Abstract
Business leaders, particularly in challenging times like the post-COVID era, grapple with fostering employee well-being and addressing spiritual needs. Our research explores the link between workplace spirituality—marked by meaningful work, community, and value alignment—and employee flourishing, with a focus on the role of servant leadership. Using self-determination theory, we analyzed survey data from SMEs in Iran and India, where employees navigated challenging times amid COVID-related difficulties. Study 1 (303 employees in 128 Iranian firms) found meaningful work and a sense of community positively influence employee flourishing, while value alignment has a curvilinear effect. Study 2 (215 senior Indian employees) replicated these findings, highlighting servant leadership’s role in amplifying positive outcomes and mitigating negatives. This research advances self-determination theory and provides practical insights for leaders to foster positive employee outcomes.
Keywords
1. Introduction
In the aftermath of the pandemic, a central challenge for business leaders is to create a workplace culture that promotes employee flourishing, which is defined as a psychological state characterized by finding meaning in work, experiencing positive emotions, achieving life satisfaction, and demonstrating enhanced performance (Colbert et al., 2016; Srinivasan and Nachimuthu, 2022). Research shows that flourishing employees can play a crucial role in helping businesses recover from the economic downturn caused by COVID-19 pandemic (Giolito et al., 2021; Montani and Vandenberghe, 2025; Srinivasan and Nachimuthu, 2022). Such employees are highly self-motivated, exceed expectations, exhibit lower turnover rates, and make substantial contributions to overall organizational performance (Giolito et al., 2021; Kleynhans et al., 2022; Redelinghuys et al., 2019; Seligman, 2011).
According to American Psychological Association (2018), a promising way for leaders to enhance employee flourishing in difficult times is by providing a workplace in which employees attach importance to the meaningfulness of work and enrich relationships with co-workers. This notion correlates with a growing stream of research on workplace spirituality (WPS) (e.g. Lata and Chaudhary, 2021; Otaye-Ebede et al., 2020; Zaidman and Goldstein-Gidoni, 2011). Studies have underscored three main dimensions of WPS: meaningful work—a desire to find meaning in work at the individual level, sense of community—a deep connection or resonance between one’s inner self and the inner self of others at the group level, and value alignment—the extent employees identify with their organization’s mission and goals (Lata and Chaudhary, 2021; Zhang, 2020). While WPS is increasingly linked to employee engagement, job satisfaction, retention, and organizational commitment (Joelle and Coelho, 2019; Milliman et al., 2018; Rezapouraghdam et al., 2019; Zaidman and Goldstein-Gidoni, 2011), three important research gaps persist.
First, it remains essential to ascertain if WPS supports employee flourishing in challenging contexts like the aftermath of a pandemic. Prior research has mostly assumed a positive impact of WPS on work-related outcomes in a linear fashion (e.g. Ashmos and Duchon, 2000; Driver, 2005; Guillory, 2000; Lata and Chaudhary, 2021; Milliman et al., 2018). However, a darker side of WPS may emerge when it increases to a higher level, due to unethical pro-organizational conduct, potential manipulation, and proselytism that negatively affect employee sentiments (Driscoll and Wiebe, 2007; Lips-Wiersma et al., 2009; Umphress and Bingham, 2011; Zhang, 2020). For example, research suggests that excessive value alignment may lead to work-family imbalance, emotional distress, and grief (e.g. Anderson and Burchell, 2021; Zhang, 2020). Therefore, it is crucial to explore both the positive and negative aspects of WPS.
Second, although the three dimensions of WPS exhibit distinct characteristics, much of the existing research has treated them as a single construct (e.g. Milliman et al., 2018; Rezapouraghdam et al., 2019; Williams et al., 2017), making it difficult to capture their unique effects on employee outcomes. The rationale for disaggregating these dimensions lies in recognizing that meaningful work, sense of community, and value alignment are not monolithic in their effects. Particularly, under post-pandemic circumstances, treating them as a singular construct oversimplifies the intricate interplay between these dimensions, potentially overlooking the distinct ways through which each contributes to employee flourishing.
Third, leadership plays a pivotal role in shaping employees’ attitudes and behaviors, contributing to the development of a thriving workforce (Chen et al., 2019; Keem et al., 2023), and thus, an appropriate leadership style is crucial during crisis recovery (Montani and Vandenberghe, 2025). Despite the acknowledged importance of leadership in organizational contexts (Hartnell et al., 2020; Keem et al., 2023; Montani and Vandenberghe, 2025), there remains uncertainty about which leadership style can effectively manage WPS to promote employee flourishing amid uncertainty and uncontrollable adverse events. Existing literature hints at the potential of servant leadership to enhance employee flourishing (Eva et al., 2019; Hartnell et al., 2020; Keem et al., 2023). Servant leaders, characterized by self-effacement, ethical conduct, and a focus on employee well-being over organizational priorities, may contribute to a positive work environment (Eva et al., 2019; Giolito et al., 2021; Peng et al., 2022). Therefore, it is imperative to explore whether and how servant leadership may foster employee flourishing, especially in times of crisis.
In two studies, we empirically analyze the impact of WPS on employee flourishing and examine whether and how servant leadership plays a moderating role in this relationship. Study 1 segregates WPS dimensions to investigate their individual impact on employee flourishing in post-pandemic era. Study 2 replicates these relationships and examines the moderating role of servant leadership. We integrate precepts of self-determination theory (Chen et al., 2019; Deci and Ryan, 2000; Frazier and Tupper, 2018; Srivastava and Gupta, 2022) to develop the conceptual framework and hypotheses. We use survey data from Small to Medium Enterprises (SMEs) in Iran (Study 1: n = 303 employees across 128 firms) and India (Study 2: n = 215 senior employees), two economies severely impacted by the pandemic. Both countries, with their dense populations, faced a challenging time marked by the rapid spread of COVID-19, heightened fear and uncertainty among employees, intensified by limited vaccine access (Barbate et al., 2021; Hasannezhad Reskati et al., 2023). We focused on SMEs because they are dominant market players in the economy with a massive cumulative effect from the COVID-19 crisis (Chhatwani et al., 2022).
This research makes three important contributions. First, to the best of our knowledge, this is the first study on how firms maintain employee flourishing under stressful conditions. By applying self-determination theory, we deepen the understanding of how WPS should be effectively managed to promote employee flourishing during times of crisis. Second, this study extends the WPS literature, which has largely considered WPS as purely positive. Unlike the conventional view, we investigate both the positive and negative effects of each WPS dimension on employee flourishing. By testing separate hypotheses for each dimension—meaningful work, sense of community, and value alignment—we advance self-determination theory, uncovering significant differences in their impact on employee flourishing. Third, in response to the calls by Hartnell et al (2020), Keem et al. (2023) and Otaye-Ebede et al. (2020), we examine the degree to which servant leadership can maximize the benefits and minimize the negative effects of higher WPS. In doing so we contribute to research that assumes that ethical and authentic leadership support employees’ psychological needs and their commitment to community citizenship behaviors. The research model illustrating the conceptual framework and hypotheses is presented in Figure 1.
Theoretical framework.
2. Literature review and theoretical framework
In the following section, we present an overview of the key constructs in our research model, along with the underlying theories that support our work. To ensure clarity and avoid ambiguity, Table 1 provides the definition and concise explanation for each construct.
Construct definition and elaboration.
