Next Article in Journal
Supporting Student Learning Needs in Tertiary Education: Institutional Support Structures Based on the Institutional Support Questionnaire
Previous Article in Journal
Social Media Exposure and Left-behind Children’s Tobacco and Alcohol Use: The Roles of Deviant Peer Affiliation and Parent–Child Contact
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Behavioral Sciences
Volume 12
Issue 8
10.3390/bs12080276
behavsci-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

The Spillover Effect of Life Satisfaction on Customer Satisfaction: The Mediating Role of Service-Oriented Organizational Citizenship and the Moderating Role of Competition Climate

by
Yunyun Luan
†,
Meizhen Lv
† and
Lei Wang
*
School of Psychological and Cognitive Sciences and Beijing Key Lab for Behavior and Mental Health, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
†
These authors contributed equally to this work.
Behav. Sci. 2022, 12(8), 276; https://doi.org/10.3390/bs12080276
Submission received: 19 July 2022 / Revised: 1 August 2022 / Accepted: 4 August 2022 / Published: 10 August 2022
(This article belongs to the Section Organizational Behaviors)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
In the field of organizational management, research on employees’ life experiences is insufficient. It remains unclear how employees’ non-work experiences affect customer service quality. Building on the spillover theory (an individual’s experience in one domain can be transferred to another domain) and the conservation of resources theory (individuals are motivated to protect their current resources and to acquire new resources), we aim to examine the impact of service employee’s life satisfaction on customer satisfaction while considering service-oriented organizational citizenship behavior (the discretionary extra-role behavior demonstrated by employees) as a mediating variable. To test our hypothesis, we collected multi-wave, multilevel, multisource data of 209 customer service employees from an insurance company. The results showed that service-oriented organizational citizenship behavior was an important mechanism by which employees’ overall life satisfaction positively affected customer satisfaction. In addition, this mediating effect was weaker for employees in higher competition climate groups. The study illustrates the critical contribution of the overall well-being of personnel to organizational business results.

1. Introduction

An increasing number of studies have revealed that employees’ work experience is of great significance to business results [1,2,3]. However, in the field of organizational management, research on employees’ life experiences has been insufficient, and few enterprises fully appreciate how employees’ life satisfaction affects their behavior and performance in the workplace [4]. Extant studies on the spillover effect of non-work domains on the work domain still have the following limitations: (1) previous studies have focused on the spillover of family experience into the workplace [5,6,7] but have ignored the impact of other meaningful life experiences on work [8]. (2) Extant studies have used life satisfaction as an outcome variable to investigate its antecedents [9,10], but the research on life satisfaction itself as the predictive variable has been inadequate [4]. (3) Though the vast majority of studies have explored the relationship between life satisfaction and job satisfaction [11,12], it remains unclear how employees’ life experience affects their job performance in such areas as customer satisfaction [4]. Given these deficiencies, this paper will pay attention to the spillover effect of employees’ overall life experience in the workplace and focus on exploring the relationship between employees’ overall life satisfaction and customer satisfaction.
Based on the model of work–family enrichment [13] and the conservation of resources theory (the COR Theory) [14,15], this paper proposes a mediating model which states that life satisfaction improves customer satisfaction by promoting service-oriented organizational citizenship behavior (service-oriented OCB) [16].
In accordance with the work–family enrichment model, we posit that higher life satisfaction leads to more organizational citizenship behavior [17] through increasing employee job satisfaction [16,18,19]. Moreover, according to the COR theory, individuals possessing rich job resources are more likely to be highly engaged in work [20,21,22,23] and thus demonstrate more organizational citizenship behavior [24,25]. In addition, service-oriented OCB is vital for customer service quality [26,27,28]. Therefore, it is theoretically and practically important to investigate whether and how service-oriented OCB affects the relationship between life satisfaction and customer satisfaction.
Furthermore, the effect of employees’ life satisfaction upon customer satisfaction may also be affected by boundary conditions. Based on the COR theory, we propose that group competition climate is a critical boundary condition in this regard. A high group competition climate increases the reduction in support from coworkers [29] and the loss of control over success [30], both of which are essential work resources according to the COR theory [15]. According to previous research, individuals in a competitive group are more likely to be unable to obtain sufficient resources following an investment of work resources [31,32,33]. Therefore, this study proposes that an increase in group competition climate makes employees more vulnerable to a loss of work resources, which weakens the positive effects of life satisfaction on customer satisfaction.
This study makes many theoretical contributions. First, we expand the understanding of the critical role of employees’ non-work experience on customer experience. We complement existing research on how employees’ life satisfaction relates to customer satisfaction [4,34]. Second, our study enriches the COR theory by clarifying the positive effect of non-work experience on customer service quality through the mediating role of service-oriented OCB. In particular, it broadens our understanding of the COR theory as a theoretical framework to explain how personal resources affect service-oriented OCB. Third, we identified a negative moderating effect of group competition climate on service performance, which contradicts the historical view of its positive role [35].

2. Theoretical Background

Spillover refers to the connection mechanism between work and life [36]. Spillover theory proposes that an individual’s experience in one domain can be transferred to another [37]. Some researchers have proposed a division of spillovers into two categories: (1) horizontal spillover, which refers to the influence of affect in one life domain on a neighboring domain; and (2) vertical spillover, refers to the spillover effect between the most superordinate domain and the subordinate domains [38].
In accordance with spillover theory, this study proposes that investigating the impact of life on work from the perspective of vertical spillover is a topic worthy of more in-depth discussion, compared with horizontal spillover. To date, there have been numerous studies on horizontal spillovers, mainly focusing on discussing “family-to-work” spillovers [39,40,41]. However, employees also encounter a large number of other meaningful life events outside the family domain, relating to such matters as health conditions [42], financial security [8], social relations, and leisure satisfaction [43], which also affect the workplace experience of the individual in complex and as-yet-unexplored ways [44]. To fully understand the experience of employees in the workplace, it is necessary to recognize their overall experience outside the workplace [44,45]. Therefore, this study proposes to use general life satisfaction [46], which is an indicator of global quality of life [47] to explore the spillover effect of life on work from a broader perspective.

