Abstract
Digital platforms and tech giants have led to a rapid shift in values and traditional ways of working. Although “diligence” has long been essential for work success and promotion, employees in modern companies are reluctant to blindly follow this attitude. Many well–known Western companies, such as Facebook and Google, see fun in the workplace as conducive to productivity and creative behavior. We investigated the associations of fun at work with experienced fun, employees’ creative behavior, managers’ support for fun, and trust in a Chinese context using different scales. Discriminant validity was confirmed by confirmatory factor analysis. A total of 508 workers from Taiwan and mainland China participated in the study and completed questionnaires. A key finding was that fun at work was positively related to employees’ creative behavior. In addition, moderators of managerial support for fun and trust between the workplace and experienced fun were confirmed. These results can serve as a reference for Chinese managers who want to encourage creative behaviors and prevent negative behaviors in the workplace. In practice, results suggest that fun should be allowed more in the workplace because it could contribute to positive outcomes. However, managers should create a workplace that is fun, allows for creativity, and at the same time leads to high productivity.
Keywords: Workplace fun, Experienced fun, Creative behaviors, Manager’s support of fun, Trust
1. Introduction
Indulging in fun activities improves individuals’ quality of life. Such activities enable people to express themselves and experience pleasure. However, some Eastern workplaces, especially in China, view having fun at work negatively, associating it with laziness; the word “fun” is often associated with a lack of seriousness and an attempt to escape from reality. Although fun activities can help retain optimism and strengthen work values, workplace fun and some kinds of workplace humor are often perceived in a negative light and do not help an organization’s outcomes [1,2], and employees might develop a cynical mentality when organizations introduce fun elements into the workplace environment [3]. Despite these apparent inconsistencies, research has shown that workplace fun influences employees’ work attitudes and behaviors. Employees who are not presented with opportunities to indulge in fun activities at work are prone to depression and burnout [4]. Fun can be a mental fix to help employees cope with emotional exhaustion and negative affect [5], and scholars have examined the benefits of experiencing fun at work with regard to enhanced employee motivation [6,7]. Therefore, encouraging workplace fun might be an effective and alternative organizational management strategy.
Many renowned Western corporations use management strategies that provide scope for workplace fun. For instance, Marriott International’s primary philosophy is to ensure that its employees get to work in a fun environment, which is reflected in their slogan, “Work hard, but keep it fun.” Furthermore, words like “fun” and “enjoyment” have frequently been used in Disney’s annual reports. Google is also famous for creating workplaces that are welcoming. Clearly, workplace fun has become an increasingly popular topic in practice and academic research [8]. Workplace fun, as a management strategy, helps employees enhance their physical and psychological wellness. Specifically, it is the characteristic of a playful and humorous work environment that can trigger the enjoyable and lighthearted feelings of employees [9]. Young employees, particularly millennials, value enjoyable and flexible work settings [10]. Such individuals prioritize happiness in the workplace. Consequently, the notion of “workplace fun” has begun gaining popularity in Eastern societies [11].
According to the Affective Events Theory (AET) [12], work events can directly lead to affective reactions, and in turn, such affective reactions contribute to judgment–driven behavior. Previous research about workplace fun had adopted the AET as its theoretical foundation [[13], [14], [15], [16], [17]]. Employees may enjoy themselves and feel happy through fun events and activities in the workplace [18]. The term “experienced fun” means that employees’ feel a sense of fun in the workplace, revealing the degree of amusement that employees could potentially experience at work [19]. However, previous research has used the terms workplace fun and experienced fun interchangeably. There has not been a clear distinction made between these two terms. Therefore, with experienced fun as the mediator, this study not only clarified the distinction between workplace fun as activities and experienced fun as a psychological state but also investigated whether workplace fun benefits employees’ experienced fun in the context of work settings in Chinese society.
One crucial benefit of workplace fun is that it encourages creative behaviors. Those who enjoy themselves inhale more oxygen, generate more endorphins, enhance blood circulation in the brain, and think more creatively [11]. Moreover, individuals with clear and open minds can challenge conventions and gain new experiences [20]. According to existing research, fun in the workplace promotes pleasant emotions and increases intrinsic motivation, which boosts the workplace’s creative climate and employees’ creative behaviors [21]. Creative behaviors could become an increasingly common component of organizational development. They are essential in all activities of the organization to raise its efficiency, whether they are related to products or services [22]. Thus, investigating the relationship between workplace fun and employees’ creative behaviors is vital. This study specifically focused on examining that relationship.
According to Bilginoğlu and Yozgat [23], successful leaders must comprehend and promote novel management practices. Employees can break free from conventional mindsets and spend more time working if management recognizes and prioritizes workplace fun. Employees have often indicated that their managers deny them a fun workplace. Such managerial attitudes only instill unfavorable sentiments toward work [24]. Evidently, management’s attitude toward workplace fun is a critical aspect that impacts employees’ experiences.
Every employee responds differently to their colleagues. The extent to which an employee enjoys their job is dictated by their own feelings within the workplace. If employees do not trust their colleagues, they are less likely to adapt to management practices, demonstrate fun in the workplace, or communicate effectively with their colleagues and management [25]. Therefore, this study also investigated the moderating impact of management’s attitude toward workplace fun and employees’ trust between workplace fun activities and their experienced fun.
Most studies on this topic have focused only on Western societies, and there has been little research about workplace fun in the Chinese context. In Chinese social settings, where hard labor is favored and workplace enjoyment is discouraged, there is an obvious dichotomy between fun and work [26]. This is because workplace fun contradicts traditional Chinese values [27]. Thus, this study investigated the benefits of workplace fun within Chinese organizations. To accomplish this, a moderated mediation model is proposed in accordance with AET to explore how workplace fun improves creative behaviors. As previously mentioned, we also considered the effects of managers’ support of fun and employees’ trust. Our findings demonstrated the broad applicability of workplace fun, adding to the existing relevant literature in the Chinese cultural context. This study was significant because it could help organizations and managers develop novel management practices, thus improving organizational operations and strategies.
2. Literature review and hypotheses
2.1. The Affective Events Theory
The Affective Events Theory (AET) [12] explains the relationship between the internal influences of employees, represented in affective events, or moods and emotions, and their reactions to events that happen in the workplace and impact their performance, feelings, attitudes, and job satisfaction levels. The theory differentiates between affective or influential work behaviors and cognitive–based behaviors that act as job satisfaction predictors [28]. Individuals within organizations behave according to their spontaneous feelings that change from one moment to another in the workplace. And attitude is a judgmental cognitive process based on affect. Hence, positive affect creates a positive affective state of matter that influences employees to achieve work goals. As a result, affective disposition influences work events, and specific personality traits influence the psychological well–being of individuals associated with emotional reactions and chronic mood.