2.1. Employee flourishing
Employee flourishing is an integrative construct that encompasses a cornucopia of themes such as employees’ intrinsic motivation for accomplishing meaningful and worthwhile tasks, deeper interpersonal relationships, positive emotions, leisure at work, and the attainment of valued goals (Colbert et al., 2016; Deci and Ryan, 2000; Giolito et al., 2021; Keyes, 2007). The most comprehensive description of employee flourishing is provided by Seligman (2011), who conceptualizes flourishing as comprising five key attributes: (a) positive emotions, such as joy and contentment; (b) complete absorption in work activities, characterized by losing track of time and self-awareness; (c) the development of positive interpersonal relationships built on mutual trust; (d) a sense of meaning, reflecting its significance or importance in life; and (e) the accomplishment of personally valued goals.
Flourishing, as a concept rooted in positive psychology literature, extends the traditional model of well-being by incorporating dimensions of accomplishment and meaning (Csikszentmihalyi and Seligman, 2000; Giolito et al., 2021). According to Srinivasan and Nachimuthu (2022), flourishing is a measure of eudaimonic well-being, which encompasses aspects such as self-acceptance, personal growth, meaning, purpose, engagement, and positive relationships (Deci and Ryan, 2008; Keyes, 2007). These attributes position flourishing at the positive end of the well-being spectrum while mental illness is at the negative end (Srivastava and Gupta, 2022). Employee flourishing is characterized by higher levels of well-being and optimal functioning (Colbert et al., 2016; Demerouti et al., 2015). Such employees are known to be optimistic and confident, have life satisfaction, and have both social and psychological well-being (Keyes, 2007; Srinivasan and Nachimuthu, 2022). Research further indicates that they are self-motivated, enthusiastically engaged in their work (Bono et al., 2012), exhibit high levels of innovation (Srinivasan and Nachimuthu, 2022), and productivity (Colbert et al., 2016). Flourished employees display proactive behavior, engage in self-directed learning, prioritize their careers, and demonstrate a strong commitment to organizational goals (Giolito et al., 2021; Keyes, 2007).
2.2. WPS
Spirituality has emerged as a significant topic of study in the literature on workplace management, referring to individuals’ subjective relationship with the transcendent and their search for meaning, purpose, and connectedness in the workplace (Guillory, 2000; Zaidman and Goldstein-Gidoni, 2011). While it was initially overshadowed by research on religiosity, recent works have brought WPS to the forefront of management studies (Lata and Chaudhary, 2021; Otaye-Ebede et al., 2020; Zhang, 2020). In the field of management, WPS encompasses employees’ understanding of themselves as spiritual beings, their need for wholeness and connectedness with others, and the presence of deeper values in the workplace (Gatling et al., 2016; Milliman et al., 2003; Susmerano, 2024; Zhang, 2020). Following Ashmos and Duchon (2000), we define WPS as “the recognition that employees have an inner life that nourishes and is nourished by meaningful work that takes place in the context of community” (p. 137), providing employees with a sense of meaning and purpose in their work (Srivastava and Gupta, 2022). Milliman et al. (2003) fine-tuned Ashmos and Duchon’s (2000) operationalization of WPS as having three distinct dimensions: meaningful work, sense of community, and alignment with organizational values. Building on this conceptualization, WPS has emerged as a critical factor in organizations, influencing employee behavior (Bantha and Nayak, 2021; Otaye-Ebede et al., 2020; Petchsawang and McLean, 2017; Susmerano, 2024).
Previous research on WPS (e.g. Otaye-Ebede et al., 2020; Rezapouraghdam et al., 2019; Williams et al., 2017) has predominantly treated it as a single construct, often overlooking its multidimensional nature. However, this simplified approach may have obscured the distinct impacts of each dimension. Although some studies have attempted to separate WPS into distinct dimensions, they have generally assumed these dimensions function similarly (see Joelle and Coelho, 2019; Lata and Chaudhary, 2021; Zhang, 2020). Given the fundamentally distinct characteristics of these dimensions, each likely exerts unique influences. For example, meaningful work outlines WPS at the individual level (Lata and Chaudhary, 2021). It refers to the intrinsic value and personal significance employees find in their tasks, emphasizing how they perceive their work as contributing to a greater purpose or fulfilling personal values (Lips-Wiersma and Wright, 2012; Lysova et al., 2023). Sense of community, on the contrary, express WPS at the group level (Joelle and Coelho, 2019). Unlike meaningful work, which has its roots in job design and work activities, the sense of community reflects interpersonal relationships and the social environment within the workplace, implicating the quality of interactions among employees and the overall supportive atmosphere (Ashmos and Duchon, 2000; Milliman et al., 2003). Finally, value alignment, the third dimension of WPS, outlines the practice of spirituality at the organizational level (Lata and Chaudhary, 2021). It involves the congruence between an employee’s personal beliefs and the values upheld by the organization (Joelle and Coelho, 2019). While alignment with organizational values fosters employees’ identification with their organizational mission and purpose (Milliman et al., 2003), it can create complexities, as employees may feel compelled to conform to organizational norms at the expense of their individuality.
In this study, we draw upon self-determination theory (Deci and Ryan, 2000; Srivastava and Gupta, 2022) to empirically investigate how each of the three dimensions of WPS uniquely contributes to employee flourishing in times of crisis.
2.3. Self-determination theory
Self-determination theory is widely acknowledged as a comprehensive framework to study human motivation, well-being, and behavior in diverse realms of life, including psychological needs, relationships, aspirations, and self-regulation (Frazier and Tupper, 2018). The theory has been particularly instrumental in examining the influence of social environment on human well-being and employee behavior in the workplace (Deci and Ryan, 2000; Donald et al., 2020; Frazier and Tupper, 2018; Srivastava and Gupta, 2022). According to self-determination theory, individuals possess three essential psychological needs: autonomy, competence, and relatedness (Deci and Ryan, 2000). Autonomy reflects the need to feel self-reliant and free, competence pertains to the need to feel effective and capable in one’s tasks, and relatedness encompasses the need to connect with others and establish meaningful relationships. The theory posits that when these psychological needs are fulfilled, individuals experience heightened self-motivation and mental health, whereas when these needs are hindered, their well-being is compromised (Ryan and Deci, 2001). According to self-determination theory, the satisfaction of these needs enhances self-motivation and well-being, while their frustration undermines both (Deci and Ryan, 2008).
As a macro theory of human motivation grounded in empirical research, self-determination theory addresses motivational dynamics across various life domains. It has been widely applied to understand the role of WPS in enhancing well-being at work (Srivastava and Gupta, 2022) and integrating spirituality into social environments (Susmerano, 2024). Researchers emphasize that the three tenets of the theory, comprising three core innate psychological needs (autonomy, competence, and relatedness), can be utilized to study employees’ desire to seek WPS dimensions within organizational settings (Srivastava and Gupta, 2022).
