so to speak, at work if I have to”. Psychosocial safety climate was measured with a questionnaire
developed by Hall et al. (2010) in the employee survey. Items were accompanied by a 5-point
rating scale, ranging from 1 “strongly disagree” to 5 “strongly agree”. Sample items are:
“Psychological well-being of staff is a priority for this company” and “Employees are
encouraged to become involved in psychological safety and health matters”.
Customers were asked to express their inclination about staying loyal to the same bank and
spreading positive word of mouth about the same bank. Participants rated their customer
behavioral intention (Liu et al., 2001) on a seven-point scale, ranging from 1 “not likely” to 7 “very
likely”. Sample items include: “Do more business with Bank X in the next few years” and
“Encourage friends and relatives to do business with Bank X”. Overall, 46 employees (13 females
and 33 males) and 40 customers (20 females and 20 males) provided useable questionnaires.

4. Result
4.1 Reliability of the constructs
Internal consistency of scales is important for survey research using multiple items. The
reliability of a scale indicates that all the items in the scale are measuring the same underlying
construct (Pallant, 2013). Cronbach’s alpha coefficient is one of the most commonly used
indicators of internal consistency that should be above 0.7 (DeVellis, 2016). Table 1 shows
means, standard deviations, Cronbach’s alpha and correlations of the constructs.
AJB To evaluate the discriminant validity of the key constructs and compare the proposed
38,1 model to other plausible models, a series of CFAs has been conducted. The proposed four-
factor measurement model comprising of PSC, PsyCap, positive service behavior and
customer behavioral intention measures fits the data well. Table 2 compares the CFA
results of a one factor model, a two-factor model separating individual-level constructs
(PsyCap and positive service behavior) and organizational-level construct (PSC), a three-
factor model including PSC, PsyCap and customer behavioral intention and the focal four-
12 factor model. The results reveal an acceptable model fit for the four-factor model [χ 2 (df)
1542.83 (773.00), χ 2/df 5 1.995, RMSEA [4] 5 0.042, SRMR [5] 5 0.046; IFI [6] 5 0.95; CFI
[7] 5 0.95 and GFI [8] 5 0.88], and also fit the data significantly better than the alternative
models.
The criterion-related validity of the key construct of the theoretical model, positive service
behavior measure, was examined through its relationship with other hypothetically related
measures. Employees’ service behavior was significantly correlated with PsyCap (r 5 0.86,
p < 0.01), Psychosocial safety climate (r 5 0.38, p < 0.01) and customer repurchase intentions
(r 5 0.78, p < 0.01). As these relationships are largely consistent with theories and some of these
measures were obtained from different sources, including employees and customers the results
provided criterion-related validity evidence for the positive service behavior measure. According
to the series of CFA results, the proposed model showed a better fitness comparing the other
plausible models. The criterion validity also showed the validity of the focal construct, positive
service behavior and its association with other constructs of the model. Therefore, the study
showed the appropriateness of the proposed synergic-mediated model of positive service
behaviors.

4.2 Hypotheses testing

To test the hypotheses relevant to the research model, model 4 of the PROCESS macro
developed by Hayes (2013) was used. In addition, this model is able to measure the direct
effects of variables and the mediating role between an independent and dependent variable.

Scales Mean SD α PsyCap PSC PSB CBI

PsyCap 4.1 0.54 0.95 1

PSC 4.5 0.55 0.84 0.29*** 1
PSB 4.5 0.38 0.90 0.34** 0.32*** 1
Table 1. CBI 4.3 0.43 0.74 0.21** 0.23** 0.34*** 1
Mean, standard Note(s): SD 5 Standard Deviation; PSC 5 Psychosocial safety climate; PsyCap 5 Psychological Capital;
deviation, Cronbach’s PSB 5 Positive Service Behavior; CBI 5 Customer Behavioral Intentions; α 5 Cronbach’s Alpha; **Correlation
alpha and correlation is significant at the 0.01 level; ***Correlation is significant at the 0.001 level

