Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

The wellbeing of employee has become a challenge associated with working towards sustainable human resource management. This study, therefore, focuses on analyzing the role played by companies’ wellness practices as an important part of the social dimension of the “triple bottom line.” We hypothesize that these practices are linked to the employees’ perceived organizational support, and, simultaneously, to organizational performance, in addition to observing the mediating effects of job satisfaction and commitment. We tested the hypotheses by developing a questionnaire. The direct and mediating effects were analyzed using the Partial Least Square (PLS) structural equation technique. The results eventually obtained from 137 questionnaires provided evidence that wellness programs and perceived organizational support influence organizational performance, with mediating effects on job satisfaction and commitment.

JEL Classification: L84, M12, M14

Plain Language Summary

Design/methodology/approach: the proposed hypotheses were tested using a snowball sampling method, which led to the attainment of 137 valid questionnaires. The direct and mediating effects were analyzed using the Partial Least Square (PLS) structural equation technique. Purpose: the wellbeing of employee has become a challenge associated with working toward sustainable human resource management. This study focuses on analyzing the role played by companies’ wellness practices as an important part of the social dimension of the ‘triple bottom linea’. We hypothesize that these practices are linked to the employees’ perceived organizational support, and simultaneously to organizational performance, in addition to observing the mediating effects of job satisfaction and commitment. Findings: the results eventually obtained from the present research provided evidence that wellness programs and perceived organizational support influence organizational performance, with mediating effects of job satisfaction and commitment. Originality: this study contributes to the issue of sustainable human resource management through the social dimension of the triple bottom line. The employee is an important component in this social dimension and the results obtained in this research make it possible to link the employees’ wellness and perceived organizational support to the companie’s performance.

Keywords

sustainable human resource management triple bottom line wellness programs perceived organizational support job satisfaction commitment organizational performance

Introduction

According to the human capital theory, the main resource in any company is its people, and the most successful enterprises are those that invest in their employees. It is, therefore, crucial for managers to sustain advantageous relationships with employees and inspire their commitment to the company, thereby escalating organizational achievement (Sun, 2019). In the past twenty years, and particularly over the past decade, sustainability has attained an important position as a strategic goal in many enterprises (Taylor et al., 2012). Researchers explain this issue as a “triple bottom line” that includes a company’s environmental, social, and economic perspectives (Elkington, 1998). Many enterprises are now pursuing multiple goals and are redefining success in more sustainable terms (Aust et al., 2020) by adopting a “profit-with-purpose” business model (Stahl et al., 2020). An organization’s adoption of a sustainability perspective provides many benefits, some of which are those related to enhanced relationships with stakeholders (Gallardo-Vázquez et al., 2013). Stakeholders are any group that can influence or be influenced by a company’s practices, decisions, or actions (Guerci et al., 2016). In this paper, we focus on one specific type of stakeholder that is of critical importance when considering sustainable human resource management: employees. In this context, human resources are more than a means to achieve the company’s purposes. They are an end, that is, sustainable human resource management can develop the physical, social and economic wellbeing of an enterprises’ employees (Taylor et al., 2012).

In this context of seeking to ensure employee’s wellness, we focus on the perceived organizational support (POS), which can be identified as the worker perceiving that the company cares about his/her wellbeing and appreciates his/her contribution (Eisenberger et al., 1986). This variable portrays the employee-company relationship from the worker’s perspective and has remarkable benefits for both employee and employer (Muñoz et al, 2023).

There are some antecedents to POS: organizational variables, individual variables, and the relationship among the company and its workers (Sun, 2019). The organizational variables include workplace conditions, on which we shall center herein, with specific concentration on enterprise wellness programs (EWP). In Spain’s case, wellness programs in the workplace could perhaps circumvent up to 96,000 diseases by 2050, conserve millions of euros in healthcare expenses, and increase productivity by an amount equal to 4,000 full-time employees each year (OECD, 2019).

People spend most of their time on the worksite, which could be a good opportunity to stimulate the development of a health culture in this environment since, as many researchers have demonstrated, this has important positive consequences for enterprises. Many companies are conscious of this fact and focus on developing wellbeing undertakings and illnesses-avoidance policies for their workers (Maryam et al., 2016). One of the main challenges for enterprises is that of improving their employees’ health in order to achieve important benefits from their wellbeing and satisfaction (Pronk, 2014). Many researchers claim that is a means to increase employee satisfaction, engagement, and commitment (Saks & Gruman, 2011), and many companies, therefore, develop practices or programs related to wellness—a concept that refers to activities focused on encouraging people to adopt healthy behavior and not have unhealthy lifestyles. This may include emotional, social, intellectual, and physical issues, and companies tend to offer a wide variety of practices by which to deal with them: health testing, fitness centers, incentive programs targeted at health behavior, health education activities, and so on (Zhang et al., 2014).

The number of EWP has increased considerably within companies for several reasons. The work environment provides a wide range of tools and resources that can be mobilized to increase an awareness of the role of health in the appropriate running of the company. The adoption of wellness incentives is also regarded as corporate social responsibility centered on employees (Porter & Kramer, 2006),which can contribute to raised levels of employee contentment and dedication (Mirvis, 2012).

The objective of this study is to fill two knowledge gaps related to this social dimension of the triple bottom line: 1) the relationship between the company’s wellbeing programs (EWP) and perceived organizational support (POS), and 2) the mediating role that job satisfaction and organizational commitment play in the POS-performance relationship. This study proposes a research model and some hypotheses with which to clarify the relationship among the different policies focused on the employee’s wellbeing, the POS and organizational performance. Moreover, this administrative support, as recognized by workers, betters their administrative commitment and job satisfaction (Kwak et al., 2010). Several studies have found that there is a strong link between organizational commitment and job satisfaction. In fact, the former can be perceived as an extension of job satisfaction (Culibrk et al., 2018). This research considers these assumptions with the additional objective of investigating the mediating effect of organizational commitment and job satisfaction. We contribute to academic research by providing a broad model containing certain variables and relationships not previously studied together.

Keeping these objectives in mind, the paper is structured as follows. The first section presents the literature and develops a set of hypotheses. The methodology portion details the data collection method and measures used. We then go on to detail the statistical procedure and consider the results. Ultimately, we explain the chief conclusions, contributions, and restrictions of this work, and future possible related investigation.