2.2. Workplace fun
The fun elements in life are regarded as essential for our psychological health [29]. When people participate in certain situations or events that involve fun or relaxation, they feel happy [30]. This motivates them to approach challenges from different perspectives [31]. Thus, scholars believed fun can help create a more joyful and relaxed working environment for employees, with many positive outcomes [32,33].
Workplace fun entails any entertaining or delightful activity that occurs in the workplace, and it is crucial to organizational success [8]. According to Piaget [34], entertainment is a process that challenges conventions. However, it can enable workplace fun. Additionally, employees who enjoy their work and find it meaningful perform better. Fun is crucial for organizations that encourage the creative behaviors of their and prioritize employees’ mental health [35].
Workplace fun can assume numerous forms, including challenges, competition, and cooperation [36]. Moreover, workplace fun can be increased through entertaining tasks [37], games [36,38], performance–based competitions [36], team–building activities, reading clubs, fitness programs, parties, pressure–relieving activities [26,36,39], anniversary parties [32,36], food sharing, and sharing jokes [26,36,38].
2.3. Creative behaviors
Creative behaviors are linked to the development of novel ideas about products, practices, services or procedures, and personality, and they are potentially useful to an organization’s competitive advantage [22,[40], [41], [42]]. Organizations could motivate employees’ creative ideas to meet market variations [41] because creative ideas can combine internal motivations and divergent thinking [7]. AlQhaiwi and Abukaraki [22] noted that creative behaviors are derived from employees’ creativity. These behaviors involve employees’ abilities to use creative concepts and ideas to perform their work at a high level [22]. Further, employees need creative actions that help them navigate the dynamic contexts in the workplace [42]. For example, creative behaviors include new ideas to improve performance, and employees could search for new technologies, processes, skills, or ways to finish their work and solve problems [43]. Creative employees are not afraid to take risks and are more confident and efficient than those who lack creativity [44,45].
Previous research has contributed to the finding that novel job structures can contribute to employees’ intrinsic motivation and creative output in the workplace [46]. Shalley and Gilson [40] pointed out that new management approaches could stimulate creative behaviors. Employees are more committed to their jobs when they have fun at work, because fun at work could build an enjoyable climate that stimulates employees to engage their time and energy and spurs their creative work involvement [47,48]. Additionally, employees who are familiar with their jobs are more likely to be interested in their jobs, acquire occupational skills, and be more creative [49]. Styhre [50] found that workplace fun encouraged employees in the pharmaceutical industry to be more creative in developing new products. Workplace fun increases employee motivation and flexibility, which benefits and is related to creative performance [51]. Organizations have increasingly incorporated fun elements into the workplace and encouraged employees to be creative [52].
Accordingly, we proposed the first hypothesis.
H1
Workplace fun is positively associated with employees’ creative behaviors.
2.4. Experienced fun
According to AET, employees react emotionally to events in the workplace, developing various affective reactions with subsequent implications for work and behavior [12]. The meaning of “experienced fun” (employees’ feeling of fun in the workplace) differs from that of “workplace fun” (fun activities and behaviors in the workplace). Fun activities bring considerable experienced fun to employees and prevent them from becoming exhausted by routine work or drudgery [4,19,39,41]. Experienced fun reveals the degree of employees’ perceptions of fun when they participate in fun activities, see amusing things, or relax in the workplace [19,30]. It clarifies the impact of workplace fun on employees, where employees who experience a high level of fun are more likely to enhance their work performance and enjoy their work [53]. Making the workplace fun is positively associated with employees’ perceived fun and reduced negative outcomes [54]. Thus, it has been shown that experienced fun has been considered an important determinant of interpersonal cohesiveness [54,55]. Moreover, individuals’ creative behaviors are expected to increase directly if the workplace is supportive on formal as well as informal levels. According to Fluegge–Woolf [51], the behavioral manifestations of creative employees refer to the generation of ideas, procedures, and products that are both novel and useful. Positive emotions and feelings can influence their creative behaviors [56], which tend to increase creative output in terms of quantity and quality [48]. Therefore, based on AET, when workplace fun (fun events and activities in the workplace) is facilitated, employees may experience fun and enjoy themselves [53,57]. A fun workplace is one where the organizational culture, management practices, and resources are beneficial for creative behaviors. The higher the level of fun, the more creative behaviors are encouraged, and the more a creative climate is enhanced in the workplace. Based on these observations, we proposed the second hypothesis.
H2
Experienced fun mediates the relationship between workplace fun and employees’ creative behaviors.
2.5. Managers’ support of fun
The support of managers for fun is shown in the space provided for employees to have fun at work [58]. Managers’ support of fun makes employees aware of the types of fun that are permitted in the workplace, making these activities seem valued and supported [9]. In this regard, managers could be proactive and contribute to designing work–appropriate fun activities or encourage employees to enjoy organic fun [59]. Managed fun is a type of workplace fun [38,60] that indicates designed, work–appropriate fun that helps to achieve organizational goals. Examples include encouraging employees to socialize and coordinate fun activities in the workplace or outside of it. Organic fun occurs naturally among people. A good way of enabling this is by allowing creative behaviors at work and taking short breaks. Task fun assumes that work is fun and that implementing tasks is enjoyable for employees’ personal interests [61]. Choi, Kwon, and Kim [62] suggested an approach that encourages a creative and productive work environment, represented in the careful design of fun activities by managers and allowing employees to participate in them voluntarily, without punishment, or allowing employees to design the activities by themselves and providing them with the relevant support. Sumayya, Amen, and Imran [63] pointed out that a creative environment benefits from managers’ support for a fun culture. With the support of managers, employees can think more creatively about work–related issues and problem solving. Therefore, managers’ support of fun determines whether employees experience fun and exhibit creative behaviors. Hence, we proposed the following hypotheses.
H3a
Managers’ support of fun moderates the relationship between workplace fun and employees’ experienced fun.
H3b
Managers’ support of fun moderates the indirect relationship between workplace fun and creative behaviors through employees’ experiences of fun; the indirect effect is more profound when the positive manager’s support of fun in the workplace is higher.
2.6. Trust
Trust is a psychological state wherein individuals are willing to share interpersonal risk and communicate with others [64]. When one party cannot control or supervise another party but is willing to endure the risk of damage, trust is created [65]. Trust encourages individuals to share resources and assuages the fear of being exploited [66]. The nature of interpersonal relationships is determined by trust in an organization, which is a critical component of work life [65,67]. Trust is essential in any important relationship, whether personal or professional; strong relationships based on trust result in a positive impact on organizations. Mutual trust among employees is a valuable resource that provides a competitive edge [68]. Employees who trust one another work more efficiently and are more likely to exchange information [69,70]. Moreover, employees who demonstrate a high sense of passion are more likely to engage with their work and perceive it as fun [68].