2.1. Life Satisfaction and Customer Satisfaction

In accordance with spillover theory and in line with existing research, we propose that life satisfaction will correlate with customer satisfaction through job satisfaction and job burnout, respectively. On the one hand, life satisfaction is positively related to job satisfaction [12,48], and job satisfaction is positively associated with customer satisfaction [18,49,50,51]. On the other hand, life satisfaction is negatively related to job burnout [52,53], and job burnout is negatively associated with customer satisfaction [54,55].
First, the relationship between life satisfaction and job satisfaction can be supported from theoretical and empirical perspectives. Theoretically, the work–family spillover theory [13] posits a relationship between life satisfaction and job satisfaction. This theory holds that an individual’s experience in one role in life will promote a similar experience in another. Specifically, individuals with happy lives are much more likely to be satisfied with their jobs, and vice versa [4,11,56]. Previous studies have supported a correlation and causal relationship between life satisfaction and job satisfaction. A meta-analysis by Bowling et al. [12] found that the correlation coefficient between life satisfaction and job satisfaction ranged from 0.16 to 0.68 [12] As for the direction of causality in the relationship, previous research suggests that the relationship is reciprocal, though there is a stronger influence of life satisfaction on subsequent job satisfaction than of job satisfaction on subsequent life satisfaction [11,12]. Therefore, we posit that employees with high overall life satisfaction will also have high job satisfaction.
Furthermore, the relationship between job satisfaction and customer satisfaction has also been empirically supported. It has been found that job satisfaction is positively associated with customer-oriented behavior [49,57]. The results of a meta-analysis also support a significant positive correlation between employee job satisfaction and customer satisfaction across various industries [58]. At the same time, one study found that job satisfaction can significantly predict customer satisfaction [50].
Second, life satisfaction can alleviate job burnout by reducing negative emotions. Specifically, life satisfaction is a cognitive component of subjective well-being (SWB) [46] and the other two affective components are positive affect and negative affect [47]. Life satisfaction is positively related to positive affect [59,60] In other words, a higher level of life satisfaction can enhance positive affect and alleviate job burnout by reducing emotional exhaustion [61]. Thus, we propose that life satisfaction is related to reduced job burnout [53].
At the same time, job burnout has a negative impact on customer satisfaction. For example, job burnout has a negative impact upon employees’ work attitude [62]; reduces employees’ commitment to customers [63]; diminishes the display of genuine emotions by employees towards customers [64]; negatively affects customer-oriented behavior [65]; and damages the creativity of frontline service personnel [66]. In conclusion, the higher the degree of employee burnout, the more likely it will produce a negative impact on customer satisfaction [54,55].
Taken together, we propose that life satisfaction can promote customer satisfaction by increasing job satisfaction and reducing job burnout. Accordingly, we hypothesize:
Hypothesis 1 (H1).
Life satisfaction is positively related to customer satisfaction.

2.2. The Mediating Role of Service-Oriented Organizational Citizenship Behavior

Organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) refers to extra-role behavior demonstrated by an individual at the workplace, which is discretionary, not directly or explicitly recognized by the formal reward system, and aggregates to promote the effective functioning of the organization [67]. Service-oriented OCB refers to the discretionary behavior performed by customer-contact employees in a service organization that surpasses their formal role prescriptions [68]. In contrast to the prior concept of organizational citizenship behavior [67], which is widely applicable across different types of organizations and positions, service-oriented OCB is mainly concerned with service personnel in contact with customers [18].
Based on the work–family enrichment model and the conservation of resources theory, we propose that service-oriented OCB may explain the internal mechanism of the relationship between life satisfaction and customer satisfaction. In other words, employees with higher life satisfaction are more willing to provide customers with services beyond their responsibilities, resulting in higher customer satisfaction.
First, our view is based on the work–family enrichment theory [13]. The theory holds that a mutual positive spillover between work and family can be achieved through an instrumental path and an affective path [69]. The instrumental path operates through resources, so that “a resource can be transferred directly from Role A to Role B, thereby enhancing performance in Role B” [13] (p. 80). The emotional path operates through positive emotion, so that “a resource generated in Role A can promote positive affect within Role A, which, in turn, produces performance and positive affect in Role B” [13] (p. 80). Therefore, we may expect that individuals with high quality of life will spill over resources and positive emotions from life to work, which will promote their performance and positive emotions at work [70] and, in turn, improve the job satisfaction of employees [71]. Moreover, employee job satisfaction can be used as an important attitude factor to predict service-oriented OCB [16,18,19] because proactive behavior at work is often driven by a positive affect brought out by job satisfaction [72,73].
Second, our view is also based on the COR theory. The theory posits that individuals are motivated both to protect their current resources (conservation) and to acquire new resources (acquisition) [14]. The definition of “resources” refers to anything perceived by the individual to help attain his or her goals [22]. The theory also holds that those who possess resources are more capable of gaining more, and, in addition, that initial resource gain begets future such gain, thus generating “gain spirals” [15], meaning that individuals with high life satisfaction are more likely to accumulate resources at work. According to previous studies, individuals with rich working resources tend to have higher work engagement [20,21,22,23], and highly engaged employees are more willing to do work beyond their duties [24,25]. In other words, life satisfaction can positively predict organizational citizenship behavior. Therefore, we propose that service personnel who are more satisfied with life may exhibit more willingness to go beyond the call of duty to provide customers with extra services.
In conclusion, life satisfaction can predict service-oriented OCB in two ways: (1) life satisfaction positively affects job satisfaction, which, in turn, promotes service-oriented OCB; (2) life satisfaction positively impacts work engagement by increasing work resources, and work engagement positively impacts service employees’ OCB. Based on the above arguments, we formulate the following hypothesis:
Hypothesis 2 (H2).
Employees’ life satisfaction will positively affect their service-oriented OCB.
Furthermore, organizational citizenship behavior is vital for promoting customer service quality [26]. For example, organizational citizenship behavior can improve customer satisfaction [27,28] and customer loyalty [72]. The main reason is that no one can specify the full range of duties a service employee might have to perform in response to unpredictable customer requests [74,75]. Therefore, the delivery and service carried out by service personnel beyond specified job standards or the expectations of customers will significantly affect customers’ perception of service quality [76]. We believe that service-oriented OCB will serve a similar function.
To sum up, we further formulate the indirect effect hypothesis of life satisfaction and customer satisfaction:
Hypothesis 3 (H3).
Service-oriented OCB plays a mediating role in the relationship between life satisfaction and customer satisfaction.

2.3. The Moderating Role of Group Competition Climate

Although we predict that life satisfaction will positively impact customer satisfaction, the degree of this impact may vary with differing levels of group competition climate in the workplace. Drawing upon the COR theory, we propose that, compared with a highly competitive team climate, a relaxed and cooperative team climate is more likely to enable a life-satisfied employee to provide high-quality customer service.
The COR theory explains the negative impact of a competitive group climate on an individual’s work resources. First, a high group competition climate hinders employees from obtaining two necessary work resources: (1) peer support; and (2) a sense of control over work results. Group competition climate refers to the extent to which employees perceive organizational rewards to be contingent on comparing their performance against that of their peers [77]. Compared with a low competition climate, a high competition climate means that (1) relationships among team members are more conflictual [78] and mutually exclusive, rather than mutually supportive and cooperative [29]; (2) uncertainty of achieving performance increases [30], indicating to employees that future success does not entirely depend on themselves, which makes them feel less of a sense of control over work results. The COR theory states that support from coworkers and a feeling of control over success are both vital work resources [15]. Thus, the availability of these work resources will decline with an increased competition climate.
Second, a high group competition climate reduces the ability of individuals to gain sufficient resources. Competition implies that there might be a lack of resource gains, such as promotion opportunities or job security, following significant resource investment of time and energy [31,32,33]; that is, resource investment is more salient than resource gains. This chronic resource loss is a principal explanatory mechanism for understanding the process of work stress and burnout [15]. A meta-analysis review has shown empirical evidence for the negative impact caused by a competitive group climate through the continuous depletion of individual resources. It was found that individuals experience increased levels of stress regardless of their own level of trait competitiveness when individual perceptions of a competitive climate increased [30].
Based on the above arguments, we construct the following hypothesis:
Hypothesis 4 (H4).
Group competition climate moderates the within-individual indirect relationship between life satisfaction and customer satisfaction mediated by service-oriented OCB, such that the relationship between service-oriented OCB and customer satisfaction will be weaker for groups with a higher compared to those with a lower competition climate.
The hypothesized model can now be illustrated, as shown in Figure 1.