Theoretical Framework and Proposal of Hypotheses

Sustainability and Human Resources

A model linking human resources and sustainability was proposed by (De Stefano et al., 2018). This model includes two dimensions: a) people versus process and b) internal versus external. In the first dimension, the process orientation is focused on the technical aspects of the function of human resources and includes the instrumental contribution made by human resources practices to sustainability. The people orientation is the social function that the human resources perform (seeking e.g., employee wellbeing, healthy conditions, job security, and quality of life). The origins of the second dimension are the multiple stakeholder approach and the internal and external consequences of sustainability practices (Kim et al., 2010). The interaction among the different categories provides four ways in which human resources interact with sustainability. Our research can be classified in the people-internal category, which includes issues such as employees’ welfare and wellbeing, occupational health and safety, job security and responsible layoffs, and lifelong learning (De Stefano et al., 2018). We focus on the first issue, as other researchers such as (Anand & Gasper, 2007; Burton et al., 2004; Ernst Kossek et al., 2012; Kulik et al., 2009) have done before us.

Taking the research carried out by Wang et al. (2018) as a basis, we propose a model (Figure 1) in which the central element is POS. We consider that EWP influence POS, which leads to raised levels of job satisfaction and worker commitment. The improvements made to these variables subsequently influence various result indicators.

Figure 1.

Research model.

Employee Wellness Programs

Wellbeing has been defined according two perspectives: the hedonic perspective, which describes wellbeing as happiness, and the eudaimonic perspective, which describes wellbeing as self-actualization (Ryan & Deci, 2001). The second concept includes variables that we consider to be more closely linked to a workplace, that is, the taking part in tasks which contribute to human growth, such as life purpose, self-growth, self-confidence, or positive connectedness (Ryff & Keyes, 1995). Wellbeing at the job level means a feeling of contentment and positive sentiments toward one’s job (Keeman et al., 2017).

Julander (2014) classifies worksite wellness program interventions at several levels. The first level centers on creating mindfulness (flyers, health fairs, newsletters, etc.), the second level seeks to change lifestyle choices (physical activity, health-related classes, counseling, etc.), and the third level looks for the creation of supportive surroundings by mean of a health-conscious lifestyle and conduct (space for an onsite fitness center, health coaching, adapting the worksite cafeteria, no-smoking facilities, benefit plan options, etc.).

There are several studies examining the by-product of wellness programs on different result indicators. In the case of productivity, it has been seen that the extent and quality of production are raised (Loeppke et al., 2008), and certain labor expenses are notably brought down (Baicker et al., 2010), especially regarding those linked to truancy (van den Heuvel et al., 2005). Other indicators could be profit (Goetzel et al., 2005), job satisfaction (Barr-Anderson et al., 2011), worker commitment (Saks & Gruman, 2011), and work surroundings (Jack & Brewis, 2005). Schwatka et al. (2018) demonstrated the probable benefits of EWP for companies of any size. The results obtained from the different research works lead us to conclude that the use of wellness programs is highly recommended for both the company and the employee.

Perceived Organizational Support

The organizational support theory (OST) asserts that an employee forms a perception of the level to which the company values his/her work development and pays attention to his/her satisfaction in order to assess the benefits of a greater work effort (Giorgi et al., 2020). In this context, POS is a variable that represents an employee’s feelings in relation to how much the company cares about his/her wellbeing (Eisenberger et al., 1986). It is, therefore, a key instrument by which to improve the relationship between companies and their employees and to increase their motivation. POS leads the employees to contribute to achieving the organization’s goals, because it allows them to be emotionally attached to the firm (Wang et al., 2018). Considering the social exchange theory, POS is an exchange between the company and the employee that benefits the employee, which generates the obligation of reciprocating with a contribution that will benefit the company. If workers feel their efforts are acknowledged, they will probably show more fruitful attitudes and perform their duties in a more fruitful way (Tsai, 2013). POS, therefore, refers to a sequence of emotional and instrumental dealings whose objective is to enhance and maintain the employee’s performance and wellbeing (Chen et al., 2009). It constitutes one of the pillars that enable workers to relate to the firm’s objectives and thus allow the enterprise to achieve its established goals (Shoss et al., 2013).

Firms have differing options by which they can enhance the level of POS, such as bettering their workers’ workplace conditions, providing mechanisms for involvement, using the emotional compensation, and generating a positive work environment dependent on internal/emotional relationships (McCarthy et al., 2013; Sun, 2019; Wayne et al., 2002). The implementation of wellness programs clearly affects these variables, provided that their design is carried out in an appropriate manner, in accordance with the characteristics established by (Pronk & Kottke, 2009): they should be driven by management, favor worker participation, cover specific needs, promote relationships, and include an incentive system.

Having established this theoretical background, we shall now formulate the first hypothesis:

H1: The application of wellness incentives are positively linked to POS.

Several researchers have analyzed the impact of POS on organizational performance. Production staff with high POS were shown to have a more positive attitude toward Just in Time management and an improved work performance (White et al., 2001), while the meta-analysis carried out by Rhoades showed that POS was moderately linked to the out-of-role performance of companies (Rhoades & Eisenberger, 2002). Similar conclusions were obtained by Chen et al. (2009), while Shoss et al. (2013) found that a low sense of organizational support produced some anti-productive behavior among workers and reduced the out-of-role performance.

The employees’ sense of organizational support makes them feel obliged to correspond to the company and make a greater effort to help the organization achieve its objectives and improve its results (Zhang & Jia, 2010).

Having established this theoretical background, we shall now formulate the second hypothesis:

H2: POS is positively associated with organizational performance.

Job Satisfaction

POS is related to employees’ socio-emotional needs and can improve their performance-reward expectancies, and, as a result, increase their job satisfaction (Harris et al., 2007; Rhoades & Eisenberger, 2002).

Job satisfaction plays an important role in the achievement of organizational performance. With regard to companies’ success, researchers often claim that employees’ morale is fundamental. Workers who have a high level of job satisfaction will be creative and committed, love their job, assist their workmates and managers, and achieve a high performance (Bakotić, 2016; Mudrak et al., 2018). In the case of those studies focusing on the relationship between job satisfaction and organizational performance, some found a positive relationship (Evans & Jack, 2003; Harter et al. 2003; Schneider et al., 2003). Harter et al. (2003) concluded that a positive correlation between employee satisfaction and benefits, employee turnover, workplace accidents, and customer satisfaction exists, while Evans and Jack (2003) showed that worker satisfaction has a positive effect on a company’s sales and value. Schneider et al. (2003) discovered that profitability (ROA) and earnings per share of companies are positively correlated with higher employee job satisfaction. Furthermore, if individual job satisfaction is low, the employee’s engagement decreases (Culibrk et al., 2018). Some other studies did not, however, discover any significant correlation (Daily & Near, 2000; Mohr & Puck, 2007).