Mutual trust among employees affects their work attitude [66]. Employees can engage with their work and build trust by experiencing fun at work [71]. Moreover, trust affects the relationship between workplace fun and employees’ emotions [53]. According to Georganta and Montgomery [73], workplace fun has a significant impact on employees’ feelings of freedom and trust. The effect of fun on employees’ work attitudes depends on their trust in their organization, colleagues, and managers. Employees’ mutual trust fosters an amicable relationship between coworkers and supervisors [73]. Alternatively, a lack of trust may result in cynicism. Employees who do not trust their colleagues may be uninterested in their work or in workplace fun. The reason that workplace fun could improve a workplace relationship is that any good relationship is built on trust [72,73]. Trust moderates the relationship between workplace fun and other workplace–related factors [73]. Thus, we proposed the following hypotheses.
H4a
Trust moderates the relationship between workplace fun and employees’ experienced fun.
H4b
Trust moderates the indirect relationship between workplace fun and creative behaviors through employees’ experiences of fun; the indirect effect is stronger when employees demonstrate a higher level of trust in workplace fun.
3. Methods
3.1. Research framework
This study examined the relationships between workplace fun, experienced fun, creative behaviors, and managers’ support of fun and trust. To better understand their effects, a conceptual model was developed based on previous research. In this moderated mediation model, experienced fun is the mediator, and managers’ support of fun and trust are the moderators. The research framework is illustrated on Fig. 1.
Fig. 1.
Study framework based on hypotheses.
3.2. Sample and procedure
For data collection, online questionnaires were distributed as part of a cross–sectional survey. Full–time employees from Taiwan and mainland China were invited to participate during July 2021 and March 2022. All samples came from different types of local businesses; there were no samples from foreign–invested enterprises, and most of the samples from mainland China were concentrated in southeast coastal areas. Due to the close geographical location and the fact that both types of organizations belong to Chinese culture, this study found a high degree of similarity between them in terms of both corporate culture and management style. This study was conducted by posting survey links to the questionnaire on the organizations’ corporate and social networks via Google Form and other platforms in mainland China for collecting questionnaires. The objective of the survey, the standards for full–time employees, the privacy of the participants’ personal information, and the voluntary nature of the survey were all mentioned in a statement attached to the questionnaire.
A total of 508 full–time employees from different types of local businesses in Taiwan and mainland China participated in this study (144 samples from Taiwan and 364 samples from mainland China). The average age of the participants was 36.5 years; 60.6% were women, and the majority (63.2%) had a bachelor’s degree. To avoid data disparities between Taiwan and mainland China, we conducted a t–test on the data from these two locations individually. The results showed that there was no significant difference between the two groups in Taiwan and mainland China. This study also checked the common method variance (CMA) that was suggested by Podsakoff [74]. The results showed that the explanation variance percentage of the first factor was 32.33%. This is less than the recommended threshold of 50% and indicates that there is no obvious common method bias in our samples [74].
3.3. Measurement instruments
To confirm that the scales were reliable, we used tools from the literature. Following Brislin [75], we ensured the accuracy and conceptual equivalence of the Chinese and English versions of the scales. All scale items were translated and back–translated by bilingual native Chinese and English speakers. All responses were measured using a six–point Likert scale because the six–point scale has no neutral or middle category and avoids the neutral categories that disturb measurement [76].
3.3.1. Workplace fun
We referred to the study by Ford, McLaughlin, and Newstrom [36] that used a 10–item scale to investigate diverse entertaining activities in the workplace, on a six–point Likert scale ranging from 1 (never) to 6 (all the time), with items such as humor (e.g., cartoons, jokes, humor emails), games (e.g., dance, bingo, company–sponsored sporting teams), and social events (e.g., picnics, parties, social gatherings). Cronbach’s α was 0.87.
3.3.2. Creative behaviors
The 13–item scale developed by George and Zhou [43] was used to measure employees’ creative behaviors. The items included “The belief that I am a good source of creative ideas” and “The belief that I often come up with creative solutions to problems.” Each was rated on a six–point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 6 (strongly agree). Cronbach’s α was 0.89.
3.3.3. Experienced fun
To measure the level of fun experienced in the workplace, this study used the four–item scale of Karl and Peluchette [77]. The items were “This is a fun place to work,” “We laugh a lot at my workplace,” and “Sometimes I feel more like I am playing rather than working.” A six–point Likert scale was used, ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 6 (strongly agree). Cronbach’s α was 0.86.
3.3.4. Managers’ support of fun
Managers’ support of fun was assessed using the five–item scale developed by Tews, Michel, and Allen [32]. The items included, “My managers encourage employees to have fun on the job” and “My managers care about employees having fun on the job.” A six–point Likert scale was used, ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 6 (strongly agree). Cronbach’s α was 0.89.
3.3.5. Trust
We adopted Methot, Lepine, Podsakoff, and Christian’s [66] four–item scale to measure the level of trust. The items included “If I had my way, I wouldn’t let my coworkers have any influence over issues that are important to me.” A six–point Likert scale was used ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 6 (strongly agree). Cronbach’s α was 0.82.
3.3.6. Control variables
This study controlled for participants’ age, gender, marital status, and educational level, as these factors could have influenced their experienced fun and work behaviors [78]. These control variables were used to eliminate the potential impact of the confounders.
3.4. Discriminant validity
To assess the factor structure of the measures and determine the discriminant validity of our model, we used confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). The goodness–of–fit of the five structures was determined using CFA. Studies suggested that a x2/df value less than 5 [79], a goodness–of–fit index (GFI) and confirmatory fit index (CFI) greater than 0.8 [80], and a root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) less than 0.08 indicate good fit [81]. The five–factor model yielded the best fit with the data (x2/df = 3.67; RMSEA = 0.06; GFI = 0.82; CFI = 0.89). We subsequently examined four alternative models and compared them to the baseline (five–factor) model using the methods mentioned in the existing literature; Table 1 showed the findings. The five–factor model exhibited the best overall fit.
Table 1.
Goodness–of–fit of models.
| Model | Fit | χ2 | df | χ2/df | RMSEA | GFI | CFI |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Baseline model | 5 factors | 1049.10*** | 340 | 3.09 | .06 | .86 | .89 |
| Model 1 | 4 factors: combining MSFd and TSe | 1702.20*** | 344 | 4.95 | .09 | .77 | .81 |
| Model 2 | 3 factors: combining WFa and EFb, MSF and TS | 2477.48*** | 347 | 7.14 | .11 | .68 | .70 |
| Model 3 | 2 factors: combining WF, EF and CBc, combining MSF and TS | 3237.24*** | 349 | 9.28 | .13 | .59 | .59 |
| Model 4 | 1 factor: combining all variables into 1 factor | 4291.40*** | 350 | 12.26 | .15 | .52 | .44 |
Note: N = 508; WF a: Workplace Fun; EF b: Experienced Fun; CB c: Creative Behaviors; MSF d: managers’ support of fun; TS e = Trust; N = 508; *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001.