3. Materials and Methods

3.1. Sample and Procedure

Participants in the current study were recruited from the call center of a large Chinese insurance company. They deliver service to customers and are required to attain specified performance objectives, including an indicator of customer satisfaction. Service employees in the call center work as a team so that they are responsible for achieving team goals and individual goals every month. The research team and the human resource management department of the company screened all full-time employees and sent an invitation letter to these 385 employees. Two hundred thirty-seven employees voluntarily participated in the survey, and 28 were eliminated from the analyses due to missing archival data on performance, leaving a final sample of 209 employees (response rate = 54.3%). These employees nested in 29 groups (response rate = 64.1%) with an average group size of 7.21, meeting the requirement that the smallest acceptable number for groups should be 20, with a minimum of five individuals per group for observation purposes [79]. The majority of the sample was female (85.6%), the average age of participants was 26.21 years (SD = 3.16), and the average job tenure was 21.80 months (SD = 23.86).
We used a time-lagged research design to reduce the potential for common-source and common-method biases and collected data at three time lags. At Time 1 (T1, beginning of the month t), life satisfaction and demographic variables were obtained from employees. One month later, at Time 2 (T2, beginning of the month t + 1), an assessment of competitive psychological climate and service-oriented OCB were obtained from employees who completed the survey at Time 1. We then collected employees’ archival data of service quality ratings at Time 3 (T3, end of the month t + 1).

3.2. Measures

Life Satisfaction. Life satisfaction was measured by a five-item scale developed by Diener (1985) [46]. Sample items include “The conditions of my life are excellent.” and “I am satisfied with my life.”. The possible responses range from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). The higher the score, the more satisfied the employee feels with their life. The coefficient α for life satisfaction was 0.86.
Group Competition Climate. Group competition climate was measured using a four-item scale developed by Brown (1998) [77]. Sample items include “My manager frequently compares my results with those of other peers.” and “My co-workers frequently compare their results with mine.”. Possible responses range from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). Higher scores represent higher competition levels, as perceived by the employee. The coefficient α for group competition climate was 0.86. To aggregate the individual perceptions of competition climate to a workgroup level, we assessed the average within-group agreement (rwg.j) and the intra-class correlations for this scale. The result showed that the average rwg (j) across groups was 0.51 and that ICC (1), the percentage of employee perceived competition level variance due to between-group factors, was 0.14.
Service-oriented OCB. Service-oriented OCB were measured by a 16-item scale proposed by Bettencourt (2001) [18]. This scale includes three service-oriented OCB dimensions: loyalty (five items), participation (five items) and service delivery (six items). The possible responses range from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). The higher the score, the more service-oriented OCB demonstrated by the employee. The coefficient α for service-oriented OCB was 0.96.
Customer Satisfaction. The measurement of customer satisfaction used the real-time feedback rating of the customer after the delivery of service by the employee. The human resource department then converted this rating into a percentage score used in this study. A higher score indicates a more satisfying customer experience.
Control Variables. We controlled for employee demographic information, such as gender (male or female), age (in years) and job tenure (in months), since age has been found to be associated with OCB [80], and gender and job tenure have been found to be associated with customer satisfaction [81,82]. The data were collected through the survey questionnaire and were double-checked with the archival data provided by HR.

3.3. Analytical Procedure

We expected that, at the individual level, the life satisfaction of employees would positively predict customer satisfaction, and that the effect could be mediated by the service-oriented OCB. We used linear regression to test the direct effect with SPSS and used Preacher and Hayes’ (2008) bootstrapping procedure [83] (5000 iterations) and corresponding SPSS macro to test for the mediation effect.
We then tested the significance of paths of the multilevel mediated moderation model by considering the cross-level moderating role of group competition climate. Mplus was used to build the hierarchical linear model, which helps separate the effects of between- and within-group variance on the dependent variable [84] and construct bias-corrected confidence intervals through a bootstrapping approach. The parameters were estimated using maximum-likelihood estimation. The individual-level predictors were group-mean centered, and the group-level predictor was grand mean centered [85].

4. Results

4.1. Descriptive Statistics and Correlations

Means, standard deviations, scale reliabilities, and correlations were calculated (see Table 1). It can be seen that the correlation between life satisfaction and service-oriented OCB was significant and positive (r = 0.15, p < 0.05). The correlation of service-oriented OCB and customer satisfaction was also positive, though only marginally significant (r = 0.13, p < 0.10). Table 1 also shows that group competition climate was positively associated with service-oriented OCB (r = 0.51, p < 0.01). Furthermore, there was a marginally significant interaction between age and customer satisfaction (r = 0.12, p < 0.10) and a significant and positive correlation between tenure and customer satisfaction (r = 0.19, p < 0.01).

4.2. Testing the Construct Validity

Before hypothesis testing, we conducted a set of confirmatory factor analyses (CFAs, see Table 2) to establish convergent and discriminant validity for the multi-item constructs used in this study. Since customer satisfaction was independently measured by customers, it was not included in the CFA model. In the first CFA, we examined a three-factor model, with those factors being life satisfaction, service-oriented OCB and group competition climate. The hypothesized model showed a good fit to the data (χ2 (232) = 411.55, RMSEA = 0.06, SRMR = 0.06, CFI = 0.96, TLI = 0.95).
We compared the three-factor model with several alternative models to test the discriminant validity. In the two-factor model, service-oriented OCB and group competition climate were combined into a single factor. In the single-factor model, all variables were combined into one factor. As shown in Table 2, the hypothesized three-factor model fitted the data considerably better than any alternative models.