Having established this theoretical background, we shall now formulate the third hypothesis:

H3: Job satisfaction mediates the relationship between POS and organizational performance.

Commitment

Finally, commitment is an attitude that indicates that employees identify with the company's objectives and are willing to guide their behavior toward achieving them. Meyer and Allen (1987) point out three configurations of organizational commitment: a) affective commitment, that is the emotional connection that workers have with the organization, and their identification with the enterprise; b) normative commitment, which is, devotion as a way of corresponding to the firm for all it has imparted; and c) continuance commitment, which is, the worker’ consciousness that they will lose out if they leave the organization.

With regard to the reciprocity norm, POS should generate a sense of obligation in employees that is focused on the company’s welfare and the achievement of its goals, thus improving their level of both affective and normative commitment (Eisenberger et al., 2001). Jack and Brewis (2005) found a positive relationship among employees’ commitment, productivity and enterprise performance, while Guan et al. (2014) provided evidence that POS is related to job performance, with mediating effects of job satisfaction and affective commitment.

Having established this theoretical background, we shall now construct the fourth hypothesis:

H4: A worker’s commitment mediates the relationship between POS and organizational performance.

Methodology

Data Collection

Data were collected though a survey in 2021. We focused on companies which evolved health and well-being incentives for workers. Then we dispatched questionnaires to customer companies of Andrade Fitness limited Co., a firm out of Madrid (Spain), whose principal pursuit is to provide wellness services to firms. After communicating with 54 firms, we related the characteristics of the research to them and 24 firms conceded to participate, providing access to their workers’ emails (total employees, 874). They were small and medium enterprises (minimum employee number, 5; maximum, 125). Upon sending an electronic version of the questionnaire we obtained 137 sound responses, that is, with at least 80% of the questionnaire filled out. Table 1 displays the graphic data.

Table 1.

Descriptive Statistics Regarding Sample.

		N	%
Gender	Female	78	57
Gender	Male	59	43
Organizational tenure	1–5 years	22	16
	6–10 years	37	27
	11–15 years	35	26
	16–20 years	26	19
	More than 20 years	17	12
Education	Below secondary education	6	4
	Secondary education	64	47
	Bachelor’s degree	67	49
Managerial level	Operative worker	34	25
	Sales representative	27	20
	Senior or middle manager	34	25
	Technician	21	15
	Administrative assistant	21	15
Sector	Industry	24	18
	Commerce	36	26
	Services	56	41
	Construction	21	15

We examined the relationships among some subjective and objective procedures as well, in order to test the correctness of the constructs, as another test to validate the questionnaire. We computed bivariate Pearson correlations between the objective procedures of return on assets (ROA) and return on equity (ROE) obtained from the responding firm’s financial reports, and the subjective measures of business performance obtained from the questionnaire. ROE and ROA positively correlated with the subjective measures (r = 0.21, p < .05 for ROE and r = 0.24, p < .05 for ROA).

Measures

All the items were rated on 5-point Likert scales. The employees had to choose between “0: completely disagree” and “5: completely agree.” Regardless of the organizational performance, the employees had to compare their company’s situation with that of its competitors. The extreme values are, in this case: “0: far below the competition” and “5: way above the competition.” A copy of the questionnaire is given in the Appendix.

Firms’ wellness policies were quantified by means of a 13-item scale adapted from Wang et al. (2018) and Sonnentag and Pundt (2016). These authors detail the differing pursuits that the companies develop related to the encouragement given on the worksite as regards exercise, healthy eating and health care apart from the usual public health institution programs (e.g., “Sometimes the company organizes sport events for the employees,”“The company usually provides information and training related to healthy habits”).

POS was measured using Eisenberger’s abbreviated scale, which is made up of 10 items. This scale was originally formed of 36 items, but most authors have preferred to use fewer items for practical reasons. The first scale was one-dimensional and had elevated internal reliability, signifying that the use of a shorter setup would not lead to any validity problems (Rhoades & Eisenberger, 2002). The items analyze the employees’ sentiment that the firm appreciates their contributions and values their wellbeing (e.g., “The company tries to take care of its employees’ wellbeing,”“The company pays attention to its employee’s interests and objectives”).

Commitment was quantified using the scale suggested by Meyer and Allen (1987), which is made up of the three features of organizational commitment: affective, continuance, and normative. We chose affective commitment, which is made up of 7 items that determine the employees’ emotional link with the company, their attachment to it and their desire to stay within it (e.g., “I feel that I am a part of this company”; “I would like to be in this company all my life”). Affective commitment is the essential dimension, as decided in studies already carried out (Harness et al., 2018; Meyer et al., 2002).

Job satisfaction was quantified using the scale suggested by Trivellas et al. (2015). We included 4 items in the questionnaire that would determine the employees’ satisfaction in relation to company management, the tasks developed on the worksite, organizational climate and awards received (e.g., “I am satisfied with the management style of this company”; “I am satisfied with the tasks I develop on my worksite”).Organizational performance was quantified using the 5 item scale suggested by Delery and Doty (1996). The employee had to value the situation of the company as regards the different items when compared to the competition (e.g., productivity, benefit, cost effectiveness, sales growth, debt). This was the best way to obtain this information without the employees feeling uncomfortable about revealing confidential data. However, we found subjective appraisals in most of the employees’ answers. In this respect, several studies have concluded that perceptions about enterprises’ results are correlated with the factual measures of those results (Dess & Robinson Jr, 1984; Venkatraman & Ramanujam, 1986).

The alpha coefficients of these measures are shown in Table 2.

Table 2.

Construct Reliability and Results of Convergent Validity (Measurement Model).

Construct	Range of loadings	Cronbach’s alpha (α)	rho_A	Composite reliability (CR)	Average variance extracted (AVE)
EWP	0.656–0.870	0.901	0.902	0.921	0.594
POS	0.717–0849	0.906	0.912	0.925	0.640
COM	0.643–0.852	0.907	0.919	0.927	0.646
SAT	0.713–0.871	0.844	0.850	0.896	0.683
PER	0.686–0.822	0.750	0.755	0.843	0.574

Note. EWP = Employee Wellness Program; POS = Perceived Organizational Support; SAT = Job Satisfaction; COM = Commitment; PER = Organizational Performance.