4. Results
Table 2 presented the means, standard deviations, and correlations among the key variables. As hypothesized, workplace fun showed positive correlation with creative behaviors (r = 0.59, p < .01) and experienced fun (r = 0.61, p < .01). Moreover, it was positively related to managers’ support of fun (r = 0.43, p < .01) and trust (r = 0.58, p < .01). Employees’ experienced fun was positively correlated with creative behaviors (r = 0.58, p < .01), managers’ support of fun (r = 0.60, p < .01), and trust (r = 0.73, p < .01). Meanwhile, creative behaviors correlated positively with managers’ support of fun (r = 0.40, p < .01) and trust (r = 0.50, p < .01).
Table 2.
Correlations among the research variables.
| Variable | Mean | SD | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Genderb | 0.39 | |||||||||
| 2. Marital Statusc | 0.61 | .14** | ||||||||
| 3. Educationd | 16.18 | 1.60 | .06 | .17** | ||||||
| 4. Age | 36.54 | 9.54 | .14** | .70** | – .14** | |||||
| 5. Workplace Fun | 4.04 | 1.23 | .05 | .03** | – .24** | .25** | ||||
| 6. Creative Behaviors | 4.28 | 1.05 | .03 | .08 | – .23** | .28** | .59** | |||
| 7. Experienced Fun | 3.81 | 1.17 | .02 | .08 | – .11** | .07 | .61** | .58** | ||
| 8. MSFa | 4.56 | 0.80 | .01 | .13** | – .04 | .16** | .43** | .40** | .60** | |
| 9. Trust | 4.06 | 1.16 | .02 | .21** | – .15** | .14** | .58** | .50** | .73** | .50** |
Note: N = 508 full–time employees; *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001; a MSF: Managers’ Support of Fun; b Gender: 0 = Male, 1 = Female; c Marital Status: 0 = Unmarried, 1 = Married; d Education: Years of Education.
The SPSS PROCESS macro [82] was utilized to test the hypotheses, including direct effect and mediation through Model 4 and moderation and moderated mediation models through Model 9. Table 3 presented the results for direct and mediating effects, indicating a significant and positive relationship between workplace fun and experienced fun (b = 0.62, p < .001). This also showed a positive correlation with creative behaviors (b = 0.54, p < .001). In terms of mediation, when workplace fun and experienced fun were incorporated into the regression model, the positive effect of workplace fun on creative behaviors weakened (b = 0.43, p < .001) and experienced fun demonstrated a significant and positive effect on creative behaviors (b = 0.19, p < .001). This finding suggested a partial mediating effect of experienced fun in the relationship between workplace fun and creative behaviors.
Table 3.
Regression results for direct effect model and mediation model.
| Variables | Experienced Fun |
Creative Behaviors |
Mediation |
|||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| B | SE | b | SE | b | SE | |
| Control Variable | ||||||
| Gender | .02 | .11 | .02 | .08 | ||
| Marital Status | −.02 | .13 | −.13 | .10 | ||
| Education | −.05 | .03 | .01 | .03 | ||
| Age | −.02* | .01 | .01 | .01 | ||
| Independent Variable | ||||||
| Workplace Fun | .62*** | .05 | .54*** | .04 | .43*** | .04 |
| Mediator | ||||||
| Experienced Fun | .19*** | .03 | ||||
| R2 | .27 | .30 | .34 | |||
| F | 37.18*** | 42.63*** | 42.87*** | |||
Note: N = 508 full–time employees; *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001.
We further examined the direct and indirect effects of mediations in Table 4, which shows that the direct effect (b = 0.43, 95% bias–corrected CI [0.34, 0.51]) and indirect effect (b = 0.12, 95% bias–corrected CI [0.07, 0.19]) of workplace fun on creative behaviors was significant, indicating a partly mediating effect of experienced fun in the relationship between workplace fun and creative behavior again. We used the Sobel test to investigate this mediating effect, as suggested by Preacher and Hayes [83]. The findings demonstrated that the mediating effect of fun experience (z = 5.09, p < .001) was significant. Thus, H1 and H2 were supported.
Table 4.
Total, direct, and indirect effects of mediations.
| Bootstrapping (95% Confidence Interval) |
Sobel Test |
||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Outcome | Effect | Boot SE | LLCIa | ULCIb | Z | p | |
| Creative Behaviors | Total effect | .54 | .04 | .47 | .62 | ||
| Direct effect | .43 | .04 | .34 | .51 | |||
| Indirect effect | .12 | .03 | .07 | .19 | 5.09 | <.00 | |
Note: a CI = confidence interval; a LL = lower limit; b UL = upper limit. *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001.
The relationship between workplace fun and experienced fun was moderated by managers’ support of fun (b = .13, p < .001) and trust (b = 0.10, p < .001) (Table 5). Fig. 2, Fig. 3 showed plots demonstrating the moderating effects of attitude toward fun on the fun experience. The regression results were used to calculate the direct effects of low and high levels of managers’ support of fun and trust. The findings showed that as managers’ support of fun increases, the association between workplace fun and experienced fun grows stronger. Similarly, as trust increased, the relationship between workplace fun and experienced fun became stronger. Therefore, H3a and H4a were supported.
Table 5.
Regression analysis for moderating variables for predicting experience of fun.
| Variable | Experienced Fun |
|
|---|---|---|
| b | SE | |
| Control Variable | ||
| Gender | .02 | .08 |
| Marital Status | −.16 | .10 |
| Education | .04 | .03 |
| Age | .01 | .01 |
| Independent Variable | ||
| Workplace Fun | .39*** | .05 |
| Managers’ Support of Fun | .43*** | .04 |
| Trust | .31*** | .03 |
| Interaction Variable | ||
| WF x MSF | .08** | .03 |
| WF x TR | .07* | .03 |
| R2 | .56 | |
| F | 127.98*** | |
Note: N = 508 full–time employees; *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001.
Fig. 2.
Interaction of Workplace Fun and Managers’ Support of Fun in Predicting Experience of Fun. Note: a WF: Workplace Fun; b MSF: Managers’ Support of Fun.
Fig. 3.
Interaction of workplace fun and trust in predicting experience of fun. Note: a WF: Workplace fun.