Scholarly research highlights strong connections between self-determination theory and the dimensions of WPS (i.e. meaningful work, value alignment, and a sense of community). For instance, self-determination theory emphasizes the importance of intrinsic motivation in fulfilling psychological needs, enabling employees to become self-driven and perform effectively without external coercion (Deci and Ryan, 2008). In congruence, WPS focuses on fulfilling higher-order spiritual needs, such as the pursuit of meaning, purpose, and a sense of fulfillment at work (Petchsawang and McLean, 2017; Susmerano, 2024). Another parallel between self-determination theory and WPS is their shared emphasis on aligning personal values with organizational or group values (Susmerano, 2024). Both frameworks recognize individuals’ innate drive for self-growth and acknowledge the profound influence of the social context on personal development. Furthermore, WPS is inherently intrinsic in nature, mirroring self-determination theory’s focus on the importance of intrinsic motivation (Bantha and Nayak, 2021; Deci and Ryan, 2008; Srivastava and Gupta, 2022; Susmerano, 2024). Given these strong theoretical parallels, Gatling et al. (2016) advocate for the application of self-determination theory as a lens to explore why individuals seek fulfillment through the three dimensions of WPS.
In the following section, we present Study 1, examining how each dimension of WPS influences employee flourishing through mechanisms grounded in self-determination theory.
3. Study 1: WPS and employee flourishing
3.1. Meaningful work
Work is considered meaningful when employees perceive it as personally valuable, significant, and appreciated (Lips-Wiersma and Wright, 2012). Employees who find meaning in their work experience a deeper sense of purpose, enjoyment, and fulfillment, fostering greater engagement, creativity, and motivation (Ashmos and Duchon, 2000; Joelle and Coelho, 2019; Lysova et al., 2023). Scholars have emphasized that employees’ experience of meaningfulness in their work is essential to sustaining well-being and improving performance (e.g. Jiang et al., 2022; Lata and Chaudhary, 2021; Lysova et al., 2023; Milliman et al., 2003). Restoring meaning is believed to inspire a shared vision, driving employees’ motivation and attachment to their work (May et al., 2004; Weeks and Schaffert, 2019). An important stream of WPS research (e.g. Lips-Wiersma and Wright, 2012; Lysova et al., 2023) suggests that the highest level of meaningfulness is achieved when there is alignment and integration across four interconnected domains: (a) unity with others—sharing common values, fostering a sense of belonging, and collaborating effectively, (b) serving others—having the capacity to make meaningful contributions to the well-being of others and recognizing the link between work and a greater purpose that addresses the needs of humanity, (c) developing and becoming self—being authentic, staying true to oneself, and continually striving to evolve into a higher version of oneself or a more improved individual, and (d) expressing self—being able to express one’s talents and create, achieve, and influence at work.
Based on self-determination theory, which emphasizes the essential psychological needs of competence, autonomy, and relatedness (Deci and Ryan, 2000), we argue that meaningful work has a particularly powerful effect on employee flourishing, especially during challenging and stressful times during the post-pandemic era. Self-determination theory posits that the need for competence drives individuals to seek challenging activities that align with their capacities, resulting in the development of greater adaptive capacity and the pleasure of being effective (Deci and Ryan, 2000; Gatling et al., 2016). This desire to fulfill the competence need aligns with what employees seek in meaningful work, such as opportunities to develop their complete selves, fulfill their creative and intellectual potential, and positively impact the lives of others (Gatling et al., 2016). Empirical research supports this notion, demonstrating that meaningful work enhances job satisfaction and well-being by satisfying the need for competence (Van den Broeck et al., 2016). This suggests that when employees perceive their work as meaningful, they are more inclined to focus on the well-being of others and actively engage in behaviors that foster a positive work environment, even amid heightened demands and pressures. There is a reason to believe that sense of competence that stems from meaningful work equips employees to manage obstacles more effectively, driving them to fulfill their responsibilities and remain resilient in the face of adversity.
In addition, meaningful work allows employees to exercise autonomy (Donald et al., 2020). By aligning their tasks with a deeper sense of purpose, employees take ownership of their actions and willingly contribute to the organization’s goals, further enhancing their motivation and commitment. According to self-determination theory, autonomy serves as a motivational factor that drives employees to engage in workplace activities out of personal interest, value, and volition (Ryan and Deci, 2017). When employees experience autonomy in their work, they are more likely to feel a sense of psychological freedom and self-concordance, which are critical for flourishing (Van den Broeck et al., 2016).
Finally, meaningful work fosters a sense of relatedness (Lips-Wiersma and Wright, 2012). In a physically distanced and socially isolated work environment, employees feel a connection with their colleagues who share in meaningful work. This sense of belonging and shared purpose can provide crucial support and camaraderie, particularly during challenging times, fostering resilience and well-being in the face of post-pandemic challenges. Prior research highlights that relatedness fulfills the human need for belonging and support, which is essential for emotional well-being and flourishing (Ryan and Deci, 2017). Research by Lysova et al. (2023) further underscores this point, demonstrating that meaningful work fosters resilience and thriving by aligning employees’ tasks with their values and purpose. Thus, we hypothesize:
3.2. Sense of community
Sense of community refers to the feeling of connectedness among co-workers (Ashmos and Duchon, 2000) and encompasses a workplace where employees view themselves as interconnected and part of a larger community (Milliman et al., 2018; Zhang, 2020). This feeling of connection enhances employees’ concern for their colleagues’ well-being (Einolf, 2013) and encourages active participation in collaborative activities (Yoshida et al., 2014). Peterson et al. (2008) highlight that experiencing a sense of community contributes to employees’ well-being and psychological health by satisfying their fundamental human needs for affiliation and affection.
Self-determination theory underscores the significance of a sense of community, particularly through the fulfillment of relatedness needs. According to this theory, the satisfaction of these needs emerges within the social context of the workplace, fostering a strong sense of belonging to the organization (Deci and Ryan, 2000). This sense of belonging is particularly crucial in contexts marked by isolation, uncertainty, and emotional distress, as it mitigates stress and enhances resilience, well-being, and sustained engagement (Baumeister and Leary, 2017). A strong sense of community can mitigate stress and uncertainty, enhancing resilience, well-being, and sustained engagement in the workplace.
Empirical research supports the positive impact of a sense of community on workplace outcomes. For example, Garrett et al. (2017) found that a sense of community enhances employee engagement and job satisfaction by fostering positive work relationships and a supportive environment. Similarly, Colbert et al. (2016) demonstrated that employees who feel connected to their colleagues are more likely to reach their highest potential and exhibit greater psychological well-being. These findings align with self-determination theory’s assertion that when individuals feel connected to others and perceive themselves as effective in a social environment, they are more inclined to internalize group values and enhance their intrinsic motivation to contribute and excel in their work (Donald et al., 2020; Srivastava and Gupta, 2022). Furthermore, a sense of community not only fulfills the need for relatedness but also indirectly supports the satisfaction of autonomy and competence needs. For instance, when employees feel connected to their colleagues, they are more likely to experience psychological safety, which enables them to express themselves authentically and exercise autonomy in their roles (Edmondson, 1999). In addition, collaborative environments foster opportunities for skill development and mastery, enhancing employees’ sense of competence (Colbert et al., 2016). These dynamics are particularly relevant in the post-pandemic context. Building on self-determination logic, we argue that in the post-pandemic context—where employees may face heightened workloads, increased demands, and potential burnout—a robust sense of community serves as a protective mechanism, motivating employees to persevere and thrive in the face of adversity. Accordingly, we hypothesize:
3.3. Value alignment
Value alignment describes the perceived congruence between employees’ personal values and those upheld by their organization. It refers to the degree to which employees identify with their organization’s mission, purpose, and responsibilities (Lata and Chaudhary, 2021; Milliman et al., 2003). Value alignment is particularly critical in challenging contexts, such as the post-pandemic environment, where employees who perceive a strong alignment often feel that the organization genuinely cares about their well-being (Ashmos and Duchon, 2000; Milliman et al., 2003). Prior research has noted that value alignment is associated with positive work-related outcomes, including increased organizational citizenship behavior, pro-environmental behavior, and reduced turnover intention (Peng et al., 2020; Teng et al., 2020). Scholars argue that a transcendent work environment encourages behavioral exemplars such as justice, benevolence, integrity, respect, and trust (Jurkiewicz and Giacalone, 2004), enabling employees to internalize these values and act in ways that reflect their organizational ethos. According to self-determination theory, when these behaviors are integrated into organizational values, employees become intrinsically motivated to replicate these behaviors without relying on external rewards (Deci and Ryan, 2000; Srivastava and Gupta, 2022). Intrinsic motivation arises because employees naturally align their actions with the value systems they observe in their organization (Otaye-Ebede et al., 2020). Consequently, value alignment encourages employees to consistently act in ways that reflect their organization’s principles and strive for moral excellence, thereby enhancing their journey toward personal and professional flourishing.
However, unlike the dimensions of meaningful work and sense of community, which promote flourishing through ongoing positive reinforcement, the benefits of value alignment can become counterproductive when it exceeds a certain threshold. Research indicates that while value alignment generally promotes positive workplace behaviors, extreme levels can lead to unethical conduct (Anderson and Burchell, 2021; Zhang, 2020). For example, employees who overly identify with their organization may prioritize its interests above their own well-being, sometimes engaging in extra-role or even unethical behaviors to serve the organization (Umphress and Bingham, 2011). In contrast to meaningful work and sense of community, which foster flourishing through mutual support and positive reinforcement, excessive value alignment can distort employees’ priorities, causing them to neglect personal relationships and other vital aspects of life. This overidentification can create a scenario where achieving organizational goals becomes an obsession, leading employees to sacrifice their well-being for the sake of the organization. As the post-pandemic challenges become evident, employees may increasingly recognize that their comfort and core values are compromised. Therefore, while value alignment initially enhances employee flourishing, it has a critical tipping point beyond which its effects become detrimental. Accordingly, we hypothesize:
3.4. Method
3.4.1 Sample and data collection procedure
The study focused on Iranian SMEs as the sample frame. Iran encountered severe challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic, resulting in heightened stress and uncertainty among employees. Contributing factors included fear, ambiguity, and restricted access to COVID-19 vaccines due to international sanctions (Hasannezhad Reskati et al., 2023). This study focuses on SMEs because, unlike larger firms with more tangible resources, SMEs depend more on socio-psychological resources, such as employee flourishing, to gain a competitive advantage (Chhatwani et al., 2022; Jardon and Martos, 2012). We collected primary data from SMEs operating in the manufacturing, healthcare, finance, business and management services, retail and wholesale trade, education, and IT/software sectors. Our preliminary interviews with industry experts and experienced researchers indicated that flourishing in the workplace is a key contributor to job performance and productivity in these sectors. We collected data from multiple employees in each SME to mitigate the potential bias associated with relying solely on self-report data from single informants (Podsakoff et al., 2003).
Participants were identified through a network of MBA alumni from a university in Iran. After informing the MBA alumni about the study, they were requested to invite participants, including not fewer than two employees in each SME, and share their contact details. Subsequently, participants were contacted via mobile and invited to participate in the study. Upon agreement, they received an email containing a link to an online questionnaire. Totally 468 employees from 171 SMEs were provided a link to the questionnaire. To ensure anonymity and minimize the potential impact of social desirability bias, the surveys were administered and collected through Porsline, an Iranian online platform. As explicitly stated in the consent form, participants’ privacy and responses were strictly confidential and accessible only to the researchers throughout the entire process. Two attention check items (e.g. “please select strongly agree here”) were added to the questionnaire to detect and eliminate inattentive responses (Alam et al., 2022).
To mitigate the potential impact of common method bias (Podsakoff et al., 2003, 2012), we employed a three-wave survey approach with a 2-week interval between each wave. Each survey wave took approximately 5 minutes to complete. At Time 1, employees reported their perception of meaningful work and provided demographic and background information. At Time 2, employees reported their sense of community, and at Time 3, employees rated their value alignment and level of flourishing. A total of 165 employees either did not respond to one or more waves of the survey or failed the attention check. After matching the data across the three waves and removing inattentive responses, our final sample consisted of 303 employees (response rate of 64%, 60% male, 40% female, Mage = 35.7 years, Mtenure = 4.32 years) from 128 SMEs (Mage = 13.2 years, Msize = 81).
To address potential non-response bias, a comparison was made between late and early responses, revealing no significant differences in key measures at the 5% significance level. This suggests that non-response bias was not a major concern. In addition, two post hoc tests, including Harman’s single-factor and marker-variable techniques, were conducted. The results of Harman’s single-factor test indicated multiple distinct factors, with the first factor accounting for 24.40% of the variance. Furthermore, after controlling for the marker variable (Internet usage), the pattern and magnitude of the correlations remained similar to the unadjusted correlations, suggesting that common method bias is not a threat (Lindell and Whitney, 2001; Malhotra et al., 2006).
3.4.2 Measures
This study employed measures from previous research and enhanced their validity through field interviews with expert judges, including academics and practitioners. Preliminary interviews assessed face and content validity, and expert judges rated items for representativeness. Participant feedback led to some item modifications for questionnaire improvement. Forward-backward translation from English to Persian was conducted, and a pilot study with 20 employees ensured item clarity. Minor modifications were made based on the pilot test results. Table 2 provides details on construct items. All multi-item scales used a 5-point Likert-type scale (1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree).
Reliability results and items statistics.
The scale format for each of the measures was 1 =“Strongly disagree” and 5 =“Strongly agree.”
We assessed meaningful work using a scale adapted from Lips-Wiersma and Wright (2012) and Lysova et al. (2023). The initial 17-item scale covered dimensions like unity with others, serving others, expressing full potential, and personal development. After preliminary interviews, we refined the scale by removing three irrelevant items, resulting in a representative set of 14 items covering the original 4 dimensions. Following Hair et al.’s (2010) guidelines, we conducted a confirmatory factor analysis to assess the homogeneity of the four factors. The second-order factor model demonstrated a better fit (χ2/df = 2.23, Tucker–Lewis Index (TLI) = 0.95, comparative fit index (CFI) = 0.92, root mean square of error approximation (RMSEA) = 0.068). Accordingly, the items were combined to create a composite score in subsequent analyses.
Sense of community was measured via six items adapted from Ashmos and Duchon (2000) and Milliman et al. (2003), and value alignment was measured via five items adapted from Milliman et al.’s (2003). 1 Employee flourishing in the post-pandemic context was assessed using an eight-item scale adapted from the work of Diener et al. (2010) and modified to be suitable for the current situation.
As multiple employees within the same SME were surveyed for each variable, we employed data aggregation by aggregating employees’ responses within each SME to generate a single score for each question. This aggregation approach was supported by the within-team agreement index (rwg), intra-class correlation (ICC1), and reliability of measures (ICC2), which exceeded the established threshold values (LeBreton and Senter, 2008).
Prior research suggests that various demographic attributes may be theoretically or empirically linked to the relationships hypothesized in this study (Colbert et al., 2016; Demerouti et al., 2015; Wang et al., 2021), prompting us to collect data on these characteristics from each respondent. These attributes include employees’ age (measured as logarithm of years), gender (measured with three dummy indicators 1 = male, 2 = female, 3 = non-binary/third gender), education (measured with four dummy indicators 1 = high school, 2 = bachelor, 3 = master, 4 = PhD), marital status (measured with four dummy indicators 1 = single, 2 = married, 3 = unmarried but with a partner, 4 = other), organizational tenure (measured as logarithm of years of tenure), and managerial job setting (measured with three dummy indicators 1 = executive, 2 = operations, 3 = production). However, since demographic attributes reflect individual-level variations within firms, we did not apply aggregation procedures to these variables. Instead, acknowledging the well-established tendency of individuals to form stronger connections with those who share similar demographic characteristics, we accounted for the influence of homogeneity in demographic attributes as control variables. This allowed us to assess the impact of diversity in demographic characteristics. To measure diversity, we utilized Blau’s (1977) index, which considers variations in these demographic factors.
3.4.3 Measure validation
Exploratory factor analysis was conducted to ensure all the items loaded on the corresponding factors without cross- or low-factor loadings. As shown in Table 2, all items exhibited factor loadings surpassing the .50 benchmark, thereby affirming convergent validity (Bagozzi and Yi, 1988). The Average Variance Extracted (AVE) for all constructs surpassed the .50 benchmark, indicating additional confirmation of convergent validity (Fornell and Larcker, 1981). We subsequently evaluated the internal consistency of the multi-item measures using Cronbach’s alpha, and the values surpassed the recommended threshold of .70 (Nunnally, 1978), affirming the acceptable reliability of the measures (Lance et al., 2006).
Discriminant validity was evaluated by comparing the square root of the AVEs with the correlation between constructs, following the method outlined by Fornell and Larcker (1981). The diagonal entries in Table 3, representing the square root of AVE for each construct, were consistently higher than the correlations between the constructs, supporting discriminant validity. In alignment with Ngo and O’Cass (2012), discriminant validity was also examined by comparing individual correlation scores with their respective reliabilities. As depicted in Table 3, none of the individual correlations exceeded their corresponding reliabilities, thereby confirming satisfactory discriminant validity for all constructs. Table 3 presents the basic descriptive statistics (means, standard deviations) and correlations of the constructs.
Descriptive statistics and intercorrelations (Study 1).
M = mean, SD = standard deviation; the square roots of AVE are on the diagonal.
p < .05; **p < .01 (two–tailed).
3.4.4 Hypotheses testing
Prior to testing the hypotheses, we evaluated homoscedasticity employing the recommended Breusch-Pagan test (p > 0.05) and found no evidence of heteroscedasticity in the data. We mean-centered all indicators to mitigate the potential concern of multicollinearity (Bachrach et al., 2023). Furthermore, we checked for multicollinearity in two ways. First, Table 3 indicates that no interfactor correlations were above the .60 threshold (Liu et al., 2016), and second, the largest variance inflation factor obtained was 1.43, substantially below the 5 cutoff; thus, multicollinearity is unlikely to bias estimates or pose any threat to the findings (Hair et al., 2010).
To test our hypotheses, we conducted a hierarchical regression analysis. This is a popular approach for estimating nonlinear relationships between variables because it can help assess an overall main effect by incorporating the linear and squared components of variables at the same time (Bachrach et al., 2023). We employed R2 to assess the predictability of each model. A detailed description of our regression analysis is provided in Table 4.
Results of hypotheses testing (Study 1).
p < .05; ** p < .01.
In preparation for the regression analysis, the linear term of value alignment was squared to explore the possibility of a nonlinear relationship with employee flourishing (Bachrach et al., 2023). We then started regression analysis by entering the control variables in the first step (Model 1), the linear terms of meaningful work, sense of community, and value alignment in the second step (Model 2), and the squared term of value alignment in the third step (Model 3). As indicated in Table 4, the adjusted R2 values increased significantly with each step.
The results in Model 1 indicate that no control variables were related to employee flourishing. H1 proposes that meaningful work positively affects employee flourishing. The results in Model 2 provide support for this hypothesis (b = .25, p < .01). As hypothesized in H2, the analysis in Model 2 reveals that sense of community significantly affects employee flourishing (b = .21, p < .05).
H3 proposes that value alignment will have an inverted U-shaped relationship with employee flourishing. Model 2 shows a positive but insignificant relationship between value alignment and employee flourishing (b = 0.12, n.s.). However, the effect of the squared term of organizational value alignment on employee flourishing is negative and significant in Model 3 (b = −0.20, p < .05), suggesting that the positive impact of value alignment on employee flourishing is diminishing. Overall, these results provide strong support for H3. These empirical results are illustrated in Figure 2, which shows that there is a positive and growing trend at lower levels of value alignment before turning, and a negative and declining trend at higher levels of value alignment on employee flourishing.
Curvilinear effect of organizational value alignment.
4. Summary and motivation for Study 2
In Study 1, we uncovered the significant roles of meaningful work, sense of community, and value alignment in promoting employee flourishing. Specifically, both meaningful work and sense of community demonstrated a positive impact on flourishing, whereas organizational value alignment exhibited a curvilinear relationship—enhancing flourishing at moderate levels but diminishing it when excessively aligned. These findings underscore the importance of these WPS dimensions in shaping employee flourishing. However, building on the principles of self-determination theory (Deci and Ryan, 2000), it is also important to consider the role of leadership in this relationship because leadership profoundly influences the extent to which employees’ core psychological needs are met (Brière et al., 2021; Eva et al., 2019). Extensive research highlights leadership’s crucial role in fostering employee engagement (Giolito et al., 2021; Van Dierendonck et al., 2014). Scholars argue that self-serving or ill-intentioned leadership can have negative implications for WPS, by exploiting their position for personal control and instrumental gain (Driscoll and Wiebe, 2007; Lips-Wiersma et al., 2009). Instrumentality dilutes the authenticity of WPS, treating employees merely as productive units (Case and Gosling, 2010). Conversely, leadership that prioritize employee welfare can authentically integrate WPS practices. Servant leadership, in particular, is highly valued for its genuine focus on employee well-being (Eva et al., 2019). Scholars drawing on self-determination theory support servant leadership because it cultivates the environment for promoting intrinsic motivation among employees (e.g. Brière et al., 2021). Compared to other leadership styles, servant leadership is inherently more people-centered and ethical, genuinely caring for individuals within the organization (Eva et al., 2019; Giolito et al., 2021; Van Dierendonck et al., 2014). This reduces the risk of instrumentalizing WPS for organizational gain. Accordingly, in response to Otaye-Ebede et al.’s (2020) call for further research on leadership’s role in modifying the impact of WPS, we conduct Study 2 to replicate Study 1’s findings and explore how servant leadership moderates the relationship between WPS dimensions and employee flourishing.
4.1. Moderating role of servant leadership
Servant leadership is distinguished for its emphasis on the leader’s commitment to serving others within the leader-follower relationship (Van Dierendonck et al., 2014). Unlike traditional leadership styles that may prioritize organizational goals or personal advancement, servant leaders place the needs of their followers above both organizational interests and their own (Eva et al., 2019). This approach involves self-sacrificial behavior, providing emotional healing during challenges, empowering employees to find their own best way to work, behaving ethically, fostering employee growth and success, and encouraging the creation of value for both the organization and the community (Eva et al., 2019; Giolito et al., 2021; Liden et al., 2015; Peng et al., 2022; Van Dierendonck, 2011).
Drawing on self-determination theory, we argue that servant leadership enhances the fulfillment of these psychological needs, creating an environment where employees can derive greater value from meaningful work and achieve higher levels of flourishing. We reason this to be the case because servant leadership supports the autonomy need by empowering employees to self-organize their experiences and behaviors in ways that align with their integrated sense of self. Servant leaders transcend self-interest, genuinely seeking to assist and nurture subordinates (Eva et al., 2019; Van Dierendonck et al., 2014). Their authenticity stems from a sincere desire to make a positive impact on followers’ lives (Eva et al., 2019). By engaging in one-on-one conversations and recognizing the strengths, desires, and potential of everyone (Liden et al., 2008; Van Dierendonck et al., 2014), servant leaders create a climate where employees feel trusted and supported to take ownership of their work. This autonomy-supportive environment amplifies the positive effects of meaningful work, as employees are more likely to internalize the value of their tasks and experience greater intrinsic motivation (Ryan and Deci, 2017).
Moreover, servant leadership fosters the competence need by providing employees with opportunities for growth, skill development, and mastery. Servant leaders prioritize the personal and professional development of their followers, helping them achieve their full potential (Liden et al., 2015; Peng et al., 2022). When employees perceive their work as meaningful and are supported by servant leaders who encourage their development, they are more likely to experience a sense of accomplishment and self-efficacy, which are critical for flourishing. Accordingly, we hypothesize:
Drawing on self-determination theory, we further argue that servant leadership strengthens the relationship between sense of community and employee flourishing by fulfilling core psychological needs. Servant leaders empower employees to express their talents and set clear goals. This fulfill the need for autonomy, enabling individuals to align their behaviors with their values (Eva et al., 2019; Liden et al., 2015). Simultaneously, servant leadership strengthens the need for relatedness by fostering group consensus and connections within teams (Yoshida et al., 2014). Empirical evidence supports this, showing that servant leadership enhances employees’ sense of belonging and motivation to contribute to their community (Giolito et al., 2021; Van Dierendonck et al., 2014).
Furthermore, self-determination theory posits that alignment between an employee’s values and behaviors and those of their group positively influences goal achievement, performance, and personal growth (Deci and Ryan, 2000; Gatling et al., 2016). Servant leaders not only empower employees to contribute to coworkers’ well-being, but also foster a strong sense of relatedness within the team (Yoshida et al., 2014). In environments where deeper connections and strong relationships are encouraged, employees with a high sense of community are more likely to experience well-being and psychological health. Therefore, servant leadership acts as a driving force that strengthens the connection between a sense of community and employee flourishing. Thus, we propose the following:
Our study also proposes that servant leadership plays a moderating role in the inverted U-shaped relationship between value alignment and employee flourishing. Specifically, building on self-determination theory, we argue that servant leadership can delay the point at which increasing value alignment begins to have negative effects on employee flourishing. Servant leadership style, with its focus on empowering employees and satisfying their needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness, is particularly well-suited to mitigate the potential downsides of excessive value alignment, especially under stressful conditions. For example, servant leaders empower employees, that is, grant them autonomy and the responsibility to handle challenges as they see fit (Brière et al., 2021). This fosters an environment where employees feel trusted and capable, reinforcing their intrinsic motivation. Furthermore, the emotional intelligence and genuine care demonstrated by servant leaders allow them to harness the positive effects of value alignment on employee flourishing (Brière et al., 2021; Keem et al., 2023). By assuming responsibility for their followers’ well-being, servant leaders foster a sense of trust and care within the organization, aligning employee and organizational values (Eva et al., 2019). Consequently, servant leaders reduce potential conflicts, facilitate a better match between employees’ personal values and organizational values, and support employee flourishing.
Likewise, servant leaders’ commitment to individualized attention, through one-on-one conversations and proactive support, enables them to identify and address emerging issues early (Liden et al., 2008; Van Dierendonck et al., 2014). They identify workplace issues and provide emotional healing, demonstrating genuine sensitivity to their followers’ concerns (Liden et al., 2008; Peng et al., 2022). This allows servant leaders to encourage employees to maintain a healthy work-life balance and advise them against overcommitting to work, thereby mitigating the negative effects of excessive value alignment on employee flourishing. As a result, servant leaders can reduce the mismatch between employee and organizational values, avoid forking, and help streamline the curvilinear relationship between value alignment and employee flourishing. Thus, we propose the following hypothesis:
4.2. Method
4.2.1 Sample and data collection procedure
The Indian SMEs were chosen as the sample frame for Study 2. Being densely populated, India remained under severe or partial lockdown (Sahoo and Ashwani, 2020). High uncertainty, the deferment of investment, reduced employment, and lower per capita income affected millions of employees (see Garg and Sahoo, 2020), particularly SMEs (Barbate et al., 2021; Sahoo and Ashwani, 2020). Qualtrics, an online market research panel, was used to recruit our sample, including senior employees working in Indian SMEs in various industries. Qualtrics ensures quality certification by monitoring each respondent’s IP address to avoid duplicates and replacing those respondents who complete the questionnaire in less than one-third of the average completion time (Carlson et al., 2021; Seiders et al., 2021). Three selection criteria were used to recruit potential respondents. First, adopting European Commission definitions of SMEs (Guide, 2016), we needed firms that employed fewer than 250 people. Second, following Study 1, we needed SMEs operating in the manufacturing, healthcare, finance, business and management services, retail and wholesale trade, education, and IT/software sectors. Qualtrics implemented quotas to ensure that the sample was proportionate to different sectors. Third, we sought individuals in managerial positions who directly liaised with their CEOs.
Of 244 completed surveys received, 12 were discarded for failing to meet at least one selection criterion. Following the same procedure as in Study 1, we further excluded 17 surveys in which respondents failed one of the two attention questions. In total, 215 usable surveys were retained that comprise 47% male, and 53% female, and the majority (69%) attained their bachelor’s degree or above. The average age of the participants was 42.08 years, with an average tenure of 7.85 years. We took proactive measures to address potential issues of non-response and common method bias in Study 2, similar to what we implemented in Study 1. The results of our analyses provided reassurance that these threats were minimal and did not significantly impact the validity of our findings.
4.2.2 Measures
Consistent with Study 1’s methodology, we utilized the same measures to assess meaningful work, sense of community, value alignment, and employee flourishing in Study 2. As shown in Table 2, servant leadership was operationalized using the seven-item scale adopted from Liden et al. (2015). Respondents were asked to indicate the degree to which the statements accurately described their leaders’ priorities regarding employees’ concerns and their self-growth. In addition, consistent with Study 1, we included same control variables—employees’ age, gender, education, marital status, organizational tenure, and managerial job role—to account for and minimize the potential confounding effects of these alternative factors.
The exploratory factor analysis yielded factor solutions in line with theoretical expectations for all measures (see Table 2). Internal consistency for our measurement items, assessed through Cronbach’s alpha, surpassed the critical threshold of .70, as outlined in Table 1. As in Study1, the convergent validity was supported by AVEs exceeding the .50 threshold (Table 2), and discriminant validity by the square root of AVE for each construct greater than correlations with other constructs (Table 3). Descriptive statistics, including means, standard deviations, and construct correlations, are presented in Table 5.
Descriptive statistics and intercorrelations (Study 2).
M = mean, SD = standard deviation; the square roots of AVE are on the diagonal.
p < .05; **p < .01 (two-tailed).
4.2.3 Hypotheses testing
Table 6 presents the results of our regression analysis, which was conducted in a stepwise manner. In Model 1, we included the control variables as predictors. Model 2 added the linear terms of meaningful work, sense of community, and value alignment. In Model 3, we introduced the squared term of value alignment. To test H4 and H5, we separately multiplied each independent variable (i.e. meaningful work and sense of community) by servant leadership. To test H6, first, we multiplied value alignment by servant leadership, and second, we multiplied the squared term of value alignment by servant leadership. Adding the interaction effects of servant leadership to Model 3 formed Model 4. Table 6 demonstrates a notable increase in the adjusted R2 values at each step of the analysis.
Results of hypotheses testing (Study 2).
p < .05; ** p < .01 (two-tailed).
The results of moderated regression analysis in Table 6 demonstrate a significant increase in the predictive power of the model (as indicated by the increment in R2) when the product terms were included in Model 4 to predict employee flourishing. The regression analysis revealed a positive and significant parameter estimate for the interaction between meaningful work and servant leadership (b = 0.25, p < .01), providing support for H4. However, the analysis revealed that the product terms of sense of community and servant leadership did not have a significant positive effect on employee flourishing (b = .12, n.s.), failing to support H5. In Model 4, the interaction term between the squared term for value alignment and servant leadership shows that servant leadership has a statistically significant moderating effect (b = 0.19, p < .05), supporting H6.
To illustrate the moderating effect of servant leadership, we plotted the curvilinear relationship between value alignment and employee flourishing at low, medium, and high levels of servant leadership. As indicated in Figure 3, the curvilinear effect of value alignment on employee flourishing only becomes more linear at higher levels of servant leadership.
Moderating effect of servant leadership.
5. Discussion and implications
Organizations increasingly recognize the pivotal role of employee well-being in sustaining competitive advantage. Flourishing employees not only contribute to organizational success but are also better equipped to navigate vulnerabilities and challenges (Colbert et al., 2016; Demerouti et al., 2015; Kleynhans et al., 2022). However, fostering employee flourishing became especially challenging in the post-pandemic era due to significant disruptions such as lockdowns, job insecurity, social isolation, remote working, and economic instability (e.g. Bakker and Van Wingerden, 2021; Barbate et al., 2021; Srinivasan and Nachimuthu, 2022). These challenges have been particularly pronounced in countries like India and Iran, where the pandemic exacerbated pre-existing socio-economic difficulties, including unemployment, mental health crises, and the added strain of economic sanctions.
This study, grounded in self-determination theory, aimed to explore whether fostering a spiritual work environment can promote employee flourishing in this challenging context. Self-determination theory posits that fulfilling employees’ basic psychological needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness is essential for their well-being and flourishing (Deci and Ryan, 2000). By applying self-determination theory, we theorized that WPS dimensions—meaningful work, sense of community, and value alignment—would address these psychological needs, thereby influencing employee flourishing. In addition, we investigated the moderating role of servant leadership in the relationship between individual dimensions of WPS and employee flourishing.
Our findings confirm that meaningful work and a sense of community positively influence employee flourishing, whereas the relationship between value alignment and flourishing is curvilinear, that is, a moderate level of value alignment enhances flourishing, but both excessive and insufficient alignment undermines it. Furthermore, servant leadership amplifies the positive effects of meaningful work and sense of community on flourishing while mitigating the negative effects of excessive value alignment. These findings highlight the interaction between leadership styles, WPS, and employee well-being, particularly in the unique context of the post-pandemic recovery. In countries where employees face heightened socio-economic pressures, organizations can benefit from cultivating spiritual work environments and adopting servant leadership practices. By addressing employees’ psychological needs, organizations can enhance their resilience and ability to flourish, even in challenging environments. This contextual insight underscores the importance of tailoring strategies to the socio-economic realities of the post-pandemic era.
5.1. Theoretical implications
The existing literature acknowledges the benefits of WPS in improving different employee-related outcomes, such as ethical behavior, innovativeness, engagement, and pro-environmental attitudes (Milliman et al., 2018; Otaye-Ebede et al., 2020; Rezapouraghdam et al., 2019). However, there has been a notable lack of research examining the role of WPS as a vital practice for enhancing employee flourishing, especially during challenging times when organizations are grappling with new obstacles and striving to support their employees’ well-being. Through our analysis, we extend the scope and applicability of self-determination theory to explain the relationship between the individual dimensions of WPS and employee flourishing. In addition, we contribute to the literature by investigating how each dimension—meaningful work, sense of community, and value alignment—affects employee flourishing during crises. This theoretical extension is essential because, unlike previous studies that treat these dimensions as having similar impacts (e.g. Rezapouraghdam et al., 2019; Williams et al., 2017), our empirical findings demonstrate that each dimension uniquely influences employee flourishing through distinct mechanisms.
Furthermore, existing studies have predominantly highlighted the importance of WPS as an exclusively positive factor (e.g. Gatling et al., 2016; Lata and Chaudhary, 2021; Lips-Wiersma et al., 2009; Otaye et al., 2020; Petchsawang and McLean, 2017; Susmerano, 2024) often overlooking its potential drawbacks. In attempting to close this research gap, we argue that WPS has both positive and negative sides and that examining one without the other may provide an incomplete picture of its true value. Building on self-determination theory, we demonstrate that while meaningful work and a sense of community substantially enhance employee flourishing, the impact of value alignment diminishes beyond a certain point. Our results indicate that employees who derive positive meaning from their work—such as through a sense of competence—and those who experience a strong sense of community—fostering relatedness and a shared purpose—tend to flourish and perform at higher levels. However, the interplay between value alignment and employee flourishing is more complex than previously recognized. Although alignment with organizational values can empower employees and facilitate their engagement in activities that resonate with their self-identity, overidentification with these values may lead employees to focus solely on meeting organizational objectives. This narrow focus can detract from other essential aspects of life such as family, health, social relationships, and work-life balance, thereby diminishing their overall flourishing. These findings strengthen the applicability and depth of self-identification theory by highlighting the negative consequences of excessive value alignment. In addition, our data provide compelling evidence supporting the arguments of Anderson and Burchell (2021) and Zhang (2020) that excessive WPS can result in unethical employee behavior. Our research takes this discussion in a new direction, particularly in the context of WPS and employee flourishing, by showing that when value alignment exceeds a specific limit, employees may experience a lower level of flourishing.
Finally, our research provides a clearer understanding of the crucial role that leaders play in enhancing the effect of WPS on employee flourishing. In line with self-determination theory, we propose that servant leadership is a significant moderating factor in this relationship. Servant leaders are driven by a strong sense of purpose and a genuine desire to make a positive impact on their subordinates (Eva et al., 2019). By positioning servant leadership as a key moderating factor in the effects of meaningful work, sense of community, and value alignment on employee flourishing, we contribute to research that assumes that ethical and authentic styles of leadership support employees’ psychological needs and their commitment to community citizenship behaviors (e.g. Driscoll and Wiebe, 2007; Liden et al., 2008; Van Dierendonck et al., 2014). Specifically, our findings indicate that servant leadership not only amplifies the positive effects of meaningful work and a sense of community but also mitigates the negative impact of excessive value alignment on employee flourishing, particularly in times of crisis.