Model df x2 CFI IFI SRMR GFI AGFI RMSEA Δx2 x2 =df

Model 1: 779 4700.75 0.84 0.84 0.68 0.71 0.68 0.095 – 6.034
1 factor
Model 2: 778 3814.11 0.87 0.87 0.08 0.75 0.72 0.084 886.64 (p < 0.001) 4.902
2 factors
Table 2. Model 3: 776 1834.07 0.94 0.94 0.047 0.86 0.85 0.049 1980.04 (p < 0.001) 2.363
Comparison of 3 factors
alternative Model 4: 773 1542.83 0.95 0.95 0.046 0.88 0.87 0.042 291.24 (p < 0.001) 1.995
measurement models 4 factors
4.3 Testing direct and indirect effects Antecedents of
The results provided in Table 3(a) show that PsyCap directly affects positive service customer
behavior (PSB) (β 5 0.39, t 5 5.81); and PSB directly affects CBI (β 5 0.43, t 5 6.39);
therefore, H2 and H4 were supported. The findings in Table 3(b) also show that the
behavioral
mediation effect of PSB on the relationship between PsyCap and CBI was statistically intentions
significant (β 5 0.46, p < 0.001); thus, H6 was supported.
In addition to analysis of hypotheses at individual level, the present study examined the
effect of cross-level propositions of PSC on individual-level variables (i.e. H1, H3 and H5). 13
In relation to H1 that PSC affect PSB, the findings indicated a significant cross-level effect
(^y 5 0.32, p < 0.01) supporting hypothesis H1 (see organizational-level coefficient of Model 1 in
Table 4). Furthermore, findings in Table 4, in relation to H5, that PSB mediates the effect of
PSC on CBI, show that the mediating effect of PSB in the link between PSC and CBI is
significant (^y 5 0.38, p < 0.001). Finally, to test the interactive effect of PSC (Organizational
Level) and PsyCap (Individual level) on PSB, Table 4, panel cross-level interaction in model 3,
shows that the interaction between PSC and PsyCap is significant (^y 5 0.41, p < 0.001)
supporting hypothesis H3.

(a) Direct relationships

CI 95%
Hypotheses Relationships β Lower Upper t-value Conclusion

H2 PsyCap → PSB 0.39 0.25 0.47 5.81 ***

Supported
H4 PSB → CBI 0.43 0.36 0.62 6.39*** Supported

(b) Standardized indirect effects: bias-corrected

CI 95%
Hypothesized mediated relationship β Lower Upper Conclusion Table 3.
Results for direct
H6: PsyCap → PSB → CBI 0.46 ***
0.34 0.69 Supported relationships and
Note(s): PsyCap 5 Psychological capital; PSB 5 Positive service behavior; CBI 5 Customer behavior simple mediation
intention; β 5 Coefficient, CI 5 Confidence interval and ***p < 0.001 effects

Models
Level and variables 1(PSB) 2(CIB) 3(PSB)