4.3. Hypothesis Testing

Hypothesis 1 posited the effects of life satisfaction on customer satisfaction, which was tested by linear regression with SPSS. Model 1 (Table 3) showed that after controlling for gender, age and job tenure, the relationship between life satisfaction and customer satisfaction was insignificant (B = −0.04, t = −0.22, p > 0.05). Thus, hypothesis 1 was not supported.
In support of Hypotheses 2 and 3, we used sample bootstrapping tests of indirect effects concerning the mediating role of service-oriented OCB. Model 2 (Table 3) showed that, after controlling for gender, age and tenure, life satisfaction was significantly related to service-oriented OCB (B = 0.12, t = 2.22, p < 0.05), The 95% bias-corrected bootstrapped confidence interval does not include zero (CI = [0.013, 0.232]), indicating that the effect of life satisfaction on service-oriented OCB was significantly positive. Thus, Hypothesis 2 was supported.
After controlling for gender, age and tenure, the direct effect of life satisfaction on customer satisfaction was nonsignificant (B = −0.09, t = −0.55, p > 0.05, CI = [−0.40, 0.23]). However, the indirect effect of life satisfaction on customer satisfaction through service-oriented OCB was significantly positive (B = 0.05, SE = 0.04, CI = [0.003, 0.150]). Thus, service-oriented OCB completely mediated the relationship between life satisfaction and customer satisfaction. Hypothesis 3 was therefore supported.
Table 3 presents the analysis results for testing Hypotheses 1 to 3.
Extending Hypothesis 3, we suggested that the indirect relationship between life satisfaction and customer satisfaction would be weaker for high-level competition climate groups. To test the moderated mediation effects, we proceeded to multilevel analysis in Mplus [86]. We ran a two-level null model without any predictors in the hierarchical linear modelling software to examine whether there was a significant amount of variance in outcome across groups [87]. For customer satisfaction, the ratio of between-groups to total variance yielded an ICC (1) of 0.24, indicating that 24% of the total variance in customer satisfaction was due to group membership.
The result (see Table 4) showed that the moderating effect was significant (γ = −1.14, p < 0.01, 95% CI = [−1.840, −0.435]). Further, the pseudo-R2 showed that predictors explained 6% variance in customer satisfaction at the individual level and 3% at the group level. Thus, a mediating effect of life satisfaction on customer satisfaction via service-oriented OCB differed in conditions of low and high group competition climate, such that the high group competition climate alleviated the indirect effect. Thus, Hypothesis 4 was supported.
We plotted this interaction effect (see Figure 2) within the moderated mediation model at conditional values of group competition climate (1 SD above and below the mean). Simple slope test result shows that the relationship between service-oriented OCB and customer satisfaction on the mediation path was significantly positive at lower levels of group competition climate (simple slope = 0.16, t = 2.05, p < 0.05, 95% CI = [0.008, 0.316]) but not at higher levels of group competition climate (simple slope = −0.04, t = −0.88, p > 0.05, 95% CI = [−0.149, 0.057]), which means that the correlation between service-oriented OCB and customer satisfaction was no longer significant in high competition groups.

5. Discussion

5.1. Summary of the Findings

Few enterprises fully appreciate how employees’ non-work experience will affect their service behavior towards customers. This study investigated the effect of life satisfaction on customer satisfaction and highlights its underlying mechanism and boundary conditions. The findings do not support a direct effect of life satisfaction on customer satisfaction but do support an indirect effect. In other words, employees’ overall life satisfaction has a significant indirect effect on customer satisfaction through service-oriented OCB. Furthermore, results show that the group competition climate buffers the indirect relationship between life satisfaction and customer satisfaction. When the group competition climate was low, the indirect effect of life satisfaction on customer satisfaction was significant, but when the team competition atmosphere was high, the indirect effect was no longer significant.
First, the results do not support our hypothesis that employees’ overall life satisfaction would positively affect customer satisfaction. There are two possible explanations for this result. On the one hand, the relationship between life satisfaction and customer satisfaction is far from being a simple model but instead has complex patterns, which may be affected by moderating variables such as personality or work attitude. It is likely that the effects of these variables on the relationship between life satisfaction and customer satisfaction offset each other, so the total effect is not significant.
On the other hand, the effect of life satisfaction on customer service needs to be transmitted through one or more mediator variables. Thus, the employee’s life satisfaction has no direct effect on customer satisfaction; rather, its entire effect is indirect.
Second, this study sought to identify an indirect effect of life satisfaction on customer satisfaction through service-oriented OCB, and this was supported by the results. The mediating role of service-oriented OCB on the life satisfaction–customer satisfaction link resonates with previous research which found that life satisfaction can predict organizational citizenship behavior [17] through job satisfaction [16,18] and then predict customer service quality [26,27,28].
Finally, our findings show that the group competition climate buffers the indirect relationship between life satisfaction and customer satisfaction. When the group competition climate was low, the indirect effect of life satisfaction on customer satisfaction was significant, but when the team competition atmosphere was high, the indirect effect was no longer significant. This finding complements previous research on the impact of competition on individual performance, which has produced inconsistent results, including positive effects [35], negative effects [30], and no significant correlation [29]. This study contributes to a growing body of evidence suggesting the detrimental effect of competition on individual performance.

5.2. Theoretical Contributions

This study makes three theoretical contributions. First, it expands understanding of the critical role played by employees’ non-work experience in organizational outcomes. According to the results of the previous meta-analysis, few studies have examined how employees’ life satisfaction relates to customer service [4]. This study fills the research gap by investigating the spillover effect of life satisfaction on customer satisfaction, thus contributing a new perspective from outside the workplace to the explanatory framework of customer service [4,34].
Second, this study enriches the understanding of the COR theory by showing the positive impact of life satisfaction on service-oriented OCB. Based on the work–family enrichment theory [13] and the COR theory [14], we hypothesize that individuals with higher life satisfaction can possess more work resources and positive affect [70] and have higher level of job satisfaction [71] and work engagement [19,20,21,22,23], which in turn will increase their extra work behaviors [24,25]. The results of our study support this hypothesis and broaden the understanding of the COR theory that it can be used to explain how personal resources impact service-oriented OCB.
Third, our study reveals a negative moderating effect of group competition climate on service performance, which contradicts the historical view of its positive effect [35]. In one study of Chinese hair salon staff, results suggested that the group competition climate improved the positive relationship between self-efficacy and service quality, with one possible explanation being that the subjects did not need to depend on each other at work [35]. The current study also employed subjects with high work independence; that is, the call center staff. However, our results demonstrated that the group competition climate impeded, rather than facilitated, the positive relationship between service-oriented OCB and customer satisfaction. Our findings complement previous investigations of the moderating effect of competition climate.

5.3. Practical Implications

This study also has significant practical implications. First, this paper provides enterprises with new perspectives for people-oriented management. According to our findings, an increase in employees’ life satisfaction is conducive to promoting service-oriented OCB, which shows that in addition to employees’ workplace experience, employees’ life experience may also affect critical organizational behaviors. Existing studies have discussed methods which enterprises might use to promote employees’ family life, including improving employees efficiency to reduce daily workload, creating a family-supportive organizational culture, and arranging emotion management training [88]. The current study suggests that organizations should expand their lens to include a broader array of non-work experiences, such as employees’ physical health [42], financial security [8], social relations, and leisure satisfaction [43].
Second, this study suggests that for enterprises with a high competition climate, the question of how to reduce the negative impact of competition on performance is a problem worthy of further exploration. A certain level of competition is beneficial to employee performance [89]. However, according to the findings of this study, a high-level group competition climate, does not strengthen but hinders the positive impact of life satisfaction on customer service quality. Therefore, we suggest that managers consider two factors to maintain a reasonable competitive level. One factor to be considered is the stress level of team members. According to the Yerkes–Dodson Law, there is an inverted U-shaped relationship between individual stress and performance [89]. Therefore, when an increase in pressure fails to positively affect performance, the peak of the competition curve appears, indicating that a further pressure level increase might be detrimental to performance. Another factor is the completion rate of individual or team goals. When the performance has been completed, or the team has outperformed the competitors, fewer incentive measures should be taken to promote competition, and more measures should be adopted to alleviate employees’ stress levels.