Results

In order to test the hypotheses and analyze the direct effect and the mediating effect, the partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) technique was used. PLS-SEM is a tool that is used in including when non-normality data conditions are at hand and the sample group is not very large (Hair Jr, et al., 2019). In this investigation, the data file satisfies the condition for which the sample group should be at least 10 times larger than the largest number of structural paths headed in the direction of any one construct (Chin et al., 2003).

We chose this data analysis method for the following reasons: a) it is one of the best options in the beginning stages of an infant hypothesis (Hair Jr, et al., 2019); b) it allows the analysis of differing causal relationships (Astrachan et al., 2014); c) it is sound method when there is not a large sample group (Henseler et al., 2015); and d) it is appropriate to models which study intricate relationships (Hair et al., 2012).

The software used was SmartPLS 3.3. PLS-PM, contingent on an iterative algorithm in order to obtain the weights employed to construct the linear combinations of the noted indicators as proxies for all the constructs in the model. The procedure should heed two steps. The measurement model assesses the reliability and validity of the theoretical constructs, and the structural model is approximated so as to study the (path) interconnections that the research model hypothesized (Hair Jr, et al., 2019).

Measurement Model

A criterion is appropriate when it has a loading (λ) greater than 0.707 on its respective construct. The loadings can be contemplated as well, if they are greater than 0.6 and significant (Benitez-Amado et al., 2015). In order to preserve convergent reliability, we, therefore, eliminated any indicators whose loadings were under 0.6. This affected companies’ wellness policies, which were eventually measured using an 8-item scale, POS which were quantified by employing a 7-item scale and organizational performance, which was quantified by employing a 4-item scale. We utilized Cronbach’s α, rho_A and composite reliability (CR) (Table 2) to assess construct reliability, all of which should be higher than the expected threshold of 0.7 (Fornell & Larcker, 1981).

Convergent reliability was then inspected by observing the loadings of the common factor constructs and the average variance extracted (AVE) of all latent variables. All the loadings were higher than the proposed threshold of 0.5 (Hair Jr, et al., 2019) (Table 2).

When assessing discriminant validity, Fornell and Lacker (1981) propose the criteria in which the square root of the AVE of a latent variable ought to be greater than the correlations between the other latent variables and the construct as such. As Table 3 shows, with the principal diagonal conveying the square root of the AVE of all the construct, discriminant validity is corroborated in our model, seeing as this condition is satisfied for all the constructs.

Table 3.

Discriminant Validity of the Measurement Model.

Construct	EWP	POS	COM	SAT	PER
Employee Wellness Program (EWP)	0.771	0.500	0.525	0.472	0.427
Perceived Organizational Support (POS)	0.462	0.800	0.683	0.780	0.770
Commitment (COM)	0.471	0.630	0.804	0.639	0.779
Job Satisfaction (SAT)	0.413	0.688	0.568	0.827	0.839
Organizational Performance (PER)	0.357	0.639	0.652	0.671	0.758

Note. The elements of the diagonal (bold) are the square root of the variance shared between the constructs and their measures (AVE). Italic values above the diagonal elements are Heterotrait-Monotrait (HTMT) values. Values below the diagonal are the correlations between the constructs.

Discriminant validity was considered by first weighing up the loadings of the indicators of all the latent variables with cross-loadings, achieving the proposed condition. Finally, we calculated the ratios among the Heterotrait–Monotrait correlations, which became a matrix including values lower than 0.9 (Table 3).

Structural Model

The VIF (variance inflation factor) values (Table 3) indicate that collinearity is not a problem for the structural model (Hair et al., 2019). Size was considered as a control variable, as commonly occurs in the literature related to business performance. We scrutinized the significance of the structural relationships by computing the path coefficients employing a bootstrapping technique (10,000 sub-samples, n = 137) and the significance level through the use of a t-Student distribution (one tail, n−1 degrees of freedom).

The results of the structural model analysis are provided in Figure 2, in which the path coefficients are shown, along with their significance levels. All the direct, indirect and total effects are shown in Table 4. The results of the statistical model suggest that all the hypotheses are empirically supported. EWP has a strong, positive, and significant effect on POS (β = .462, p < .01), signifying that the more a company encourages wellness incentives, the higher the level of POS will be. H1 is, consequently, supported. A weaker, although significant relationship, is noticed between POS and organizational performance (β = .191, p < .01), and H2 is, therefore, supported. With regard to mediating effects, we first calculated indirect effects, which are the result of multiplying significant paths. Both indirect effects of POS on innovation behavior through job satisfaction and commitment were found to be significant (β = .246, p < .01and β = .207, p < .01).

Figure 2.

Final proposed model.

Table 4.

Structural Analysis: Direct Effects.

Hypothesis	Direct effect^a	t-Value^b	p Value^b	Percentile confidence interval		f ²
Hypothesis	Direct effect^a	t-Value^b	p Value^b	5%	95%	f ²
H1: EWP→POS	0.462	8.175	.000	0.378	0.567	0.272
POS→COM	0.630	10.095	.000	0.530	0.730	0.659
POS→SAT	0.688	12.196	.000	0.591	0.778	0.901
H2: POS→PER	0.191	1.874	.031	0.018	0.363	0.038
COM→PER	0.327	4.283	.000	0.189	0.448	0.143
SAT→PER	0.358	3.822	.000	0.209	0.524	0.150
Size→PER	0.066	1.543	.061	−0.005	0.134	0.010

^aPaths from hypothesis assessed by applying a one-tailed test at 5% of significance level [5%, 95%].

Bootstrapping-based n = 10,000 bootstrap samples.

Finally, the mediating effects in the model (Table 5) were examined by calculating the variance accounted for (VAF). This provides a value which shows the importance of the indirect effect between two variables proportionate to the total outcome of the association (Nitzl et al., 2016).

Table 5.

Structural Analysis: Mediating Effects.

Hypothesis	Total effect path (p value)	Direct effect path (p value)	Indirect effects path (p value)	Confidence interval		VAF (%)
Hypothesis	Total effect path (p value)	Direct effect path (p value)	Indirect effects path (p value)	5%	95%	VAF (%)
H3: POS→SAT→PER	0.644 (.000)	0.191 (.031)	0.246 (.000)	0.141	0.373	38.19
H4: POS→COM→PER	0.644 (.000)	0.191 (.031)	0.206 (.000)	0.120	0.296	31.98

In the case of the mediating effect of job satisfaction on the association between POS and organizational performance, both the direct and indirect outcomes are significant (p < .01), with a VAF of 38.19%, thus showing the presence of a limited mediation. H3 is, therefore, supported.