We employed a bootstrap estimate approach, which was used to generate bias–corrected confidence intervals (CIs) in Table 6. The findings showed that creative behaviors were a dependent variable that influenced the direct and indirect impact of the relationship between managers’ support of fun and trust. Workplace fun demonstrated a direct effect on creative behaviors (b = .41, p < .001). Meanwhile, when employees perceived lower levels of managers’ support of fun and trust, workplace fun indirectly affected creative behaviors through experienced fun (b = 0.04, 95% bias–corrected CI [0.01, 0.08]). Similarly, when employees perceived higher levels of managers’ support of fun and trust, workplace fun indirectly influenced creative behaviors through experienced fun (b = 0.11, 95% bias–corrected CI [0.07, 0.18]). Therefore, H3b and H4b were supported.
Table 6.
Direct and Indirect Effects of the Experience of Fun on Creative Behaviors under High and Low Levels of Moderatorsa.
| Conditional Direct Effects |
Conditional Indirect Effects |
|||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 95% CIb | 95% CI | |||||||||||
| Outcome | Mediator | Moderator | Effect | SE | t | p | LLc | ULd | Effect | Boot SE | LL | UL |
| Creative Behaviors | Direct Effect Experienced Fun | .41 | .04 | 9.68 | .00 | .33 | .49 | |||||
| Low | .04 | .02 | .01 | .08 | ||||||||
| High | .11 | .03 | .07 | .18 | ||||||||
Note: a Entries are unstandardized coefficient estimates (95% confidence intervals). b CI = confidence interval; c LL = lower limit; d UL = upper limit.
5. Discussion and theoretical implications
Our results, assumed a positive and significant relationship between workplace fun and employees’ creative behaviors, have been supported by prior studies [53]. Based on the AET, we established the rationale for the mediating effect of experienced fun between workplace fun and creative behaviors by viewing workplace fun as a work event, experienced fun as an affective reaction, and creative behaviors as judgment–driven behaviors. Moreover, Pryor, Singleton, Taneja, and Humphreys [30] supported this finding by establishing that workplace fun positively impacts employees’ creative behaviors.
Our results suggested a partial mediating effect of experienced fun in the relationship between workplace fun and creative behaviors. This finding was in line with the findings of Abdelmotaleb, Metwally, and Saha [56], who indicated that employees’ positive emotions could promote creative behaviors. Accordingly, experienced fun in a workplace that encourages fun benefits employees’ creative behaviors, which are important to organizational success. This is also supported by the findings of the study by Sumayya, Amen, and Imran [64], who found a positive and significant relationship between workplace fun and the creative performance of employees.
Our results indicated that managers’ support of fun moderates the relationship between workplace fun and employees’ experienced fun. This finding was partially supported by the study findings of Tews, Michel, Xu, and Drost [58], who indicated that manager support is a predictor of experienced fun. Further, our results proved that managers’ support of fun indirectly moderates the relationship between workplace fun and creative behavior. This result was partially consistent with those of the studies by Sumayya, Amen, and Imran [63], who indicated that endorsement of idiosyncratic workplace fun by leaders is positively related to creative outcomes.
Our findings suggested that trust has a moderating effect on the relationship between workplace fun and experienced fun. This hypothesis was supported in a study by Han, Kim, and Jeong [84], who reported that interpersonal trust has a significant effect on the relationship between workplace fun activities and experienced fun. Moreover, it is partially supported by the findings of Karl, Peluchette, Hall–Indiana, and Harland [70], assuming that employees’ attitudes regarding workplace fun are positively moderated by trust in supervisors and coworkers. It also assumed that trust can predict experienced fun in the workplace. The results, suggested an indirect moderating effect of trust on the relationship between workplace fun and creative behaviors through employees’ experienced fun, are partially supported by Rice’s [85] findings, assumed that a workplace that reflects a playful, trusting, and open environment is related to a higher level of employees’ creative behaviors. Based on the importance of a trust moderator between experienced fun and its outcomes, we suggested that trust deserves to be discussed in more detail regarding the division between natural and collaborative trust, and this provided stronger support for promoting the future study of workplace fun. Similarly, since trust is considered the basis for the Chinese guanxi relationship [86], future research could discuss the different derivations of trust in Chinese society and explore the effects of workplace fun.
6. Managerial implications
Managers must carefully select fun activities in the workplace to ensure that employees are not punished for engaging in organic fun activities. Different fun activities impact employees differently, which then translates into generating more creative ideas that can be transformed into innovations. If the type of fun allowed in the organization is formal, considering that it might not equally appeal to all employees due to different personal perceptions and subcultures, this becomes important to managers because it could influence some employees’ non–participation in the organized fun activities. Accordingly, managers must consider the differences between employees in terms of personalities and subcultures and design fun activities that ensure the involvement of all types of employees or allow organic fun activities without punishment. These could include social events, public celebrations of professional achievements, stress release activities, and entertainment. Activities for workplace fun need to be implemented and updated periodically to sustain their attractiveness for employees and to maintain their enthusiasm. Thus, organizations must conduct surveys to determine how employees can experience fun feelings and how to organize the most appealing fun activities.
It is recommended that managers support fun activities and make the work environment joyful. This is more likely to influence creative thinking and provide employees with the freedom to express new ideas than to induce them to consider the workplace to be a mere means to an end. However, managers should also be cautious and let employees indulge in fun activities in the workplace. A balance of formal and organic fun activities is critical for improving protective aspects and maintaining a creative environment. Activities that are joyful and also support creative behaviors at work are highly recommended. This helps in creating a positive organizational culture that includes the management’s support of fun activities, creates new fun practices, maintains trust, and ensures creative work [87]. Furthermore, trust can play a significant role in the relationship between workplace fun and its consequences [88]. Losing trust among employees could possibly result in negative outcomes when the workplace relationship does not reflect the values of camaraderie or when managers are not perceived as benevolent. Opposite results might be generated if respect and dignity are not part of the equation [89] or when the needs of the employees are not considered. Thus, organizations must invest in a workplace climate of mutual trust among employees and provide a healthy work environment. Allowing fun activities in the workplace helps employees perceive fun initiatives as the organization’s efforts to support their well–being. This further helps employees build good relationships and develop greater trust for colleagues and leaders.
Our study contributed to this line of thought by developing a hypothetical model based on the AET. In doing so, it provided an opportunity to understand the implications of fun activities in the workplace. It also provided a potential mechanism to explain how workplace fun fosters positive moods, emotions, and creative behaviors by analyzing how management support and trust impact employees’ positive attitudes. Furthermore, it highlighted that the management of workplace fun helps employees maintain a positive psychological state and become more creative at work.
7. Limitations and future research
This study had several limitations. First, we employed snowball sampling, which cannot be used to infer causality. Owing to the subjective variable chosen in the research and the limited survey samples, this study should use a longitudinal design in the future and prioritize examining employees’ experiences with workplace fun and how it evolves over time. Future studies should also be based on a large survey sample at the individual level and be conducted to help provide a comprehensive and objective understanding of the subject.