5.4. Limitations and Future Research

This study also has some limitations. First, the model used only provides a preliminary framework since the relationship between life satisfaction and customer satisfaction is too complicated. Past research has revealed that the mixed effects of the life-work link can be caused by personality traits. For example, a higher level of neuroticism was associated with negative spillover between family and work, while a higher level of extraversion was associated with a positive spillover effect [37]. Several studies also support the idea that individuals high in conscientiousness tend to control life–work cross-boundary interruptions in a way that aligns with their needs and identities [90,91]. Similarly, for those service employees high in conscientiousness, even if they are not happy in life, it is less likely that they will exhibit negative emotions in a service job, and thus the effect between life satisfaction and customer satisfaction is not directly significant. Future models can examine more mediating and moderating variables. For example, employees’ in-role behavior is a potential mediating variable because of its importance in job performance, and it should be tested as a mediating variable in future research. In addition, personality is a potential moderating variable. Previous research supports that trait affectivity and core self-evaluation can weaken the correlation between life satisfaction and job satisfaction [42].
Second, broader samples from various nations or cultures should be included in future research. Given that the context of our study was frontline service employees of an insurance company in China, it is necessary to apply our model in a Western cultural setting to increase the generalization of our results. Specifically, the variables in our model have cross-cultural differences as follows: (1) Life Satisfaction. Life satisfaction in individualistic cultures (e.g., Europe and America) is significantly higher than that in collectivist cultures (e.g., East Asian countries) [92]. (2) Life satisfaction–job satisfaction links may differ across cultures and individuals with different socioeconomic characteristics [11]. (3) Customer Experience. Special treatment benefits, reflecting social bonds, were more important for customers rated high on uncertainty avoidance and collectivism [93], indicating that employees need to do more work beyond job duties. In conclusion, future research can examine the life satisfaction–customer satisfaction link in a cross-culture context.

6. Conclusions

This study makes a preliminary exploration of the impact of overall life satisfaction on customer service quality. Building upon the work–family enrichment model and the COR theory, we predicted and found that life satisfaction has a positive effect on customer satisfaction indirectly through service-oriented OCB. Group competition climate buffered the positive relationships between life satisfaction and customer satisfaction, such that the links were not significant when the group competition climate was high. Our research explored the spillover relationship between the work and non-work domains from a top-down perspective, highlighting meaningful directions for future research on the impact of overall life experience on customer service performance within organizations.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, Y.L., M.L., and L.W.; data curation, M.L. and Y.L.; formal analysis, M.L.; funding acquisition, L.W.; investigation, M.L. and L.W.; methodology, L.W.; project administration, L.W.; resources, Y.L.; supervision, L.W.; writing—original draft, Y.L. and M.L.; writing—review and editing, Y.L. and L.W. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by National Natural Science Fund of China grant number #31971013.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, and approved by the Ethics Committee of the School of Psychological and Cognitive Sciences, Peking University (protocol code: #2015-06-11).