With regard to the mediating effect of commitment on the relationship between POS and business performance, the direct and indirect outcomes are also significant (p < .01), with a VAF of 31.98%, also suggesting the presence of a partial mediation and supporting H4.

Discussion

The principal objective of this research was to expand the contributions that link HRM and sustainability. Keeping this in mind, we have focused on the internal/people orientation of De Stefano’s model (De Stefano et al., 2018), since employees are the primary stakeholders of the human resources function. We have, therefore, considered sustainability in terms of employees’ wellbeing, welfare, and safety.

Promoting wellbeing in companies could potentially benefit both the employee and the organization (Keeman et al., 2017). Organizations or supervisors can implement a series of practices by which to enhance the development of work, which can be called wellbeing building, and employees will consequently perceive organizational support as regards achieving tangible and intangible resources with which to facilitate their work tasks or goals (Lee et al., 2021). POS is the employees’ perception that their company cares about their wellbeing and helps them achieve professional and personal challenges (Akgunduz et al., 2018; Demir, 2015; Kurtessis et al., 2017; Liguori et al., 2020). They, in turn, give their dedication as a social exchange and develop a feeling of belonging and security (Akgunduz et al., 2018; Jemini-Gashi et al., 2019; Kose, 2016). POS is positively related to beneficial work attitudes and work behavior such as job involvement, job satisfaction, low turnover, organizational commitment, and task performance (Rockstuhl et al., 2020). In this research, we have analyzed the link between companies’ wellness practices and POS and the relationship between POS and organizational performance. As has occurred in previous studies, we have also chosen job satisfaction and organizational commitment as mediators (Lan et al., 2020; Tang et al., 2019).

The findings show that enterprise wellness programs have a significantly positive effect on perceived organizational support (H1), in line with that obtained by Keeman et al. (2017). At the same time, perceived organizational support also has a simultaneous significantly positive effect on organizational performance (H2). However, job satisfaction mediates the positive influence of POS on organizational performance (H3), that is, when employees perceive greater organizational support, they have higher job satisfaction. The employees’ satisfaction within companies then leads to an increase in organizational performance. In addition, organizational commitment mediates too the positive influence of POS on organizational performance (H4), that is, when employees perceive greater organizational support, they are more committed to their enterprise. The employees’ commitment then leads to an increase in organizational performance.

Conclusions, Limitations and Directions for Future Research

In this paper, we have discussed the ability of the different policies focused on the employee’s well-being to improve organizational performance and even the POS. This study focuses on employees’ points of view but also the Company’s economic-financial ratios, such as ROA and ROE. In both cases, the effect of these good practices has been positive. In addition, two variables seem to be essential when it comes to explaining these results: job satisfaction and commitment of employees.

This study provides several theoretical contributions. First, we provide and test a model to clarify the relationship among the companies’ wellness practices, the POS and organizational performance. The POS is the catalyst between the two variables. This approach allows us to determine the extent to which these behaviors impact such organizational performance, thereby providing us more focused guidance as to what possible interventions may be effective in helping employees achieve better organizational performance together with a greater sense of well-being.

Second, we contribute to the issue of sustainable human resource management through the social dimension of the triple bottom line. The employee is an important component in this social dimension and the results obtained in this research make it possible to link the employees’ wellness and perceived organizational support to the company’s performance.

Third, this study adds confirmatory evidence to the existing research literature that how employees perceive their wellness correlates positively with organizational performance and finds that this transcends the organization’s size.

Our conclusions, therefore, support the use and maintenance of wellness programs. This is the main managerial implication but not the only one. Managers should consider the usual inclusion of practices for employees, such as training in and information on healthy habits, medical checkups, special spaces in which to play sports, or healthy meals in the companies’ cafeterias. These practices will help companies to enhance their workers’ wellbeing, which will eventually contribute to the enterprises’ success and growth.

Managers should consider too the inclusion into the balanced scorecard of Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) related to employee wellbeing to measure the emotional value generated by the organization in the form of well-being and transferred to its employees, as suggested by Retolaza et al. (2021). It may be relevant not only to demonstrate the social dimension of their corporate social responsibility, but also as an argument for attracting talent and human capital. In certain sectors, such as ICT or cyber security, given the current pool of professional, this type of good practices seems particularly important.

With regard to the main limitations of the research, the first concerns the context of the country in which this study was carried out (Spain). The selected variables may be contingent to the national culture, and a more in-depth analysis should, therefore, be carried out. In addition, future research should corroborate these findings in the context of other countries.

The second limitation is related to the use of a cross-sectional design. A longitudinal study would provide valuable information on whether, over time, the implementation of these good practices is normalized and their effect on organizational performance is reduced. In addition, the financial indicators used can be biased too as pointed out by David et al. (2022). Firms use the so-called “accrual accounting” to better track earnings attributable to business transactions over a given time period but this differs from actual cash flow during that period. Future studies could also consider the effect of this time gap. It is plausible to argue that employee wellness programs taken by a firm affect its medium and long-term performance.

Thirdly, from a methodological point of view, we have used self-report measures provides by employees. This can generate common-method bias and it is a free choice to participate in a research study or not. Future research works could replicate this analysis with more direct objective measurements of the constructs.

Fourthly, the results seem to indicate the existence of other variables affecting POS, so it would be useful for future research to include other good practices related to sustainable human resource management (Sun, 2019), such as flexible working arrangements or even teleworking.

Finally, this study includes just one control variable: firm size. The results obtained show that relationships between the firm size and the firm performance construct in the model are not significant. Although this variable is one to which most attention has been paid in the academic literature, the identification of other circumstances should receive more attention. Future research should aim to include other control variables that have already been mentioned such as sector or age of firm.

In brief, further research is needed to add to the confidence in the results reported here. Research on human resource management has been going on for quite a while now. This study is a continuation of the search for knowledge that could help managers, policymakers and other stakeholders to make decisions when dealing with issues related to sustainable human resource management. In that regard, we call for more targeted research into proposed research lines.

Footnotes

Appendix

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank VIMASS Research Laboratory researchers for their helpful comments, suggestions, and information.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work was supported by University of Castilla-La Mancha (UCLM), Spain, and the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) under Grant 2022-GRIN-34373.

ORCID iDs

Isidro Peña

Virginia Barba-Sánchez

Data Availability Statement

Data sharing not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analyzed during the current study.