This study collected self–reported questionnaires, which may be subjective. Although no common method variance was detected, research should collect sample data from several different sources to perform a detailed analysis of organizational support and trust between supervisors and subordinates. Future research could perform cross–level validation of each team member in a specific domain of organizations. Questionnaires could be designed to collect data and match/analyze it in two steps.
Many Asian countries, including Japan, South Korea, Singapore, and Thailand, are similar and influenced by Confucian culture. Due to developmental disparities, these countries demonstrate several differences. Therefore, a study could be conducted among these countries. Additionally, different types of enterprises may have different levels of creative behaviors, and some organizations may have a decreased frequency of workplace fun because they need to constantly manage social crises. Thus, future research needs to discuss the concept further and evaluate the negative impacts of workplace fun or analyze different levels of creative behaviors. Furthermore, there are slightly different organizational traits in different cities; future research can discuss the variations in workplace fun among different cities or areas. Organizational factors, including gender, hierarchy, managerial rights, power distance, organizational type, and life cycle, vary [90]. These variables should be examined to comprehensively investigate workplace fun.
Declaration of competing interestCOI
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest and no financial interests. All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. This study does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the authors. Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study. It is an original manuscript.
Author contribution statement
Fei Ran Yang; Chun-Hsi Vivian Chen: Conceived and designed the experiments; Performed the experiments; Analyzed and interpreted the data; Contributed reagents, materials, analysis tools or data; Wrote the paper.
Funding statement
This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
Data availability statement
Data will be made available on request.
Declaration of interest’s statement
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Supplementary content related to this article has been published online at [URL].
Footnotes
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e14597.
Appendix A. Supplementary data
The following are the Supplementary data to this article.
References
- 1.Balazs S., Kuchinka D.G., Mantz T., Bracken D. Creating an innovative workplace: effects of humor style and supervisor support. Eur. J. Management. 2017;17:37–48. [Google Scholar]
- 2.Trif S., Fodor O.C. The dark side of humor in the workplace: aggressive humor, exhaustion and intention to leave the organization. Psihologia. Resurselor Umane. 2019;17(2):74–100. [Google Scholar]
- 3.Duerden M.D., Courtright S.H., Widmer M.A. Why people play at work: a theoretical examination of leisure–at–work. Leisure Sci. 2017;40(6):634–648. [Google Scholar]
- 4.Lee A.Y.P., Wang Y.H., Yang F.R. Feeling exhausted? Let’s play–How play in work relates to experienced burnout and innovation behaviors. Appl. Res. Qual. Life. 2021;16(2):629–648. [Google Scholar]
- 5.Georganta K., Montgomery A. Exploring fun as a job resource: the enhancing and protecting role of a key modern workplace factor. Int. J. Appl. Posit. Psychol. 2016;1(1–3):107–131. [Google Scholar]
- 6.Perryer C., Celestine N.A., Scott–Ladd B., Leighton C. Enhancing workplace motivation through gamification: transferrable lessons from pedagogy. Int. J. Manag. Educ. 2016;14(3):327–335. [Google Scholar]
- 7.Tsaur S.H., Hsu F.S., Lin H. Workplace fun and work engagement in tourism and hospitality: the role of psychological capital. Int. J. Hospit. Manag. 2019;81:131–140. [Google Scholar]
- 8.Tews M.J., Jolly P.M., Stafford K. Fun in the workplace and employee turnover: is less managed fun better? Employee Relat. 2020;43(5):979–995. [Google Scholar]
- 9.Michel J.W., Tews M.J., Allen D.G. Fun in the workplace: a review and expanded theoretical perspective. Hum. Resour. Manag. Rev. 2019;29(1):98–110. [Google Scholar]
- 10.Robbins S.P., Judge T.A. tenth ed. Pearson Education; Upper Saddle River: 2010. Auditing in England : Essentials of Organizational Behavior. [Google Scholar]
- 11.Ruangkanjanases A., Chen C. Attitude, job satisfaction, and task performance of Thai millennial employees toward workplace fun. IJRBS. 2019;8(5):113–122. [Google Scholar]
- 12.Weiss H.M., Cropanzano R. Affective events theory. Res. Organ. Behav. 1996;18(1):1–74. [Google Scholar]
- 13.Tang J., Liu M.S., Liu W.B. How workplace fun influences employees’ performance: the role of person–organization value congruence. Soc. Behav. Pers. 2017;45(11):1787–1801. [Google Scholar]
- 14.Taherdoost H. What is the best response scale for survey and questionnaire design; Review of different lengths of rating scale/attitude scale/Likert scale. Int. J. Adv. Res. Manag. 2019;8(1):1–10. [Google Scholar]
- 15.Chen C.H.V., Yang F.R. Workplace fun and its application in Chinese societies. Chung Yuan Manag. Rev. 2021;19(1):9–45. [Google Scholar]
- 16.Tetteh S., Dei Mensah R., Opata C.N., Mensah C.N. Service employees’ workplace fun and turnover intention: the influence of psychological capital and work engagement. Manag. Res. Rev. 2021;45(3):363–380. [Google Scholar]
- 17.Edosomwan H.S. Relationship between workplace fun and job satisfaction among university administrative staff: does perceived organizational support matter? AJSSMS. 2022;9(2):42. [Google Scholar]
- 18.Prabowo H., Sari N.A., Aprilianti A., Satrya A. 2018 Proceedings of the 1st Sampoerna University–AFBE International Conference. 2018. The impact of fun at work on creative performance and organizational citizenship behaviour. December 6–7; Jakarta Indonesia. [Google Scholar]
- 19.Peluchette J., Karl K.A. Attitudes toward incorporating fun into the health care workplace. Health Care Manag. 2005;24(3):268–275. doi: 10.1097/00126450-200507000-00011. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Salas‐Vallina A., Ferrer‐Franco A., Guerrero R.F. Altruistic leadership and affiliative humor's role on service innovation: lessons from Spanish public hospitals. Int. J. Health Plann. Manag. 2018;33(3):861–872. doi: 10.1002/hpm.2549. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Petelczyc C.A., Capezio A., Wang L., Restubog S.L.D., Aquino K. Play at work: an integrative review and agenda for future research. J. Manag. 2018;44(1):161–190. [Google Scholar]