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

The employee self-reported data are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Chi, N.-W.; Grandey, A.A. Emotional Labor Predicts Service Performance Depending on Activation and Inhibition Regulatory Fit. J. Manag. 2019, 45, 673–700. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Han, X.; Chen, S.; Chen, B. From employee engagement to customer engagement: A multilevel dual-path model of engagement spillover effects in service ecosystems. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2022, 64, 102815. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Menguc, B.; Auh, S.; Yeniaras, V.; Katsikeas, C.S. The role of climate: Implications for service employee engagement and customer service performance. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2017, 45, 428–451. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Erdogan, B.; Bauer, T.N.; Truxillo, D.M.; Mansfield, L.R. Whistle While You Work. J. Manag. 2012, 38, 1038–1083. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Brandth, B.; Halrynjo, S.; Kvande, E. Work-Family Dynamics: Competing Logics of Regulation, Economy and Morals; Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group: London, UK; New York, NY, USA, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  6. Hammer, L.B.; Kossek, E.E.; Anger, W.K.; Bodner, T.; Zimmerman, K.L. Clarifying Work-Family Intervention Processes: The Roles of Work-Family Conflict and Family-Supportive Supervisor Behaviors. J. Appl. Psychol. 2011, 96, 134–150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  7. Shockley, K.M.; Shen, W.; Johnson, R.C. The Cambridge Handbook of the Global Work-Family Interface; Shockley, K.M., Shen, W., Johnson, R.C., Eds.; Cambridge University Press: New York, NY, USA, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  8. Ragins, B.R.; Lyness, K.S.; Williams, L.J.; Winkel, D. Life Spillovers: The Spillover of Fear of Home Foreclosure to the Workplace. Pers. Psychol. 2014, 67, 763–800. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Landolfi, A.; Barattucci, M.; De Rosa, A.; Lo Presti, A. The Association of Job and Family Resources and Demands with Life Satisfaction through Work-Family Balance: A Longitudinal Study among Italian Schoolteachers during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Behav. Sci. 2021, 11, 136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Lachmann, B.; Sariyska, R.; Kannen, C.; Błaszkiewicz, K.; Trendafilov, B.I.; Eibes, M.; Markowetz, A.; Li, M.; Kendrick, K.M. Contributing to Overall Life Satisfaction: Personality Traits versus Life Satisfaction Variables RevisitedIs Replication Impossible? Behav. Sci. 2018, 8, 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  11. Bialowolski, P.; Weziak-Bialowolska, D. Longitudinal Evidence for Reciprocal Effects Between Life Satisfaction and Job Satisfaction. J. Happiness Stud. 2020, 22, 1287–1312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Bowling, N.A.; Eschleman, K.J.; Wang, Q.A. A meta-analytic examination of the relationship between job satisfaction and subjective well-being. J. Occup. Organ. Psychol. 2010, 83, 915–934. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  13. Greenhaus, J.H.; Powell, G.N. When Work and Family Are Allies: A Theory of Work-Family Enrichment. Acad. Manag. Rev. 2006, 31, 72–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Hobfoll, S.E. Conservation of resources—A new attempt at conceptualizing stress. Am. Psychol. 1989, 44, 513–524. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Hobfoll, S.E. The Influence of Culture, Community, and the Nested-Self in the Stress Process: Advancing Conservation of Resources Theory. Appl. Psychol. 2001, 50, 337–421. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Payne, S.C.; Webber, S.S. Effects of service provider attitudes and employment status on citizenship behaviors and customers’ attitudes and loyalty behavior. J. Appl. Psychol. 2006, 91, 365–378. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Park, J.; Hight, S.K.; Bufquin, D.; de Souza Meira, J.V.; Back, R.M. An examination of restaurant employees’ work-life outlook: The influence of support systems during COVID-19. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 2021, 97, 102992. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Bettencourt, L.A.; Gwinner, K.P.; Meuter, M.L. A comparison of attitude, personality, and knowledge predictors of service-oriented organizational citizenship behaviors. J. Appl. Psychol. 2001, 86, 29–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  19. Urbini, F.; Chirumbolo, A.; Callea, A. Promoting Individual and Organizational OCBs: The Mediating Role of Work Engagement. Behav. Sci. 2020, 10, 138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Afrahi, B.; Blenkinsopp, J.; de Arroyabe, J.C.F.; Karim, M.S. Work disengagement: A review of the literature. Hum. Resour. Manag. Rev. 2022, 32, 100822. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Hakanen, J.J.; Perhoniemi, R.; Toppinen-Tanner, S. Positive gain spirals at work: From job resources to work engagement, personal initiative and work-unit innovativeness. J. Vocat. Behav. 2008, 73, 78–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Halbesleben, J.R.B.; Neveu, J.P.; Paustian-Underdahl, S.C.; Westman, M. Getting to the “COR”: Understanding the Role of Resources in Conservation of Resources Theory. J. Manag. 2014, 40, 1334–1364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Kuehnel, J.; Sonnentag, S.; Bledow, R. Resources and time pressure as day-level antecedents of work engagement. J. Occup. Organ. Psychol. 2012, 85, 181–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Rich, B.L.; Lepine, J.A.; Crawford, E.R. Job engagement: Antecedents and effects on job performance. Acad. Manag. J. 2010, 53, 617–635. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Shrotryia, V.K.; Saroha, K.; Dhanda, U. Why employee engagement matters? Evidences from Delhi Metro Rail Corporation in India. Pers. Rev. 2022, 51, 501–527. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Kim, W.; Hantula, D.A.; Di Benedetto, A. Organizational citizenship behaviors perceived by collectivistic 50-and-older customers and medical-care service performance: An application of stimulus-organism-response theory. Asia Pac. J. Mark. Logist. 2022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Podsakoff, N.P.; Whiting, S.W.; Podsakoff, P.M.; Blume, B.D. Individual- and Organizational-Level Consequences of Organizational Citizenship Behaviors: A Meta-Analysis. J. Appl. Psychol. 2009, 94, 122–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  28. Yang, J.; Kim, Y.; Kim, P.B. Pushing forward high-performance work systems in the hotel industry: A procedural-justice climate to promote higher unit-level outcomes. Tour. Manag. 2021, 87, 104385. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Murayama, K.; Elliot, A.J. The competition-performance relation: A meta-analytic review and test of the opposing processes model of competition and performance. Psychol. Bull. 2012, 138, 1035–1070. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  30. Fletcher, T.D.; Major, D.A.; Davis, D.D. The interactive relationship of competitive climate and trait competitiveness with workplace attitudes, stress, and performance. J. Organ. Behav. 2008, 29, 899–922. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Buckert, M.; Schwieren, C.; Kudielka, B.M.; Fiebachad, C.J. How stressful are economic competitions in the lab? An investigation with physiological measures. J. Econ. Psychol. 2017, 62, 231–245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  32. Ng, B.C.S.; Zhang, X.J.; Chen, Z.X.G. A stress perspective on antecedents of abusive supervision: Blaming the organisation when exhausted supervisors abuse. J. Manag. Organ. 2021, 27, 361–381. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Siegrist, J.; Peter, R.; Junge, A.; Cremer, P.; Seidel, D. Low status control, high effort at work and ischemic-heart-disease—Prospective evidence from blue-collar men. Soc. Sci. Med. 1990, 31, 1127–1134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Ployhart, R.E.; Vandenberg, R.J. Longitudinal Research: The Theory, Design, and Analysis of Change. J. Manag. 2010, 36, 94–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Chen, Z.; Zhu, J.; Zhou, M. How Does a Servant Leader Fuel the Service Fire? A Multilevel Model of Servant Leadership, Individual Self Identity, Group Competition Climate, and Customer Service Performance. J. Appl. Psychol. 2015, 100, 511–521. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Lambert, S.J. Processes linking work and family—A critical-review and research agenda. Hum. Relat. 