References

Akgunduz

Alkan

Gök

Ö. A.

(2018). Perceived organizational support, employee creativity and proactive personality: The mediating effect of meaning of work. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 34, 105–114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhtm.2018.01.004

Anand

P. B.

Gasper

(2007). Special issue on human security, well-being and sustainability: Rights, responsibilities and priorities. Journal of International Development, 19(4), 449–456. https://doi.org/10.1002/jid.1381

Astrachan

C. B.

Patel

V. K.

Wanzenried

(2014). A comparative study of CB-SEM and PLS-SEM for theory development in family firm research. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 5(1), 116–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfbs.2013.12.002

Aust

Matthews

Muller-Camen

(2020). Common good HRM: A paradigm shift in Sustainable HRM? Human Resource Management Review, 30(3), 100705. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2019.100705

Baicker

Cutler

Song

(2010). Workplace wellness programs can generate savings. Health Affairs, 29(2), 304–311. https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.2009.0626

Bakotić

(2016). Relationship between job satisfaction and organisational performance. Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja, 29(1), 118–130. https://doi.org/10.1080/1331677X.2016.1163946

Barr-Anderson

D. J.

AuYoung

Whitt-Glover

M. C.

Glenn

B. A.

Yancey

A. K.

(2011). Integration of short bouts of physical activity into organizational routine a systematic review of the literature. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 40(1), 76–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2010.09.033

Benitez-Amado

Llorens-Montes

F. J.

Fernandez-Perez

(2015). IT impact on talent management and operational environmental sustainability. Information Technology and Management, 16(3), 207–220. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10799-015-0226-4

Burton

R. M.

Lauridsen

Obel

(2004). The impact of organizational climate and strategic fit on firm performance. Human Resource Management, 43(1), 67–82. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.20003

10.

Chen

Eisenberger

Johnson

K. M.

Sucharski

I. L.

Aselage

(2009). Perceived organizational support and extra-role performance: Which leads to which? The Journal of Social Psychology, 149(1), 119–124. https://doi.org/10.3200/socp.149.1.119-124

11.

Chin

W. W.

Marcolin

B. L.

Newsted

P. R.

(2003). A partial least squares latent variable modeling approach for measuring interaction effects: Results from a Monte Carlo simulation study and an electronic-mail emotion/adoption study. Information Systems Research, 14(2), 189–217. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.14.2.189.16018

12.

Culibrk

Delic

Mitrovic

Culibrk

(2018). Job satisfaction, organizational commitment and job involvement: The mediating role of job involvement. Frontiers in Psychology. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00132

13.

Daily

C. M.

Near

J. P.

(2000). Ceo satisfaction and firm performance in family firms: Divergence between theory and practice. Social Indicators Research, 51(2), 125–170. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007099301884

14.

David

Dharwadkar

Duru

(2022). Financial reporting choices, governance, and strategic assets: A transaction cost perspective. Academy of Management Review, 47(4), 579–599. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2019.0105

15.

De Stefano

Bagdadli

Camuffo

(2018). The HR role in corporate social responsibility and sustainability: A boundary-shifting literature review. Human Resource Management, 57(2), 549–566. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.21870

16.

Delery

J. E.

Doty

D. H.

(1996). Modes of theorizing in strategic human resource management: Tests of universalistic, contingency, and configurational performance predictions. Academy of Management Journal, 39(4), 802–835. https://doi.org/10.5465/256713

17.

Demir

(2015). The effect of organizational justice and perceived organizational support on organizational citizenship behaviors: The mediating role of organizational identification. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 15(60), 131–148. https://doi.org/10.14689/ejer.2015.60.8

18.

Dess

G. G.

Robinson

R. B.

Jr. (1984). Measuring organizational performance in the absence of objective measures: The case of the privately-held firm and conglomerate business unit. Strategic Management Journal, 5(3), 265–273. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250050306

19.

Eisenberger

Armeli

Rexwinkel

Lynch

P. D.

Rhoades

(2001). Reciprocation of perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(1), 42–51. https://doi.org/10.1037//0021-9010.86.1.42

20.

Eisenberger

Huntington

Hutchison

Sowa

(1986). Perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71(3), 500–507. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.71.3.500

21.

Elkington

(1998). Accounting for the triple bottom line. Measuring Business Excellence, 2(3), 18–22. https://doi.org/10.1108/eb025539

22.

Ernst Kossek

Kalliath

(2012). Achieving employee wellbeing in a changing work environment. International Journal of Manpower, 33(7), 738–753. https://doi.org/10.1108/01437721211268294

23.

Evans

J. R.

Jack

E. P.

(2003). Validating key results linkages in the Baldrige performance excellence model. Quality Management Journal, 10(2), 7–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/10686967.2003.11919060

24.

Fornell

Larcker

D. F.

(1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800104

25.

Gallardo-Vázquez

Sánchez-Hernández

M. I.

Corchuelo-Martinez-Azua

M. B.

(2013). Validación de un instrumento de medida para la relación entre la orientación a la responsabilidad social corporativa y otras variables estratégicas de la empresa. Revista de Contabilidad-Spanish Accounting Review, 16(1), 11–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1138-4891(13)70002-5

26.

Giorgi

Lecca

L. I.

Ariza-Montes

Di Massimo

Campagna

Finstad

G. L.

Mucci

(2020). The dark and the light side of the expatriate’s cross-cultural adjustment: A novel framework including perceived organizational support, work related stress and innovation. Sustainability, 12(7), 2969. https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/7/2969

27.

Goetzel

R. Z.

Ozminkowski

R. J.

Baase

C. M.

Billotti

G. M.

(2005). Estimating the return-on-investment from changes in employee health risks on the dow Chemical company’s health care costs. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 47(8), 759–768. https://journals.lww.com/joem/Fulltext/2005/08000/Estimating_the_Return_on_Investment_From_Changes.1.aspx

28.

Guan

Sun

Hou

Zhao

Luan

Y.-Z.

Fan

L.-H.

(2014). The relationship between job performance and perceived organizational support in faculty members at Chinese universities: A questionnaire survey. BMC Medical Education, 14(1), 50. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6920-14-50

29.

Guerci

Longoni

Luzzini

(2016). Translating stakeholder pressures into environmental performance – the mediating role of green HRM practices. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 27(2), 262–289. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2015.1065431

30.

Hair

J. F.

Sarstedt

Pieper

T. M.

Ringle

C. M.

(2012). The use of partial least squares structural equation modeling in strategic management research: A review of past practices and recommendations for future applications. Long Range Planning, 45(5), 320–340. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2012.09.008

31.