Individual level
Intercept 5.12*** (0.03) 5.12*** (0.02) 5.12*** (0.03)
PsyCap 0.19** (0.05) – 0.23*** (0.06)
PSB – 0.44** (0.09) –
Organizational level
PSC 0.32** (0.07) 0.38*** (0.08) 0.36*** (0.06)
Cross-level interaction
PSC * PsyCap – – 0.41*** (0.07)
Within-group variance 0.06 0.06 0.07
2 log likelihood 374.65 188.48 139.22
Note(s): Values in parentheses are standard errors. The first value is the unstandardized parameter estimate, Table 4.
**
p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001 HLM analysis
AJB 5. Discussion
38,1 In times of crises, service organizations face economic instability and changing customer
demands. The most important step to adjust to the new challenge is taking care of both
employees and customers. Therefore, we suggest creating a psychosocially safe working
environment helps service employees to be less stressed under the turbulent condition and
show more positive behaviors towards customers. When customers are provided with the
adjusted services based on their needs, they are more likely to show positive intentions
14 towards the organization. The purpose of this paper has been to propose a synergic-mediated
model of positive service behaviors enabled by psychosocial resource caravan to improve
customer behavioral intentions. These behaviors, specified in this paper as discretionary,
positive emergent behaviors, are especially relevant to service customers’ behavioral
intentions based on the specific characteristics of service environments. The model of
promoting positive service behaviors by psychosocial resource caravan extends PSC theory,
resource caravan passageway theory of COR and service marketing literature not only by
considering the effect of PSC on different organizational levels including management and
employees, but also by extending PSC through service relationships with customers. The
PSC philosophy of management is reflected in an organizational climate which facilitates
service employees’ behavior that enhances customer behavioral intentions. In addition, this
model integrates PsyCap and PSC literature to explain how PsyCap and PSC in different
levels of service organizations can jointly motivate service employees’ positive service
behaviors. Finally, while PSC and PsyCap have their origins in different organizational levels,
since both are comprised of psychological elements, they can combine and create a
constellation of positive resources that can be called a psychosocial resource caravan. PSC
can act as both a higher-level resource for service employees in performing positive behaviors
and a resource caravan passageway that supply, enrich and integrate resources provided by
different organizational levels in promoting customer intentions.
The proposed synergic-mediated model of service behaviors enabled by PSC caravan
passageway allows future research to apply this framework in service research. Moreover,
using hierarchical linear modeling approach, the study proposed a two-level formula which
can assist future researchers to empirically test the so-called psychosocial safety resource
caravan. In addition, there are several ways through which future research can contribute to
model psychosocial resourceful environment in service organizations. First, researchers can
consider the possibility of the return effect of employees’ behavioral intention on
psychosocial resources to incorporate the customer’s role in organizational climate and in
employees’ psychological state. This cyclic effect in the psychosocially safe service
environment framework can assess customers’ impact on employees’ performance. Other
positive practices at the organizational and/or team and individual levels, such as
virtuousness, courageous action, mindfulness, emotional intelligence, justice and
innovation, can be added to the model.
Second, the synergic-mediated model in service can be integrated into job demand-
resource models to assess the effect of accumulated psychosocial resource at different
organizational levels on organizational stakeholders’ performance and well-being. The
possibility of a curvilinear relationship between positive psychosocial resources and service
employees’ performance (Grant and Schwartz, 2011) and also between service employees’
extra-role behavior and customer engagement could be studied in future research.
Third, service researchers can assess mediated models to explain the mechanism through
which service employees’ emergent behavior can affect customer behavior or behavioral
intention. For example, future research could examine whether service employees’ positive
behaviors directly facilitate customer engagement or if the impact of these behaviors on
customer behavioral intention is indirect through positive emotions.
6. Conclusions, contributions (theoretical and practical) and limitations Antecedents of
The proposed synergic-mediated model of positive service behaviors enabled by customer
psychosocial resource caravan can have important practical and research implications.
The model will help service organizations to face crisis such as the COVID-19 challenge more
behavioral
efficiently. The model provides service environment which help employees to overcome the intentions
new stressors and engage in positive service behaviors to benefit customers and
consequently encourage them to benefit the organization through favorable behavioral
intentions. PSC resource caravan passageway can provide a safe work context to support 15
employees’ during critical conditions such as COVID-19 pandemic in various organizations,
such as highly contagious environments such as sales and services. Therefore, PSC resource
caravan passageway including its theoretical extension and antecedents and consequences,
can be recognized and developed in future research. This paper provides an integration and
extension to PSC theory and resource caravan passageway of COR theory by integrating
PsyCap and PSC in the form of a new psychosocial resource. Importantly, the synergic-
mediated model of positive service behaviors enabled by psychosocial resource caravan
advances a future research agenda in service organizations.
The proposed synergic-mediated model of service behaviors enabled by psychosocial
resource caravan has practical implications for service managers especially during crisis
such as COVID-19 pandemic. The hypotheses of the model clearly show that a psychosocially
safe working environment provided by managers can improve service employees’ motivation
and capabilities in going extra mile to address customers’ current and future needs and
requirements. Doing prescribed task roles may not suffice to satisfy service customers when
customers’ needs are changing due to the crisis, let alone encourage them to stay loyal and
engage with the service organization positively. Therefore, nurturing positive service
behaviors among service employees is very salient. The level of stress increases during crisis;
thus, to deal with the new customer demands and survive the economic uncertainty, service
organizations need to take care of their employees and customers. To increase service
employees’ intention to involve in positive service behaviors, service organizations can
create a psychosocially safe organizational climate which helps all organizational members’
level of stress during the crisis. For example, according to principles of PSC, it is necessary
that top managers support stress prevention and make sure that required resources are
available for employees during the crisis. Also, stress prevention activities must be integrated
in regular management systems. Consequently, in a psychosocially safe service environment
service employees receive the safety signal and will be able to use more personal and
organizational resources to go beyond service tasks and show positive behaviors. Thus, top
service managers are expected to be open to the philosophy of PSC, relying on a balance
between efficiency and health which affects the policies, procedures and practices of the
service organization.
In the same vein, service organizations can adopt other indicators of a psychologically
positive work environment such as the degree to which service employees share a sense of
optimism, hope, self-efficacy and resilience (i.e. PsyCap), which can also promote employees’
positive service behaviors. A high PSC can provide an environment that improves service
employees’ PsyCap. Following another principle of PSC, all organizational levels must be
involved in occupational health and safety issues and all voices must be heard. Giving
employees a voice can enhance their hope and optimism as components of PsyCap. In
addition to PSC, organizational practices that enhance and encourage goal-oriented
discussions and the exchange of beliefs and perceptions regarding the best ways in which
the team can achieve its stated goals and overcome challenges, can increase employees’
PsyCap and consequently positive service behaviors. Therefore, service employees with
higher levels of PsyCap may easily pursue their job tasks, which require them to show
positive service behaviors.
AJB One of the main limitations of this study lies in its small sample size. Because of the pandemic
38,1 it was difficult to travel to different cities and bank branches. If more data were available, more
control variables could be added. Therefore, the results of the study should be treated with
caution. The study can be replicated using larger sample size from more bank branches from
different cities or even countries to improve the generalizability of the results. Future scholars to
increase the sample size by collecting data in multiple banks, multiple cities, or even countries.
16
Notes
1. Hope, efficacy, resiliency and optimism
2. Confirmatory factor analysis
3. Hierarchical linear modeling
4. Root mean square error of approximation
5. Standardized root mean square residual
6. Incremental fit index
7. Comparative fit index
8. Goodness-of-fit index

References
Ahmad, K.Z.B., Jasimuddin, S.M. and Kee, W.L. (2018), “Organizational climate and job satisfaction:
do employees’ personalities matter?”, Management Decision, Vol. 56 No. 2, pp. 421-440.
Avey, J.B., Reichard, R.J., Luthans, F. and Mhatre, K.H. (2011), “Meta-analysis of the impact of positive
psychological capital on employee attitudes, behaviors performance”, Human Resource
Development Quarterly, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 127-152.
Blau, P.M. (1964), Exchange and Power in Social Life, John Wiley & Sons, New York.
Bowen, J. (1990), “Development of a taxonomy of services to gain strategic marketing insights”,
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 43-49.
Brislin, R.W. (1980), Cross-cultural Research Methods Environment and Culture, Springer, Boston,
pp. 47-82.
Brunetto, Y., Saheli, N., Dick, T. and Nelson, S. (2021), “Psychosocial safety climate, psychological
capital, healthcare SLBs’ wellbeing and innovative behaviour during the COVID 19 pandemic”,
Public Performance and Management Review, Vol. 45 No. 4, pp. 751-772.
Buxton, R. (2008), “Statistics: multilevel modeling”, Mathematics Learning Support Centre–Technical
report, available at: www.statstutor.ac.uk/resources/uploaded/multilevelmodelling
Centre for Multilevel Modelling (2017), “What are multilevel models and why should I use them?”,
available at: http://www.bristol.ac.uk/cmm/learning/multilevel-models/what-why.html
Chan, K.W. and Wan, E.W. (2012), “How can stressed employees deliver better customer service? The
underlying self-regulation depletion mechanism”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 76 No. 1, pp. 119-137.
Chan, K.W., Yim, C.K. and Lam, S.S. (2010), “Is customer participation in value creation a double-
edged sword? Evidence from professional financial services across cultures”, Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 74 No. 3, pp. 48-64.
Chang, K.C. (2016), “Effect of servicescape on customer behavioral intentions: moderating roles of
service climate and employee engagement”, International Journal of Hospitality Management,
Vol. 53, pp. 116-128.
Dana, L.P. and Dana, T.E. (2005), “Expanding the scope of methodologies used in entrepreneurship
research”, International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 79-88.
Dawkins, S., Martin, A., Scott, J. and Sanderson, K. (2015), “Advancing conceptualization and Antecedents of
measurement of psychological capital as a collective construct”, Human Relations, Vol. 68 No. 6,
pp. 925-949. customer
Dawkins, S., Martin, A., Kilpatrick, M. and Scott, J. (2018), “Reasons for engagement: SME owner-
behavioral
manager motivations for engaging in a workplace mental health and wellbeing intervention”, intentions
Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Vol. 60 No. 10, pp. 917-927.
Demerouti, E., Bakker, A.B., Nachreiner, F. and Schaufeli, W.B. (2001), “The job demands-resources
model of burnout”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 86 No. 3, pp. 499-512. 17
DeVellis, R.F. (2016), Scale Development: Theory and Applications, 4th ed., Sage Publications, London.
Dollard, M.F. and Bailey, T. (2021), “Building psychosocial safety climate in turbulent times: the case
of COVID-19”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 106 No. 7, pp. 951-964.
Dollard, M.F. and Bakker, A.B. (2010), “Psychosocial safety climate as a precursor to conducive work
environments, psychological health problems, and employee engagement”, Journal of
Occupational and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 83 No. 3, pp. 579-599.
Dollard, M.F. and Mcternan, W. (2011), “Psychosocial safety climate: a multilevel theory of work stress
in the health and community service sector”, Epidemiology and Psychiatric Sciences, Vol. 20
No. 4, pp. 287-293.
Dollard, M.F., Tuckey, M.R. and Dormann, C. (2012), “Psychosocial safety climate moderates the job
demand–resource interaction in predicting workgroup distress”, Accident Analysis and
Prevention, Vol. 45, pp. 694-704.
Dong, Y., Zhao, X., Yuan, Y., Dong, H. and Jiang, J. (2022), “What’s wrong with different
empowerment? The effect of differentiated empowering leadership on employee proactive
service”, Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Research, Supp. OnlineFirst, 10963480221074270,
doi: 10.1177/10963480221074270.
Donya-e-eqtesad (2022), “Overview of bank industry in Iran”, available at: https://donya-e-eqtesad.com/%
D8%A8%D8%AE%D8%B4-%DA%A9%D8%AF%D8%A7%D9%84-107/3868977-%DA%
86%D8%B4%D9%85-%D8%A7%D9%86%D8%AF%D8%A7%D8%B2-%D8%B5%D9%
86%D8%B9%D8%AA-%D8%A8%D8%A7%D9%86%DA%A9%D8%AF%D8%A7%D8%
B1%DB%8C-%D8%AF%D8%B1-%D8%A7%DB%8C%D8%B1%D8%A7%D9%86 (accessed
September 2022).
Du Plessis, M. and Boshoff, A.B. (2018), “Authentic leadership, followership, and psychological capital
as antecedents of work engagement”, Journal of Psychology in Africa, Vol. 28, pp. 26-32.
Dutton, J.E., Glynn, M.A. and Spreitzer, G. (2007), “Positive organizational scholarship”, in
Encyclopedia of Positive Psychology, BlacNwell Publishing, available at: http://webuser.bupp.
umich.edu/janedut/POS/Dutton&Sonenshein. pdf
Friend, S.B., Jihnson, J.S., Luthans, F. and Sohi, R.S. (2016), “Positive psychology in sales: integrating
psychological capital”, Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, Vol. 24, pp. 306-327.
Grant, A.M. and Schwartz, B. (2011), “Too much of a good thing: The challenge and opportunity of the
inverted U”, Perspectives on Psychological Science, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 61-76.
Griffin, M.A., Neal, A. and Parker, S.K. (2007), “A new model of work role performance: positive
behavior in uncertain and interdependent contexts”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 50
No. 2, pp. 327-347.
Gr€ozinger, A.C., Wolff, S., Ruf, P.J. and Moog, P. (2021), “The power of shared positivity:
organizational psychological capital and firm performance during exogenous crises”, Small
Business Economics, Vol. 58 No. 2, pp. 689-716.
Gupta, M., Shaheen, M. and Reddy, P.K. (2017), “Impact of psychological capital on organizational
citizenship behavior: mediation by work engagement”, Journal of Management Development,
Vol. 36 No. 7, pp. 973-983.
Guzman, N., Prema, M., Sood, R. and Wilkes, D. (2020), “Coronavirus’ impact on service organizations:
weathering the storm”, Operations Practice, Mckinsey & Company, available at: https://www.
AJB mckinsey.com/business-functions/operations/our-insights/coronavirus-impact-on-service-
organizations-weathering-the-storm (accessed 19 October 2022).
38,1
H€ausser, J.A., Mojzisch, A., Niesel, M. and Schulz-Hardt, S. (2010), “Ten years on: a review of recent
research on the Job Demand–Control (-Support) model and psychological well-being”, Work and
Stress, Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 1-35.
Hall, G.B., Dollard, M.F. and Coward, J. (2010), “Psychosocial safety climate: development of the
PSC-12”, International Journal of Stress Management, Vol. 17, pp. 353-383.
18
Hall, G.B., Dollard, M.F., Winefield, A.H., Dormann, C. and Bakker, A.B. (2013), “Psychosocial safety
climate buffers effects of job demands on depression and positive organizational behaviors”,
Anxiety, Stress and Coping, Vol. 26 No. 4, pp. 355-377.
Hassard, J., Teoh, K.R., Visockaite, G., Dewe, P. and Cox, T. (2018), “The cost of work-related stress to
society: a systematic review”, Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, Vol. 23 No. 1, p. 1.
Havermans, B.M., Brouwers, E.P., Hoek, R.J., Anema, J.R., van der Beek, A.J. and Boot, C.R. (2018),
“Work stress prevention needs of employees and supervisors”, BMC Public Health, Vol. 18
No. 1, pp. 1-11.
Hayes, A.F. (2013), Mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis. Introduction to Mediation,
Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-Based Approach edn, Guilford
Publications, New York.
Hendrix, W.H., Summers, T.P., Leap, T.L. and Steel, R.P. (2020), “Antecedents and organizational
effectiveness outcomes of employee stress and health”, in Occupational Stress, CRC Press,
pp. 73-92.
Hobfall, S.E., Halbesleben, J., Neveu, J.P. and Westman, M. (2018), “Conservation of resources in the
organizational context: the reality of resources and their consequences”, Annual Review of
Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, Vol. 5, pp. 103-128.
Hobfoll, S.E. (2011), “Conservation of resource caravans and engaged settings”, Journal of
Occupational and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 84, pp. 116-122.
Hobfoll, S.E. (2014), “Resource caravans and resource caravan passageways: a new paradigm for
trauma responding”, Intervention, Vol. 12, pp. 21-32.