- 22.AlQhaiwi L.A., Abukaraki R.B. The impact of entrepreneurial orientation on supporting creative behavior of managers (an empirical study on medium–sized enterprise in amman city–Jordan) Int. J. Enterpren. 2021;25:1–23. [Google Scholar]
- 23.Bilginoğlu E., Yozgat U. Is ‘workplace fun’ a new management fashion or another passing fad? JMML. 2017;4(4):448–455. [Google Scholar]
- 24.Bilginoğlu E., Yozgat U. Workplace fun: a management tool for employee engagement? İş ve İnsan Dergisi. 2020;7(1):13–22. [Google Scholar]
- 25.Engelbrecht A.S., Heine G., Mahembe B. Integrity, ethical leadership, trust and work engagement. Leader. Organ. Dev. J. 2017;38(3):368–379. [Google Scholar]
- 26.Bolton S.C., Houlihan M. Are we having fun yet? A consideration of workplace fun and engagement. Employee Relat. 2009;31(6):556–568. [Google Scholar]
- 27.Sartor V. Why all the hard work? Beijing Rev. 2011;54:52. [Google Scholar]
- 28.Zoghbi–Manrique–de–Lara P., Sharifiatashgah M. An affective events model of the influence of the physical work environment on interpersonal citizenship behavior. J. Work Organ. Psychol. 2020;36(1):27–37. [Google Scholar]
- 29.Kelly W.E. An investigation of worry and sense of humor. J. Psychol. 2002;136(6):657–666. doi: 10.1080/00223980209604826. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30.Pryor M.G., Singleton L.P., Taneja S., Humphreys J.H. Workplace fun and its correlates: a conceptual inquiry. Int. J. Manag. 2010;27(2):294–302. [Google Scholar]
- 31.Burghardt G.M. Play, playfulness, creativity, and innovation. Am. J. Play. 2014;6(3):411–413. [Google Scholar]
- 32.Tews M.J., Michel J.W., Allen D.G. Fun and friends: the impact of workplace fun and constituent attachment on turnover in a hospitality context. Hum. Relat. 2014;67(8):923–946. [Google Scholar]
- 33.Lee A.Y.P., Chang P.C., Chang H.Y. How workplace fun promotes informal learning among team members: a cross–level study of the relationship between workplace fun, team climate, workplace friendship, and informal learning. Employee Relat. 2021;44(4):870–889. [Google Scholar]
- 34.Piaget J. 1951. Auditing in United States : the Child's Conception of the World (No. 213): Rowman Littlefield. [Google Scholar]
- 35.Vorhauser–Smith S. 2013. How the Best Places to Work Are Nailing Employee Engagement?http://www.forbes.com/sites Available from: [Google Scholar]
- 36.Ford R.C., McLaughlin F.S., Newstrom J.W. Questions and answers about fun at work. Hum. Resour. Plann. 2003;26(4):18–34. [Google Scholar]
- 37.Tews M.J., Michel J.W., Bartlett A. The fundamental role of workplace fun in applicant attraction. J. Leader. Organ Stud. 2012;19(1):105–114. [Google Scholar]
- 38.Plester B., Cooper–Thomas H., Winquist J. The fun paradox. Employee Relat. 2015;37(3):380–398. [Google Scholar]
- 39.Chan S.C. The antecedents of workplace fun in the hospitality industry: a qualitative study. J. Hum. Resour. Hospit. Tourism. 2019;18(4):425–440. [Google Scholar]
- 40.Shalley C.E., Gilson L.L. What leaders need to know: a review of social and contextual factors that can foster or hinder creativity. Leader. Q. 2004;15(1):33–53. [Google Scholar]
- 41.Alikaj A., Ning W., Wu B. Proactive personality and creative behavior: examining the role of thriving at work and high–involvement HR practices. J. Bus. Psychol. 2021;36(5):857–869. [Google Scholar]
- 42.Zhang Y., Zhang Y., Law K.S., Zhou J. Paradoxical leadership, subjective ambivalence, and employee creativity: effects of employee holistic thinking. J. Manag. Stud. 2022;59(3):695–723. [Google Scholar]
- 43.George J.M., Zhou J. When openness to experience and conscientiousness are related to creative behavior: an interactional approach. J. Appl. Psychol. 2001;86(3):513–537. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.86.3.513. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 44.Zhou J., George J.M. When job dissatisfaction leads to creativity: encouraging the expression of voice. Acad. Manag. J. 2001;44(4):682–696. [Google Scholar]
- 45.Zhang X., Bartol K.M. Linking empowering leadership and employee creativity: the influence of psychological empowerment, intrinsic motivation, and creative process engagement. Acad. Manag. J. 2010;53(1):107–128. [Google Scholar]
- 46.Tsaur S.H., Yen C.H., Yang W.Y. Do job characteristics lead to employee creativity in travel agencies? Int. J. Tourism Res. 2011;13(2):191–204. [Google Scholar]
- 47.Liu K., Ge Y. How psychological safety influences employee creativity in China: work engagement as a mediator. Soc. Behav. Pers. 2020;48(8):1–7. [Google Scholar]
- 48.Fang Y., Meng B., Liu Y., Liu J. Leader–member exchange mediates the relationship between workplace fun and employee creativity. Soc. Behav. Pers. 2021;49(10):1–8. [Google Scholar]
- 49.Jaussi K.S., Knights A.R., Gupta A. Feeling good, being intentional, and their relationship to two types of creativity at work. Creativ. Res. J. 2017;29(4):377–386. [Google Scholar]
- 50.Styhre A. The role of social capital in knowledge sharing: the case of a specialist rock construction company. Construct. Manag. Econ. 2008;26(9):941–951. [Google Scholar]
- 51.Fluegge–Woolf E.R. Play hard, work hard: fun at work and job performance. MRR. 2014;37(8):682–705. [Google Scholar]
- 52.Kurt L., Kurt W., Medaille A. The power of play: fostering creativity and innovation in libraries. J. Libr. Innov. 2010;1(1):8–24. [Google Scholar]
- 53.Chan C.H.S., Mak W.M. Have you experienced fun in the workplace?: an empirical study of workplace fun, trust–in–management and job satisfaction. J. Chin. Hum. Resour. 2016;7(1):27–38. [Google Scholar]
- 54.Chen H., Ayoun B. Does national culture matter? Restaurant employees’ workplace humor and job embeddedness. J. Hospit. Tourism Res. 2022;46(6):1096–1121. [Google Scholar]
- 55.Cohn M.A., Fredrickson B.L. In search of durable positive psychology interventions: predictors and consequences of long–term positive behavior change. J. Posit. Psychol. 2010;5(5):355–366. doi: 10.1080/17439760.2010.508883. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 56.Abdelmotaleb M., Mohamed Metwally A.B.E., Saha S.K. Exploring the impact of being perceived as a socially responsible organization on employee creativity. Manag. Decis. 2018;56(11):2325–2340. [Google Scholar]
- 57.Chen C.H.V., Yang F.R. Workplace fun and its application in Chinese societies. Chung Yuan Manag. Rev. 2021;19(1):19–45. [Google Scholar]
- 58.Tews M.J., Michel J., Xu S., Drost A.J. Workplace fun matters… but what else? Employee Relat. 2015;37(2):248–267. [Google Scholar]
- 59.Cvenkel N. 2020. Auditing in Singapore : Can Fun and Games at Work Replace Well–Being in the Workplace? Perspectives from Senior Managers in the Public Sector in Well–Being in the Workplace: Governance and Sustainability Insights to Promote Workplace Health: Springer. [Google Scholar]
- 60.Jyoti J. Fun at workplace and intention to leave: role of work engagement and group cohesion. Int. J. Contemp. Hospit. Manag. 2021;34(2):782–807. [Google Scholar]
- 61.Bowen J.T., Tews M.J., Baloglu S. Yielding the benefits of fun in the workplace: the devil's in the details. Organ. Dynam. 2020;49(3) [Google Scholar]
- 62.Choi Y.G., Kwon J., Kim W. Effects of attitudes vs experience of workplace fun on employee behaviors: focused on Generation Y in the hospitality industry. Int. J. Contemp. Hosp. 2013;25(3):410–427. [Google Scholar]
- 63.Sumayya U., Amen U., Imran R. Workplace fun and creative performance of employees. Renaiss. Manuscr. Stud. (RMS) 2021;3(1):37–48. [Google Scholar]
- 64.Mayer R.C., Davis J.H. The effect of the performance appraisal system on trust for management: a field quasi–experiment. J. Appl. Psychol. 1999;84(1):123–136. [Google Scholar]
- 65.Tan H.H., Lim A.K. Trust in coworkers and trust in organizations. J. Psychol. 2009;143(1):45–66. doi: 10.3200/JRLP.143.1.45-66. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 66.Methot J.R., Lepine J.A., Podsakoff N.P., Christian J.S. Are workplace friendships a mixed blessing? Exploring tradeoffs of multiplex relationships and their associations with job performance. Person. Psychol. 2016;69(2):311–355. [Google Scholar]
- 67.Guinot J., Chiva R., Mallén F. Linking altruism and organizational learning capability: a study from excellent human resources management organizations in Spain. J. Bus. Ethics. 2016;138(2):349–364. [Google Scholar]
- 68.Halbesleben J.R., Wheeler A.R. To invest or not? The role of coworker support and trust in daily reciprocal gain spirals of helping behavior. J. Manag. 2015;41(6):1628–1650. [Google Scholar]
- 69.Yung C.S., Pearson J.M. Organizational citizenship behaviour in it professionals: an expectancy theory approach. MRR. 2013;35(12):1170–1186. [Google Scholar]
- 70.Karl K., Peluchette J., Hall–Indiana L., Harland L. Attitudes toward workplace fun: a three sector comparison. J. Leader. Organ Stud. 2005;12(2):1–17. [Google Scholar]
- 71.Mathur A., Broeck M.V.D., Vanderhulst G., Mashhadi A., Kawsar F. 2015 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive Ubiquitous Computing. 2015. Tiny habits in the giant enterprise: understanding the dynamics of a quantified workplace. Sep 7 – 11; Osaka Japan. [Google Scholar]
- 72.Plester B., Hutchison A. Fun times: the relationship between fun and workplace engagement. Employee Relat. 2016;38(3):332–350. [Google Scholar]
- 73.Georganta K., Montgomery A. Workplace fun is not enough: the role of work engagement and trust. Cogent. Psychol. 2022;9(1) [Google Scholar]
- 74.Podsakoff N.P. Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. J. Appl. Psychol. 2003;88(5):879–903. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 75.Brislin R.W. Back–translation for cross–cultural research. J. Cross Cult. Psychol. 1970;1(3):185–216. [Google Scholar]
- 76.Nemoto T., Beglar D. JALT 2013 Conference Proceedings. 2013. Likert–scale questionnaires. Oep 25 – 29; Tokyo, Japan. [Google Scholar]
- 77.Karl K.A., Peluchette J.V. How does workplace fun impact employee perceptions of customer service quality? J. Leader. Organ Stud. 2006;13(2):2–13. [Google Scholar]
- 78.Karl K.A., Peluchette J.V. Does workplace fun buffer the impact of emotional exhaustion on job dissatisfaction: a study of health care workers. JBAM. 2006;7(2):128–141. [Google Scholar]
- 79.Topkaya N., Sahin E. Confirmatory factor analysis and reliability of the barriers to seeking psychological help scale among Turkish adults. TOJET. 2019;2:78–85. [Google Scholar]
- 80.Jöreskog K.G. The Handbook of Multivariate Experimental Psychology: Plenum Press; 1988. Auditing in united state : analysis of covariance structures. [Google Scholar]
- 81.Steiger J.H. 1980 Annual Meeting of the Psychometric Society.1981. Iowa City; IA: 1980. Statistically based tests for the number of common factors. 27 – 29. [Google Scholar]
- 82.Hayes A.F. A Regression-Based Approach. second ed. 2018. Auditing in United States : introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis. The Guilford Press. [Google Scholar]
- 83.Preacher K.J., Hayes A.F. SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behav. Res. Methods Instrum. Comput. 2004;36(4):717–731. doi: 10.3758/bf03206553. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 84.Han H., Kim W., Jeong C. Workplace fun for better team performance: focus on frontline hotel employees. Int. J. Contemp. Hospz. 2016;28(7):1391–1416. [Google Scholar]
- 85.Rice G. Individual values, organizational context, and self–perceptions of employee creativity: evidence from Egyptian organizations. J. Bus. Res. 2006;59(2):233–241. [Google Scholar]
- 86.Zhang Y., Tang W. Workplace fun and work engagement: workplace guanxi as a mediator. Soc. Behav. Pers. 2022;50(11):1–7. [Google Scholar]
- 87.Georganta K., Montgomery A. Workplace fun: a matter of context and not content. Qual. Res. Organ. Manag. 2018;14(3):317–336. [Google Scholar]
- 88.Ugheoke S.O., Mashi M.S., Isa M.F.M. Can workplace fun moderate organizational identification and job satisfaction relationship. BPR. 2022;10(3):344–361. [Google Scholar]
- 89.Owler K., Morrison R., Plester B. Does fun work? The complexity of promoting fun at work. J. Mo. Bar. 2010;16(3):338–352. [Google Scholar]
- 90.Unanue W., Gomez M.M., Cortez D.A., Bravo D., Araya–Véliz C., Unanue J., Van A.D.B. The reciprocal relationship between gratitude and life satisfaction: evidence from two longitudinal field studies. Front. Psychol. 2019;10:2480–2493. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02480. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Supplementary Materials
Data Availability Statement
Data will be made available on request.