Hair

Jr. Sarstedt

Hopkins

Kuppelwieser

V., G.

(2019). Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). European Business Review, 26(2), 106–121. https://doi.org/10.1108/EBR-10-2013-0128

32.

Harness

Ranaweera

Karjaluoto

Jayawardhena

(2018). The role of negative and positive forms of power in supporting CSR alignment and commitment between large firms and SMEs. Industrial Marketing Management, 75, 17–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2018.03.006

33.

Harris

R. B.

Harris

K. J.

Harvey

(2007). A test of competing models of the relationships among perceptions of organizational politics, perceived organizational support, and individual outcomes. The Journal of Social Psychology, 147(6), 631–656. https://doi.org/10.3200/SOCP.147.6.631-656

34.

Harter

J. K.

Schmidt

F. L.

Keyes

C. L. M.

(2003). Well-being in the workplace and its relationship to business outcomes: A review of the gallup studies. In Keyes

C. L. M.

Haidt

(Eds.), Flourishing: Positive psychology and the life well-lived (pp. 205–224). American Psychological Association.

35.

Henseler

Ringle

C. M.

Sarstedt

(2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1), 115–135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8

36.

Jack

Brewis

(2005). Introducing organizational wellness. Culture and Organization, 11(2), 65–68. https://doi.org/10.1080/14759550500090939

37.

Jemini-Gashi

Duraku

Z. H.

Kelmendi

(2019). Associations between social support, career self-efficacy, and career indecision among youth. Current Psychology, 40, 4691–4697. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-019-00402-x

38.

Julander

K. A.

(2014). Health and behavioral findings with a worksite wellness program [Master’s thesis, Iowa State University]. Iowa State University, Ames, IA, United States.

39.

Keeman

Näswall

Malinen

Kuntz

(2017). Employee wellbeing: Evaluating a wellbeing intervention in two settings. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 505. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00505

40.

Kim

H.-R.

Lee

H.-T.

Kim

N.-M.

(2010). Corporate social responsibility and employee–company identification. Journal of Business Ethics, 95(4), 557–569. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-010-0440-2

41.

Kose

M. A.

(2016). Comments on “Pareto weights as wedges in two-country models” by D. Backus, C. Coleman, A. Ferriere and S. Lyon. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, 72, 111–114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jedc.2016.05.001

42.

Kulik

C. T.

Cregan

Metz

Brown

(2009). HR managers as toxin handlers: The buffering effect of formalizing toxin handling responsibilities. Human Resource Management, 48(5), 695–716. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.20311

43.

Kurtessis

J. N.

Eisenberger

Ford

M. T.

Buffardi

L. C.

Stewart

K. A.

Adis

C. S.

(2017). Perceived organizational support: A meta-analytic evaluation of organizational support theory. Journal of Management, 43(6), 1854–1884. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206315575554

44.

Kwak

Chung

B. Y.

Eun-Jung

(2010). Relationship of job satisfaction with perceived organizational support and quality of care among South Korean nurses: A questionnaire survey. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 47(10), 1292–1298. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2010.02.014

45.

Lan

Chen

Zeng

Liu

(2020). The influence of job and individual resources on work engagement among Chinese police officers: A moderated mediation model. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 497. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00497

46.

Lee

T.-C.

Yao-Ping Peng

Wang

Hung

H.-K.

(2021). Factors influencing employees’ subjective wellbeing and job performance during the COVID-19 global pandemic: The perspective of social cognitive career theory. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 577028. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.577028

47.

Liguori

Winkler

Vanevenhoven

Winkel

James

(2020). Entrepreneurship as a career choice: Intentions, attitudes, and outcome expectations. Journal of Small Business & Entrepreneurship, 32(4), 311–331. https://doi.org/10.1080/08276331.2019.1600857

48.

Loeppke

Nicholson

Taitel

Sweeney

Haufle

Kessler

R. C.

(2008). The impact of an integrated population health enhancement and disease management program on employee health risk, health conditions, and productivity. Population Health Management, 11(6), 287–296. https://doi.org/10.1089/pop.2008.0006

49.

Maryam

Kamyar

Norihan Abu

Zuriati

Nurul Bahiyah Binti Ahmad

Hirofumi

(2016). A review of the importance of Physical fitness to company performance and productivity. American Journal of Applied Sciences, 13(11), 1104–1118. https://doi.org/10.3844/ajassp.2016.1104.1118

50.

McCarthy

Cleveland

J. N.

Hunter

Darcy

Grady

(2013). Employee work–life balance outcomes in Ireland: A multilevel investigation of supervisory support and perceived organizational support. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 24(6), 1257–1276. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2012.709189

51.

Meyer

J. P.

Allen

N. J.

(1987). A longitudinal analysis of the early development and consequences of organizational commitment. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science-Revue Canadienne Des Sciences Du Comportement, 19(2), 199–215. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0080013

52.

Meyer

J. P.

Stanley

D. J.

Herscovitch

Topolnytsky

(2002). Affective,continuance, and normative commitment to the organization: A meta-analysis of antecedents, correlates, and consequences. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 61(1), 20–52. https://doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.2001.1842

53.

Mirvis

(2012). Employee engagement and CSR: Transactional, relational, and developmental approaches. California Management Review, 54(4), 93–117. https://doi.org/10.1525/cmr.2012.54.4.93

54.

Mohr

A. T.

Puck

J. F.

(2007). Role conflict, general manager job satisfaction and stress and the performance of IJVs. European Management Journal, 25(1), 25–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2006.11.003

55.

Mudrak

Zabrodska

Kveton

Jelinek

Blatny

Solcova

Machovcova

(2018). Occupational well-being among university faculty: A job demands-resources model. Research in Higher Education, 59(3), 325–348. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-017-9467-x

56.

Muñoz

R. M.

Andrade

S. M.

Peña

Donate

M. J.

(2023). Wellness programs in times of COVID-19, perceived organizational support and affective commitment: Effects on employee innovative behavior. European Journal of Innovation Management, 26(7), 23–44. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJIM-02-2022-0072

57.

Nitzl

Roldan

J. L.

Cepeda

(2016). Mediation analysis in partial least squares path modeling. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 116(9), 1849–1864. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-07-2015-0302

58.

OECD. (2019). The heavy burden of obesity. OECD.

59.

Porter

Kramer

(2006). Estrategia y sociedad. Harvard Business Review, 84(12), 42–56.

60.

Pronk

N. P.

(2014). Placing workplace wellness in proper context: Value beyond money. Preventing Chronic Disease, 11, E119. https://doi.org/10.5888/pcd11.140128

61.

Pronk

N. P.

Kottke

T. E.

(2009). Physical activity promotion as a strategic corporate priority to improve worker health and business performance. Preventive Medicine, 49(4), 316–321. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2009.06.025

62.

Retolaza

J. L.

San-Jose

Freeman

R. E.

(2021). How do organisations generate and distribute value? Stakeholder values as the aim of the New Business Narrative [NBN] and Stakeholder Accounting [SA] as an information tool. Boletin de Estudios Económicos, 76(232), 37–50. https://doi.org/10.18543/bee.2240

63.

Rhoades

Eisenberger

(2002). Perceived organizational support: A review of the literature. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(4), 698–714. https://doi.org/10.1037//0021-9010.87.4.698

64.

Rockstuhl

Eisenberger

Shore

L. M.

Kurtessis

J. N.

Ford

M. T.

Buffardi

L. C.

Mesdaghinia

(2020). Perceived organizational support (POS) across 54 nations: A cross-cultural meta-analysis of POS effects. Journal of International Business Studies, 51(6), 933–962. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41267-020-00311-3

65.

Ryan

R. M.

Deci

E. L.

(2001). On happiness and human potentials: A review of research on hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. Annual Review of Psychology, 52(1), 141–166. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.141

66.

Ryff

C. D.

Keyes

C. L. M.

(1995). The structure of psychological well-being revisited. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(4), 719–727. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.69.4.719

67.

Saks

A. M.

Gruman

J. A.

(2011). Manage employee engagement to manage performance. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 4(2), 204–207. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1754-9434.2011.01328.x

68.

Schneider

Hanges

P. J.

Smith

D. B.

Salvaggio

A. N.

(2003). Which comes first: Employee attitudes or organizational financial and market performance? Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 836–851. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.836

69.

Schwatka

N. V.

Smith

Weitzenkamp

Atherly

Dally

M. J.

Brockbank

C. V. S.

Newman

L. S.

(2018). The impact of worksite wellness programs by size of business: A 3-year longitudinal study of participation, health benefits, absenteeism, and presenteeism. Annals of Work Exposures and Health, 62, S42–S54. https://doi.org/10.1093/annweh/wxy049

70.

Shoss

M. K.

Eisenberger

Restubog

S. L. D.

Zagenczyk

T. J.

(2013). Blaming the organization for abusive supervision: The roles of perceived organizational support and supervisor’s organizational embodiment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98(1), 158–168. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0030687

71.

Sonnentag

Pundt

(2016). Organisational health behavior climate: Organisations can encourage healthy eating and Physical exercise. Applied Psychology, 65(2), 259–286. https://doi.org/10.1111/apps.12059

72.

Stahl

G. K.

Brewster

C. J.

Collings

D. G.

Hajro

(2020). Enhancing the role of human resource management in corporate sustainability and social responsibility: A multi-stakeholder, multidimensional approach to HRM. Human Resource Management Review, 30(3), 100708. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2019.100708

73.

Sun

(2019). Perceived organizational support: A literature review. International Journal of Human Resource Studies, 9(3), 155–175. https://doi.org/10.5296/ijhrs.v9i3.15102

74.

Tang

Shao

Y.-F.

Chen

Y.-J.

(2019). Assessing the mediation mechanism of job satisfaction and organizational commitment on innovative behavior: The perspective of psychological capital. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 2699. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02699

75.

Taylor

Osland

Egri

C. P.

(2012). Guest editors’ introduction: Introduction to HRM’s role in sustainability: Systems, strategies, and practices. Human Resource Management, 51(6), 789–798. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.21509

76.

Trivellas

Kakkos

Blanas

Santouridis

(2015). The impact of career satisfaction on job performance in accounting firms. The mediating effect of general competencies. Procedia Economics and Finance, 33, 468–476. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(15)01730-X

77.

Tsai

C.-H.

(2013). Mediating impact of social capital on the relationship between perceived organizational support and employee well-being. Journal of Applied Sciences, 13, 4726–4731. https://doi.org/10.3923/jas.2013.4726.4731

78.

van den Heuvel

S. G.

Boshuizen

H. C.

Hildebrandt

V. H.

Blatter

B. M.

Ariëns

G. A.

Bongers

P. M.

(2005). Effect of sporting activity on absenteeism in a working population. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 39(3), e15. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsm.2004.013052

79.

Venkatraman

Ramanujam

(1986). Measurement of business performance in strategy research: A comparison of approaches. Academy of Management Review, 11(4), 801–814. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1986.4283976

80.

Wang

Liu

Yang

(2018). Employee fitness programs: Exploring relationships between perceived organizational support toward employee fitness and organizational sustainability performance. Sustainability, 10(6), 1930. https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/6/1930

81.

Wayne

S. J.

Shore

L. M.

Bommer

W. H.

Tetrick

L. E.

(2002). The role of fair treatment and rewards in perceptions of organizational support and leader-member exchange. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(3), 590–598. https://doi.org/10.1037//0021-9010.87.3.590

82.

White

R. E.

Prybutok

Chong

(2001). Relationship among organizational support, JIT implementation, and performance. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 101(6), 273–281. https://doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000005576

83.

Zhang

Kandampully

Choi

H. Y.

(2014). The role of employee wellness programme in the hospitality industry: A review of concepts, research, and practice. Research in Hospitality Management, 4(1–2), 45–54. https://doi.org/10.1080/22243534.2014.11828313

84.

Zhang

Jia

(2010). Using social exchange theory to predict the effects of high-performance human resource practices on corporate entrepreneurship: Evidence from China. Human Resource Management, 49(4), 743–765. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.20378

Wellness Programs,Perceived Organizational Support,and Their Influence on Organizational Performance: An Analysis Within the Framework of Sustainable Human Resource Management

Abstract

Plain Language Summary

Keywords

Introduction

Theoretical Framework and Proposal of Hypotheses

Sustainability and Human Resources

Employee Wellness Programs

Perceived Organizational Support

Job Satisfaction

Commitment

Methodology

Data Collection

Measures

Results

Measurement Model

Structural Model

Discussion

Conclusions, Limitations and Directions for Future Research

Footnotes

Appendix

Acknowledgements

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

Funding

ORCID iDs

Data Availability Statement

References