Ilgen, D.R. and Hollenbeck, J.R. (1991), “The structure of work: job design and roles”, in Dunnette, M.
D. and Hough, L.M. (Eds), Handbook of Industrial and Organisational Psychology, 2nd ed.,
Consulting Psychology Press, Palo Alto, CA, pp. 165-207.
Jahaneghtesad (2022), “What are the reasons for dissatisfaction from bank services?”, available at:
https://jahaneghtesad.com/%D8%AF%D9%84%DB%8C%D9%84-%D9%86%D8%A7%
D8%B1%D8%B6%D8%A7%DB%8C%D8%AA%DB%8C-%D9%85%D8%B1%D8%AF%
D9%85-%D8%A7%D8%B2-%D8%AE%D8%AF%D9%85%D8%A7%D8%AA-%D8%
A8%D8%A7%D9%86%DA%A9%DB%8C-%DA%86%DB%8C%D8%B3%D8%AA/
(accessed September 2022).
Jundt, D.K., Shoss, M.K. and Huang, J.L. (2015), “Individual adaptive performance in organizations:
a review”, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 36 No. 1, pp. 53-S71.
Kang, H.J.A., Kim, W.G., Choi, H.M. and Li, Y. (2020), “How to fuel employees’ prosocial behavior in the
hotel service encounter”, International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 84, 102333.
Karasek, R.A. Jr (1979), “Job demands, job decision latitude, and mental strain: implications for job
redesign”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 285-308.
Karatepe, O.M. and Karadas, G. (2015), “Do psychological capital and work engagement foster
frontline employees’ satisfaction? A study in the hotel industry”, International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 27 No. 6, pp. 1254-1278.
Khliefat, A., Chen, H., Ayoun, B. and Eyoun, K. (2021), “The impact of the challenge and hindrance
stress on hotel employees interpersonal citizenship behaviors: psychological capital as a
moderator”, International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 94, 102886.
Law, R., Dollard, M.F., Tuckey, M.R. and Dormann, C. (2011), “Psychosocial safety climate as a lead Antecedents of
indicator of workplace bullying and harassment, job resources, psychological health and
employee engagement”, Accident Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 43, pp. 1782-1793. customer
Li, Y., Chen, M., Lyu, Y. and Qiu, C. (2016), “Sexual harassment and proactive customer service
behavioral
performance: the roles of job engagement and sensitivity to interpersonal mistreatment”, intentions
International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 54, pp. 116-126.
Lin, M. and Ling, Q. (2018), “Is role stress always harmful? Differentiating role overload and role ambiguity
in the challenge-hindrance stressors framework”, Tourism Management, Vol. 68, pp. 355-366. 19
Loh, M.Y., Idris, M.A., Dollard, M.F. and Isahak, M. (2018), “Psychosocial safety climate as a
moderator of the moderators: contextualizing JDR models and emotional demands effects”,
Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 91 No. 3, pp. 620-644.
Liu, B.S.C, Furrer, O. and Sudharshan, D. (2001), “The relationships between culture and behavioral
intentions toward services”, Journal of Service Research, Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. 118-129.
Loh, M.Y., Dollard, M.F., McLinton, S.S. and Tuckey, M.R. (2021), “How psychosocial safety climate
(PSC) gets stronger over time: a first look at leadership and climate strength”, Journal of
Occupational Health Psychology, Vol. 26 No. 6, p. 522.
Luthans, F. and Youssef, C.M. (2007), “Emerging positive organizational behavior”, Journal of
Management, Vol. 33 No. 3, pp. 321-349.
Luthans, F., Avolio, B.J., Avey, J.B. and Norman, S.M. (2007a), “Positive psychological capital:
measurement and relationship with performance and satisfaction”, Personnel Psychology,
Vol. 60 No. 3, pp. 541-572.
Luthans, F., Youssef, C.M. and Avolio, B.J. (2007b), Psychological Capital: Developing the Human
Competitive Edge, Oxford University Press Oxford, New York.
Mansour, S. and Mohanna, D. (2018), “Mediating role of job stress between work-family conflict, work-
leisure conflict, and employees’ perception of service quality in the hotel industry in France”,
Journal of Human Resources in Hospitality and Tourism, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 154-174.
Mansour, S. and Tremblay, D.G. (2018), “Psychosocial safety climate as resource passageways to
alleviate work-family conflict: a study in the health sector in Quebec”, Personnel Review, Vol. 47
No. 2, pp. 474-493.
Netemeyer, R.G., Maxham, J.G. III and Pullig, C. (2005), “Conflicts in the work–family interface: links to
