Perceived social impact, social worth, and job performance: Mediation by motivation

• Author: Filipa Castanheira
• Date: 01 August 2016
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1002/job.2056
• Published date: 01 August 2016

Perceived social impact, social worth, and job

performance: Mediation by motivation

FILIPA CASTANHEIRA*

Nova School of Business and Economics UNL Lisbon, Portugal

Summary This study was designed to test the relationship between perceived social impact, social worth, supervisor-

rated job performance (1 month later), and mediating effects by commitment to customers and work enga-

gement. The hypotheses were tested with structural equation modeling analysis in a field study with 370

customer-service employees from bank, retail, and sales positions. Results confirm that perceived social

impact is associated with better job performance and that this relationship is mediated by work engagement.

Furthermore, results support a second mediating mechanism in which perceived social impact and social

worth are associated with engagement through affective commitment to customers. Finally, it was found

that engaged employees are rated as better performers by supervisors 1month later. This study supports the

motivational approach to performance and highlights the role that interactions with customers may play in

motivating service employees. Practical implications are discussed by highlighting the need to consider the

social dynamics in service contexts. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Keywords: social impact and social worth; work engagement; affective commitment to customers

Along with the worldwide increase in the service economy, research interest in job characteristics of customer-

service employees has proliferated. Earlier research on job design has provided evidence that the social dimensions

of work contribute to the motivation, well-being, and performance of employees (Morgeson & Humphrey, 2006).

In light of studies from Grant (for a review, see Grant & Parker, 2009), opportunities for impact on others and

contact with beneficiaries are discrete social job characteristics that trigger two psychological effects in employees:

perceived social impact and social worth. Whereas perceived social impact describes the degree to which employees

believe their actions have a positive impact on others, perceived social worth concerns the perception that their ac-

tions are valued by others (Grant, 2007). Earlier research has demonstrated that the way jobs are designed, mainly

with regard to the social job characteristics, may influence worker’s perceived social impact and social worth, which

in turn lead to increased persistence, effort, and performance in the task (for a review, see Grant & Parker, 2009).

However, earlier research has also demonstrated that some service encounters (high in social job characteristics)

can also be associated with emotional demands, job dissatisfaction, job stress, burnout, and poorer performance

(Castanheira & Chambel, 2010a, 2010b, 2013; Dollard, Dorman, Boyd, Winefield, & Winefield, 2003; Grandey,

Dickter, & Sin, 2004; Hulsheger & Schewe, 2011). Therefore, it is important to know whether individuals

performing jobs with social jobs characteristics feel these psychological effects, and how this relates to motivation

and performance.

The present research builds on Grant’s (2008a) study but extends it by allowing perceived social impact and social

worth to intercorrelate to explain workers’engagement and performance at work. Work engagement is a motiva-

tional construct characterized by vigor, dedication, and absorption (Schaufeli & Bakker, 2014). I propose that by

studying perceived social impact and social worth side by side, this study provides a test of the relative strength

of the psychological effects to explain motivation during service encounters. These dynamics between perceived

*Correspondence to: Filipa Castanheira, Nova School of Business and Economics, UNL, Campus de Campolide, 1099-032 Lisbon, Portugal.

E-mail: fcastanheira@novasbe.pt

Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Received 11 December 2014

Revised 31 August 2015, Accepted 14 September 2015

Journal of Organizational Behavior, J. Organiz. Behav. 37, 789–803 (2016)

Published online 6 October 2015 in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) DOI: 10.1002/job.2056

Research Article