1990, 43, 239–257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Grzywacz, J.G.; Marks, N.F. Reconceptualizing the work-family interface: An ecological perspective on the correlates of positive and negative spillover between work and family. J. Occup. Health Psychol. 2000, 5, 111–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Sirgy, M.J.; Efraty, D.; Siegel, P.; Lee, D.-J. A new measure of quality of work life (QWL) based on need satisfaction and spillover theories. Soc. Indic. Res. 2001, 55, 241–302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Bernardi, L.; Bollmann, G.; Potarca, G.; Rossier, J. Multidimensionality of Well-Being and Spillover Effects Across Life Domains: How Do Parenthood and Personality Affect Changes in Domain-Specific Satisfaction? Res. Hum. Dev. 2017, 14, 26–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Du, D.Y.; Derks, D.; Bakker, A.B. Daily Spillover from Family to Work: A Test of the Work-Home Resources Model. J. Occup. Health Psychol. 2018, 23, 237–247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  41. Michel, J.S.; Kotrba, L.M.; Mitchelson, J.K.; Clark, M.A.; Baltes, B.B. Antecedents of work-family conflict: A meta-analytic review. J. Organ. Behav. 2011, 32, 689–725. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Heller, D.; Judge, T.A.; Watson, D. The confounding role of personality and trait affectivity in the relationship between job and life satisfaction. J. Organ. Behav. 2002, 23, 815–835. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Maffioletti, A.; Maida, A.; Scacciati, F. Happiness, life satisfaction, well-being: Survey design and response analysis. Eur. J. Comp. Econ. 2019, 16, 277–312. [Google Scholar]
  44. Ragins, B.R. Disclosure disconnects: Antecedents and consequences of disclosing invisible stigmas across life domains. Acad. Manag. Rev. 2008, 33, 194–215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Ragins, B.R.; Dutton, J.E. Positive Relationships at Work: An Introduction and Invitation. In Conference on Positive Relationships at Work; Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.: Mahwah, NJ, USA, 2007. [Google Scholar]
  46. Diener, E.; Emmons, R.A.; Larsen, R.J.; Griffin, S. The Satisfaction with Life Scale. J. Personal. Assess. 1985, 49, 71–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. Pavot, W.; Diener, E. The Satisfaction with Life Scale and the emerging construct of life satisfaction. J. Posit. Psychol. 2008, 3, 137–152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Moscoso, S.; Salgado, J.F. Meta-analytic Examination of a Suppressor Effect on Subjective Well-Being and Job Performance Relationship. J. Work. Organ. Psychol. 2021, 37, 119–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Ferdous, A.S.; Polonsky, M.; Bednall, D.H.B. Internal communication and the development of customer-oriented behavior among frontline employees. Eur. J. Mark. 2021, 55, 2344–2366. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Harter, J.K.; Schmidt, F.L.; Hayes, T.L. Business-unit-level relationship between employee satisfaction, employee engagement, and business outcomes: A meta-analysis. J. Appl. Psychol. 2002, 87, 268–279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  51. Pantouvakis, A.; Bouranta, N. The interrelationship between service features, job satisfaction and customer satisfaction: Evidence from the transport sector. TQM J. 2013, 25, 186–201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Booth-LeDoux, S.M.; Matthews, R.A.; Wayne, J.H. Testing a Resource-Based Spillover-Crossover-Spillover Model: Transmission of Social Support in Dual-Earner Couples. J. Appl. Psychol. 2020, 105, 732–747. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Haar, J.M.; Roche, M.A. Family supportive organization perceptions and employee outcomes: The mediating effects of life satisfaction. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2010, 21, 999–1014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Shoshan, H.N.; Sonnentag, S. The effects of employee burnout on customers: An experimental approach. Work Stress 2020, 34, 127–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Taris, T.W. Is there a relationship between burnout and objective performance? A critical review of 16 studies. Work Stress 2006, 20, 316–334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Wayne, J.H.; Grzywacz, J.G.; Carlson, D.S.; Kacmar, K.M. Work–family facilitation: A theoretical explanation and model of primary antecedents and consequences. Hum. Resour. Manag. Rev. 2007, 17, 63–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Singh, R.; Das, G. The impact of job satisfaction, adaptive selling behaviors and customer orientation on salesperson’s performance: Exploring the moderating role of selling experience. J. Bus. Ind. Mark. 2013, 28, 554–564. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Bernhardt, K.L.; Donthu, N.; Kennett, P.A. A longitudinal analysis of satisfaction and profitability. J. Bus. Res. 2000, 47, 161–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Barsky, A.; Thoresen, C.J.; Warren, C.R.; Kaplan, S.A. Modeling negative affectivity and job stress: A contingency-based approach. J. Organ. Behav. 2004, 25, 915–936. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Piccolo, R.F.; Judge, T.A.; Takahashi, K.; Watanabe, N.; Locke, E.A. Core self-evaluations in Japan: Relative effects on job satisfaction, life satisfaction, and happiness. J. Organ. Behav. 2005, 26, 965–984. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Brand, S.; Beck, J.; Hatzinger, M.; Harbaugh, A.; Ruch, W.; Holsboer-Trachsler, E. Associations between satisfaction with life, burnout-related emotional and physical exhaustion, and sleep complaints. World J. Biol. Psychiatry 2010, 11, 744–754. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Cropanzano, R.; Rupp, D.E.; Byrne, Z.S. The relationship of emotional exhaustion to work attitudes, job performance, and organizational citizenship behaviors. J. Appl. Psychol. 2003, 88, 160–169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Jeon, A. The effect of pre-flight attendants’ emotional intelligence, emotional labor, and emotional exhaustion on commitment to customer service. Serv. Bus. 2016, 10, 345–367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Zhao, X.; Mattila, A.S.; Ngan, N.N. The Impact of Frontline Employees’ Work–Family Conflict on Customer Satisfaction. Cornell Hosp. Q. 2014, 55, 422–432. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Kim, T.T.; Paek, S.; Choi, C.H.; Lee, G. Frontline service employees’ customer-related social stressors, emotional exhaustion, and service recovery performance: Customer orientation as a moderator. Serv. Bus. 2012, 6, 503–526. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Hur, W.-M.; Moon, T.; Jun, J.-K. The effect of workplace incivility on service employee creativity: The mediating role of emotional exhaustion and intrinsic motivation. J. Serv. Mark. 2016, 30, 302–315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Smith, C.A.; Organ, D.W.; Near, J.P. Organizational citizenship behavior–Its nature and antecedents. J. Appl. Psychol. 1983, 68, 653–663. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Bettencourt, L.A.; Brown, S.W. Contact employees: Relationships among workplace fairness, job satisfaction and prosocial service behaviors. J. Retail. 1997, 73, 39–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Hanson, G.C.; Hammer, L.B.; Colton, C.L. Development and validation of a multidimensional scale of perceived work-family positive spillover. J. Occup. Health Psychol. 2006, 11, 249–265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. McNall, L.A.; Nicklin, J.M.; Masuda, A.D. A Meta-Analytic Review of the Consequences Associated with Work–Family Enrichment. J. Bus. Psychol. 2009, 25, 381–396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Hu, X.; Kaplan, S. Is “feeling good” good enough? Differentiating discrete positive emotions at work. J. Organ. Behav. 2015, 36, 39–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Jain, A.K.; Malhotra, N.K.; Guan, C. Positive and Negative Affectivity as Mediators of Volunteerism and Service-Oriented Citizenship Behavior and Customer Loyalty. Psychol. Mark. 2012, 29, 1004–1017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Lavy, S.; Littman-Ovadia, H. My Better Self: Using Strengths at Work and Work Productivity, Organizational Citizenship Behavior, and Satisfaction. J. Career Dev. 2017, 44, 95–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Bowen, D.E.; Gilliland, S.W.; Folger, R. HRM and service fairness: How being fair with employees spills over to customers. Organ. Dyn. 1999, 27, 7–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Secchi, E.; Roth, A.; Verma, R. The Impact of Service Improvisation Competence on Customer Satisfaction: Evidence from the Hospitality Industry. Prod. Oper. Manag. 2019, 28, 1329–1346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Yoon, M.H.; Suh, J. Organizational citizenship behaviors and service quality as external effectiveness of contact employees. J. Bus. Res. 2003, 56, 597–611. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Brown, S.P.; Cron, W.L.; Slocum, J.W. Effects of trait competitiveness and perceived intraorganizational competition on salesperson goal setting and performance. J. Mark. 1998, 62, 88–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  78. Swab, R.G.; Johnson, P.D. Steel sharpens steel: A review of multilevel competition and competitiveness in organizations. J. Organ. Behav. 2019, 40, 147–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Kreft, I.G.G.; de Leeuw, J. Introducing Multilevel Modeling; SAGE Publications Ltd.: London, UK, 2004. [Google Scholar]