job stress, customer service employee performance, and customer purchase intent”, Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 69 No. 2, pp. 130-143.
Neuman, W.L. and Robson, K. (2014), Basics of Social Research: Qualitative and Quantitative
Approaches, 7th ed., Pearson Canada, Toronto.
Nguyen, H., Johnson, A., Collins, C. and Parker, S.K. (2016), “Confidence matters: self-efficacy
moderates the credit that supervisors give to adaptive and proactive role behaviors”, British
Journal of Management, Vol. 28 No. 2, pp. 315-330.
Pallant, J. (2013), SPSS Survival Manual, McGraw-Hill Education, London.
Pansari, A. and Kumar, V. (2017), “Customer engagement: the construct, antecedents, and
consequences”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 45, pp. 294-311.
Pathak, D. and Joshi, G. (2021), “Impact of psychological capital and life satisfaction on organizational
resilience during COVID-19: Indian tourism insights”, Current Issues in Tourism, Vol. 24 No. 17,
pp. 2398-2415.
Rabiul, M.K., Patwary, A.K. and Panha, I.M. (2022), “The role of servant leadership, self-efficacy, high
performance work systems, and work engagement in increasing service-oriented behavior”,
Journal of Hospitality Marketing and Management, Vol. 31 No. 4, pp. 504-526.
Radiogoftogoo (2019), “Iran has ranked forth based on the number of bank branches, the Islamic
Republic of Iran Radio”, available at: http://radiogoftogoo.ir/newsDetails/?m5175100&n5766432
(accessed September 2022).
AJB Raub, S. and Liao, H. (2012), “Doing the right thing without being told: joint effects of initiative climate
and general self-efficacy on employee proactive customer service performance”, Journal of
38,1 Applied Psychology, Vol. 97, pp. 651-709.
Redelinghuys, K., Rothmann, S. and Botha, E. (2019), “Flourishing-at-work: the role of positive
organizational practices”, Psychological Reports, Vol. 122 No. 2, pp. 609-631.
Robinson, S., Orsingher, C., Alkire, L., De Keyser, A., Giebelhausen, M., Papamichail, K.N., Shams, P.
and Temerak, M.S. (2020), “Frontline encounters of the AI kind: an evolved service encounter
20 framework”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 116, pp. 366-376.
Shahzadi, M., Malik, S.A., Ahmad, M. and Shabbir, A. (2018), “Perceptions of fine dining restaurants in
Pakistan: what influences customer satisfaction and behavioral intentions?”, International
Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, Vol. 28 No. 3, pp. 338-348.
Siami, S., Martin, A., Gorji, M. and Grimmer, M. (2022), “How discretionary behaviors promote
customer engagement: the role of psychosocial safety climate and psychological capital”,
Journal of Management and Organization, Vol. 28 No. 2, pp. 379-397.
Spreitzer, G.M. and Sonenshein, S. (2003), “Positive Deviance and Extraordinary Organizing”, In: K. S.
Cameron, J. E. Dutton and R. E. Quinn, Eds., Positive Organizational Scholarship: Foundations of
a New Discipline, Berrett-Koeller, San Francisco, 2003, pp. 207-224.
Stockemer, D. (2019), Quantitative Methods for the Social Sciences, Springer International Publishing,
Ottawa.
Subramony, M., Groth, M., Hu, X.J. and Wu, Y. (2021), “Four decades of frontline service employee
research: an integrative bibliometric review”, Journal of Service Research, Vol. 24 No. 2,
pp. 230-248.
Subramony, M. and Pugh, S.D. (2015), “Services management research: review, integration, and future
directions”, Journal of Management, Vol. 41 No. 1, pp. 347-373.
Tomaskovic-Devey, D., Rainey, A., Avent-Holt, D., Bandelj, N., Boza, I., Cort, D., Godechot, O., Hajduf,
G., Hallsteng, M., Henriksenh, L.F., Hermanseni, A.S., Houj, F., Jungk, J., Joe Kingm, A.K.,
Kodaman, N., Kristalo, T., Krizkovap, A., Lippenyiq, Z., Melzerr, S.M., Munk, E., Pennerc, A.,
Petersens, T., Pojet, A., Safie, M., Thanningg, M. and Tufail, Z. (2020), “Rising between-
workplace inequalities in high-income countries”, Proceedings of the National Academy of
Sciences, National Academy of Sciences, Vol. 117, pp. 9277-9283.
Tsegaye, W.K., Su, Q. and Ouyang, Z. (2019), “Cognitive adjustment and psychological capital
influences on expatriate workers’ job performance: an Ethiopian study”, Journal of Psychology
in Africa, Vol. 29, pp. 1-6.
Verleye, K., Gemmel, P. and Rangarajan, D. (2016), “Engaged customers as job resources or
demands for frontline employees?”, Journal of Service Theory and Practice, Vol. 26,
pp. 363-383.
Waterwall, B. (2019), “Linking proactive personality and proactive behavior: the mediating effect of
regulatory focus”, Journal of Organizational Psychology, Vol. 19 No. 1, pp. 108-122.
Wilder, K.M., Collier, J.E. and Barnes, D.C. (2014), “Tailoring to customers’ needs: understanding how
to promote an adaptive service experience with frontline employees”, Journal of Service
Research, Vol. 17 No. 4, pp. 446-459.
Yang, K., Kim, J., Min, J. and Hernandez-Calderon, A. (2021), “Effects of retailers’ service quality and
legitimacy on behavioral intention: the role of emotions during COVID-19”, The Service
Industries Journal, Vol. 41 Nos 1-2, pp. 84-106.
Youssef-Morgan, C.M. and Luthans, F. (2013), “Positive leadership: meaning and application across
cultures”, Organizational Dynamics, Vol. 42, pp. 198-208.
Zhang, M., Zhang, P., Liu, Y., Wang, H., Hu, K. and Du, M. (2021), “Influence of perceived stress and
workload on work engagement in front-line nurses during COVID-19 pandemic”, Journal of
Clinical Nursing, Vol. 30 Nos 11-12, pp. 1584-1595.
Further reading Antecedents of
Bakker, A.B. and Demerouti, E. (2018), “Multiple levels in job demands-resources theory: implications customer
for employee well-being and performance”, in Handbook of well-being.
behavioral
Chou, S.Y., Barron, K. and Ramser, C. (2021), “Helping coworkers only when I have more? Integrating intentions
social comparison, attribution and conservation of resources theories”, Management Research
Review, Vol. 44 No. 7, pp. 1012-1028.
Griffin, M.A., Parker, S.K. and Manson, C.M. (2010), “Leader vision and the development of adaptive and 21
proactive performance: a longitudinal study”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 95 No. 1,
pp. 174-182.
Homburg, C. and Furst, A. (2005), “How organizational complaint handling drives customer loyalty: an
analysis of the mechanistic and the organic approach”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 69, pp. 95-114.
Idris, M.A. and Dollard, M.F. (2014), “Psychosocial safety climate, emotional demands, burnout, and
depression: a longitudinal multilevel study in the Malaysian private sector”, Journal of
Occupational Health Psychology, Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 291-303.
International Labour Organization (2021), “ILO Monitor: COVID-19 and the world of work”, Seventh
edition Updated estimates and analysis, available at: https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/
public/@dgreports/@dcomm/documents/bri efingnote/wcms_767028.pdf (accessed 12 May).
Jaramillo, F., Mulki, J.P. and Boles, J.S. (2013), “Bringing meaning to the sales job: the effect of ethical
climate and customer demandingness”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 66 No. 11,
pp. 2301-2307.
Kalyar, M.N., Saeed, M., Usta, A. and Shafique, I. (2020), “Workplace cyberbullying and creativity:
examining the roles of psychological distress and psychological capital”, Management Research
Review, Vol. 44 No. 4, pp. 607-624.
Kozlowski, S.W. and Klein, K.J. (2000), “A multilevel approach to theory and research in organizations:
contextual, temporal, and emergent processes”, in Klein, K.J. and Kozlowski, S.W.J. (Eds),
Multilevel Theory, Research, and Methods in Organizations: Foundations, Extensions, and New
Directions, Jossey-Bass, pp. 3-90.
Mansour, S. and Tremblay, D.G. (2019), “How can we decrease burnout and safety workaround
behaviors in health care organizations? The role of psychosocial safety climate”, Personnel
Review, Vol. 48 No. 2, pp. 528-550.
Schmitz, C. and Ganesan, S. (2014), “Managing customer and organizational complexity in sales
organizations”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 78 No. 6, pp. 59-77.
Wirtz, L. (2011), Services Marketing. People, Technology, Strategy, 7th ed., Pearson, NJ.
Yulita, I.M.A. and Dollard, M.F. (2014), “A multi-level study of psychosocial safety climate, challenge and
hindrance demands, employee exhaustion, engagement and physical health”, in Psychosocial
Factors at Work in the Asia Pacific, pp. 127-143.
Zadow, A., Dollard, M.F., Parker, L. and Storey, K. (2019), “Psychosocial safety climate: a Review of
the evidence”, in Psychosocial Safety Climate, Springer, Cham, pp. 31-75.

Corresponding author
Sahar Siami can be contacted at: sahar.siami@uws.ac.uk

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com