5.2. Managerial implications
This study provides important implications for organizations seeking to promote their employees’ well-being, particularly in the post-pandemic era, as they navigate new challenges and strive to create a supportive and thriving work environment. First, our findings highlight the role of senior leadership, especially CEOs, in implementing strategies that promote and facilitate spirituality in the workplace. Given the importance of WPS in supporting employee flourishing, we recommend that CEOs organize training workshops to raise spiritual awareness and develop personalized spiritual growth plans for employees. Managers are further encouraged to cultivate a work environment where employees can freely express their perspectives on what aspects of their job hold personal meaning, without fear of judgment. CEOs can further support this self-expression by fostering a culture of open communication, encouraging regular feedback from employees, and exploring ways to improve the workplace. It is equally important to introduce certain spiritual initiatives into the organizational climate to support community-building activities and promote citizenship behaviors over self-interest. Such initiatives include conducting charity programs, sponsoring national festivals and events, and participating in social and environmental programs.
Second, managers must recognize the limits of value alignment. While employees benefit from aligning with organizational values, overidentification can lead to negative outcomes. Thus, managers need to conduct periodic checks and psychological assessments and ensure that work-related practices are not overly dominant or pursued at the cost of personal goals, such as work-life balance. One practical approach is to foster an environment where employees can openly discuss how their organizations could assist them in achieving their personal objectives and attempt a better balance between personal and organizational objectives. This balance may be achieved by emphasizing an organizational mission that prioritizes employee well-being and values beyond just profit. In addition, we recommend that CEOs and department heads establish a social support mechanism, such as counseling services, to assist employees who may struggle with overidentification and are at risk of sacrificing their individual well-being for the sake of the organization’s reputation and success.
Third, our research reminds organizations that servant leadership style is useful in maximizing the benefits of WPS while at the same time neutralizing its negative consequences. Accordingly, upper echelons can consider their leadership approach and set clear strategies to reshape unfavorable leadership styles. Our results demonstrate that adopting a leadership style that prioritizes followers’ well-being and growth rather than merely enhancing economic returns could be a helpful strategy. We recommend that the top management teams of organizations establish leadership training programs to create an environment in which senior leaders are encouraged to display ethical and moral approaches to leadership, such as putting followers’ interests above the interests of the self and the organization. Finally, it is equally important, if not more so, to consider psychometric testing in the recruitment process to recruit authentic servant leaders who are willing to serve and make a positive difference for followers.
5.3. Limitations and future research recommendations
The limitations of this study provide valuable insights for future research. First, the cross-sectional design limits our ability to establish causal relationships between WPS and employee flourishing. Future research could address this limitation by employing longitudinal designs that track the temporal dynamics between WPS dimensions and employee flourishing, establishing causality over time. Second, we recognize the need to critically examine potential unmeasured variables that may have influenced the relationships we studied. For example, alternative factors such as employee personality traits (e.g. openness to experience or emotional stability) or psychological resources (e.g. resilience or self-efficacy) could moderate the impact of WPS on employee flourishing. Future research could incorporate these variables to provide a more nuanced understanding of the conditions under which WPS interventions are most effective. Moreover, job-related factors such as job autonomy, task significance, or workload may also shape how WPS affects employee flourishing. These variables could be explored to determine whether certain job characteristics enhance or mitigate the positive effects of WPS. Third, the role of different leadership styles beyond servant leadership could provide further insights into how leadership influences the effectiveness of WPS. For instance, transformational leadership, focusing on inspiring and motivating employees to transcend self-interest for the greater good, may play a similar or even stronger role in promoting employee flourishing through WPS. Alternatively, ethical leadership, which emphasizes integrity and fairness, could complement WPS by fostering a climate of trust and psychological safety that enables employees to express their values and engage in meaningful work. Future studies should explore how other leadership styles interact with WPS dimensions to influence employee well-being. Furthermore, boundary conditions that may affect the impact of WPS interventions warrant further investigation. Factors such as individual differences, job characteristics, or organizational structure could influence how WPS affects employee flourishing. For example, it would be insightful to examine whether employees with a high need for personal growth or those working in collaborative versus hierarchical structures experience different outcomes from WPS initiatives. Fourth, comparative studies across diverse cultural contexts could provide valuable insights into how culture influences the effects of WPS. Specifically, investigating the effects of WPS dimensions in individualistic cultures versus collectivistic cultures would shed further light on how cultural factors influence these relationships. Finally, considering the multi-level nature of organizations, future research could adopt a multi-level analysis to examine the impact of WPS at different organizational levels, such as teams or departments. This would provide insights into how WPS operates and influences employee flourishing within different organizational contexts.
6. Conclusion
In conclusion, this study underscores the importance of fostering WPS and adopting servant leadership practices to promote employee flourishing, particularly in the challenging post-pandemic era. Our findings reveal that meaningful work and a sense of community significantly enhance employee flourishing by fulfilling psychological needs for autonomy, competence and relatedness, while value alignment exhibits a curvilinear relationship, with excessive alignment undermining autonomy and well-being. Servant leadership emerges as a critical factor, amplifying the positive effects of WPS and mitigating the drawbacks of excessive value alignment. These insights are especially relevant for countries where the pandemic exacerbated socio-economic challenges, highlighting the need for organizations to prioritize employee well-being through ethical leadership and spiritually enriching work environments. By bridging theoretical and practical gaps, this research offers valuable guidance for organizations striving to build resilient and flourishing workforces in times of crisis.
Key practical and research implications
Organizations should invest in creating meaningful work experiences and fostering a sense of community, as these dimensions significantly enhance employee well-being. Practical steps include designing roles that align with employees’ intrinsic motivations and facilitating collaborative environments that build strong interpersonal connections
Managers must be cautious about overemphasizing value alignment, as excessive focus on shared values can lead to diminishing returns, potentially stifling innovation and diverse perspectives. Striking the right balance between alignment and individuality is essential for sustained organizational performance.
Leaders who prioritize ethical behavior, empowerment, and care for their employees can create an environment that supports holistic well-being, particularly in challenging and uncertain times. Leadership development programs should integrate servant leadership principles, equipping managers to adopt a people-centered approach that aligns with organizational goals and employee aspirations.
For researchers, this study expands the applicability of self-determination theory by demonstrating its relevance in the WPS domain. Future research could build on this by addressing some of the limitations of our study. For instance, employing longitudinal designs would allow researchers to establish causal relationships between WPS dimensions and employee flourishing, providing a clearer understanding of their temporal dynamics. Furthermore, exploring unexamined factors such as individual traits (e.g., resilience or openness to experience), job-related variables (e.g., autonomy or workload), and alternative leadership styles (e.g., transformational or ethical leadership) could uncover boundary conditions that shape the effectiveness of WPS initiatives. Comparative studies across cultural contexts, such as individualistic versus collectivistic cultures, and multi-level analyses that consider team- or department-level dynamics could further enrich the literature. By addressing these gaps, future research can provide a more nuanced and comprehensive perspective on how WPS fosters employee flourishing across diverse contexts.
Footnotes
Acknowledgements
The authors gratefully acknowledge the insightful feedback and support provided by AJM Deputy Editor Catherine Collins, Associate Editor Shenjiang Mo, and the anonymous reviewer, which significantly contributed to the development of this manuscript.
Final transcript accepted 1 April 2025 by Shenjiang Mo (AE Organisational Behaviour).
Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