  80. Lin, Q.; Guan, W.; Zhang, N. Work–family conflict, family well-being and organizational citizenship behavior: A moderated mediation model. Int. J. Confl. Manag. 2022, 33, 47–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Jing, F.F. Leadership paradigms and performance in small service firms. J. Manag. Organ. 2018, 24, 339–358. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Bharadwaja, S.; Lee, L.; Madera, J.M. Customer evaluations of service-oriented organizational citizenship behaviors: Agentic and communal differences. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 2018, 70, 120–129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Preacher, K.J.; Hayes, A.F. Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behav. Res. Methods 2008, 40, 879–891. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Hofmann, D.A. An overview of the logic and rationale of hierarchical linear models. J. Manag. 1997, 23, 723–744. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Hofmann, D.A.; Gavin, M.B. Centering decisions in hierarchical linear models: Implications for research in organizations. J. Manag. 1998, 24, 623–641. [Google Scholar]
  86. Bauer, D.J.; Preacher, K.J.; Gil, K.M. Conceptualizing and testing random indirect effects and moderated mediation in multilevel models: New procedures and recommendations. Psychol. Methods 2006, 11, 142–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  87. Raudenbush, S.W.; Bryk, A.S. Hierarchical Linear Models: Applications and Data Analysis Methods; Sage: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2002; Volume 1. [Google Scholar]
  88. Goh, Z.; Ilies, R.; Wilson, K.S. Supportive supervisors improve employees’ daily lives: The role supervisors play in the impact of daily workload on life satisfaction via work–family conflict. J. Vocat. Behav. 2015, 89, 65–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Yerkes, R.M.; Dodson, J.D. The relation of strength of stimulus to rapidity of habit-formation. J. Comp. Neurol. Psychol. 1908, 18, 459–482. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  90. Chu, F.; Guo, M.; Liu, S.; Chen, S. Work-family conflict, personality, and safety behaviors among high-speed railway drivers. J. Transp. Saf. Secur. 2020, 12, 1147–1163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Gardner, D.M.; Lauricella, T.; Ryan, A.M.; Wadlington, P.; Elizondo, F. Managing boundaries between work and non-work domains: Personality and job characteristics and adopted style. J. Occup. Organ. Psychol. 2021, 94, 132–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Oyserman, D.; Coon, H.M.; Kemmelmeier, M. Rethinking individualism and collectivism: Evaluation of theoretical assumptions and meta-analyses. Psychol. Bull. 2002, 128, 3–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Zhang, J.; Beatty, S.E.; Walsh, G. Review and future directions of cross-cultural consumer services research. J. Bus. Res. 2008, 61, 211–224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Behavsci 12 00276 g001 550
Figure 1. A Conceptual Model of the Hypotheses.
Figure 1. A Conceptual Model of the Hypotheses.
Behavsci 12 00276 g001
Behavsci 12 00276 g002 550
Figure 2. Group Competition Climate Moderating the Indirect Relationship Between Life Satisfaction and Customer Satisfaction.
Figure 2. Group Competition Climate Moderating the Indirect Relationship Between Life Satisfaction and Customer Satisfaction.
Behavsci 12 00276 g002
Table
Table 1. Means, Standard Deviations, Pearson Correlations, and Scale Reliabilities.
Table 1. Means, Standard Deviations, Pearson Correlations, and Scale Reliabilities.
VariableMSD123456
Employee/T1
  1. Age (in years)26.213.16
  2. Gender 0.01
  3. Tenure (in months)21.8023.860.060.60 **
  4. Life satisfaction4.201.190.010.070.06(0.86)
Employee/T2
  5. Service-oriented OCB5.450.950.11−0.03−0.030.15 *(0.96)
  6. Group competition climate4.731.40−0.07−0.04−0.060.040.51 **(0.86)
Customer/T3
  7. Customer satisfaction93.572.750.12 †−0.030.19 **0.010.13 †0.08
Note. Nindividual = 209; Ngroup = 29. Reliability estimates (coefficient alpha) are in parentheses on the diagonal. OCB = organizational citizenship behavior; Gender coded 1 = female, 0 = male; † p < 0.10, two-tailed. * p < 0.05, two-tailed. ** p < 0.01, two-tailed.
Table
Table 2. Confirmatory Factor Analyses.
Table 2. Confirmatory Factor Analyses.
Modelχ2dfRMSEASRMRCFITLI Δχ2 (Δ df)
Three-Factor Model411.552320.060.060.960.95
Two-Factor Model697.652340.100.080.890.86286.10 (2) **
Single-Factor Model1199.942350.140.120.780.72502.29 (1) **
Note. N = 209. RMSEA = Root Mean Square Error of Approximation; SRMR = Standardized Root Mean Residual; CFI = Comparative Fit Index; TLI = Tucker–Lewis Index; ** p < 0.01.
Table
Table 3. Individual Analyses Results for Testing Hypotheses 1 to 3.
Table 3. Individual Analyses Results for Testing Hypotheses 1 to 3.
VariablesModel 1Model 2Model 3
DV = Customer SatisfactionMediator = Service-Oriented OCBDV = Customer Satisfaction
BSEBSEBSE
Intercept93.212.014.91 ***0.7091.09 ***2.22
Control variables
Gender−0.380.540.310.19−0.510.54
Age0.020.08−0.010.030.020.07
Tenure0.02 *0.01−0.00−0.000.02 *0.01
Predictors
Life satisfaction−0.040.160.12 *0.06−0.090.16
Service-oriented OCB 0.43 *0.20
R20.040.040.06
Note. N = 209. OCB = organizational citizenship behavior; * p < 0.05, two-tailed. *** p < 0.001, two-tailed. DV = dependent variable.
Table
Table 4. Multilevel Analysis Results for Testing Hypothesis 4.
Table 4. Multilevel Analysis Results for Testing Hypothesis 4.
VariablesModel 4
Mediator = Service-Oriented OCBDV = Customer Satisfaction
γSEγSE
Intercept00.0693.95 ***1.88
Control variables
Gender −0.390.50
Age −0.020.07
Tenure 0.02 *0.01
Predictors
Life satisfaction0.17 **0.06−0.040.17
Service-oriented OCB 0.35 †0.21
Group competition climate −0.63 †0.38
Service-oriented OCB * Group competition climate −1.14 **0.43
σ20.797.51
~R2 (individual level) 0.06
~R2 (group level) 0.03
Note. Nindividual = 209; Ngroup = 29. γ = unstandardized coefficient obtained from hierarchical linear modelling. OCB = organizational citizenship behavior; † p < 0.10, two-tailed. * p < 0.05, two-tailed. ** p < 0.01, two-tailed. *** p < 0.001, two-tailed. DV = dependent variable.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Luan, Y.; Lv, M.; Wang, L. The Spillover Effect of Life Satisfaction on Customer Satisfaction: The Mediating Role of Service-Oriented Organizational Citizenship and the Moderating Role of Competition Climate. Behav. Sci. 2022, 12, 276. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs12080276

AMA Style

Luan Y, Lv M, Wang L. The Spillover Effect of Life Satisfaction on Customer Satisfaction: The Mediating Role of Service-Oriented Organizational Citizenship and the Moderating Role of Competition Climate. Behavioral Sciences. 2022; 12(8):276. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs12080276

Chicago/Turabian Style

Luan, Yunyun, Meizhen Lv, and Lei Wang. 2022. "The Spillover Effect of Life Satisfaction on Customer Satisfaction: The Mediating Role of Service-Oriented Organizational Citizenship and the Moderating Role of Competition Climate" Behavioral Sciences 12, no. 8: 276. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs12080276

APA Style

Luan, Y., Lv, M., & Wang, L. (2022). The Spillover Effect of Life Satisfaction on Customer Satisfaction: The Mediating Role of Service-Oriented Organizational Citizenship and the Moderating Role of Competition Climate. Behavioral Sciences, 12(8), 276. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs12080276

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop