CEO for a Day Presentation

https://doi.org/10.1177/1523422317741886

Advances in Developing Human Resources

2018, Vol. 20(1) 103 –122 © The Author(s) 2017

Reprints and permissions: sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

DOI: 10.1177/1523422317741886 journals.sagepub.com/home/adhr

Article

Can Engaged and Positive Employees Delight Customers?

Musarrat Shaheen1, Farrah Zeba1, and Pankaj Kumar Mohanty1

Abstract The Problem. Although there have been a plethora of studies on the determinants of customer delight in marketing literature, less attention has been given to understand the role of employees’ work engagement and psychological capital (PsyCap) in satisfying and delighting customers. The objective of the present study is threefold—the first is to examine how engaged employees are positive and efficacious; the second is to investigate how engaged, positive, and efficacious employees delight patients specifically in the health care sector; and the third is to examine how the relationship between employees’ positive PsyCap and customer delight is mediated by beneficiary contact, which is the perception of employees about the meaningful impact of their efforts on their patients. The Solution. Previous studies have shown that employees who are absorbed, dedicated, and immersed in their work are more confident and positive at their workplace. Engaged, positive, and confident employees not only keep themselves but also their customers happy and positive through their optimistic outlook and efficacious work behavior. Responses are collected from 200 employees and their 200 patients from different hospitals of India. Hierarchical regression analysis shows a significant and positive relationship between work engagement, PsyCap, and customer delight. Work engagement is found to predict PsyCap and customer delight. Beneficiary contact is found to mediate between the relationship of PsyCap and customer delight. The originality of the article lies in its interdisciplinary approach to understand how engaged and dedicated employees keep themselves and their patients positive and delighted.

1IFHE University, Hyderabad, India

Corresponding Author: Musarrat Shaheen, ICFAI Business School (IBS) Hyderabad, IFHE University, Donthanapalli, Shankerpalli Road, Hyderabad, Telangana 501203, India. Email: [email protected]; [email protected]

741886ADHXXX10.1177/1523422317741886Advances in Developing Human ResourcesShaheen et al. research-article2017

104 Advances in Developing Human Resources 20(1)

The Stakeholders. This study is of relevance to human resource development (HRD) professionals, customer relationship managers of the health care sector, and also academicians belonging to the disciplines of marketing and human resource management. The findings of this study would help them understand how engaged employees lead to employees’ positive PsyCap and customer delight. Furthermore, they will also understand the vital role of the interface between employees and customers, as beneficiary contact mediates the relationship of employees’ PsyCap and customer delight.

Keywords beneficiary contact, customer delight, health care, psychological capital, work engagement

Introduction

Today’s volatile and complex world can be characterized as ambiguous and uncertain, leading to severe competition at the workplace (Bennett & Lemoine, 2014). To survive and sustain, organizations need engaged and psychologically positive employees as they add significant value to their organizations by being cognitively, emotionally, and physically immersed in their work that leads to improved performance (Kahn, 1990; Kim & Kang, 2016). However, it is often challenging for organizations to keep their employees engaged and positive in this highly competitive workplace (Harvard Business Review [HBR], 2013). This challenge of keeping employees engaged and positive can be resolved through human resource development (HRD) interventions by the organizations (Lee, Kwon, Kim, & Cho, 2016). Unfortunately, scant researches are available that provide support to HRD managers in designing strategies for engag- ing employees in this volatile workplace (Shuck, Rocco, & Albornoz, 2011). In view of this, positive psychologists posited that engagement at work and the psychological ability to remain confident, optimistic, and positive at the workplace can effectively be achieved when HRD interventions are focused on the development of positive strengths and resources of an employee (Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2014).

Positive psychologists recalled the foregone missions of the field of psychology and raised a concern that researchers should focus on the positive aspects of human life as it will not only nourish the human life but will also lead to several beneficial outcomes such as happiness, satisfaction, quality of work and life, and overall well- being (Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2014; Seligman, Steen, Park, & Peterson, 2005). This call for attention toward the positive side of human-being led to an increase in several researches on positive state-like variables at the workplace, such as work engagement and psychological capital (PsyCap), which have gained attention from both researchers and practitioners of organizational behavior due to the beneficial out- comes at the workplace such as organizational commitment, citizenship behaviors, job satisfaction, work performance, and employees’ well-being (HBR, 2013; Noblet et al., 2016). Engaged employees are absorbed, immersed, and dedicated in their work. Similarly, employees who are high on PsyCap are efficacious, optimistic, hopeful, and

Shaheen et al. 105

resilient at the workplace, which assist them to perform and sustain even in adverse situations (Luthans, Avolio, Avey, & Norman, 2007; Shaheen, 2017). Employees who are high in PsyCap are found to be achievers in their work (Luthans et al., 2007); achievements in turn generate positive experiences and feelings among them (Avey, Wernsing, & Luthans, 2008), which further enhance their efficacy, hope, and level of optimism, and also increase their resilience level at the workplace (Luthans, Avey, Avolio, & Peterson, 2010).

Past studies found a close relationship between work engagement and PsyCap level of the employees (Gupta & Shaheen, 2017; Gupta, Shaheen, & Reddy, 2017), but the influence of work engagement on PsyCap is found to be sensitive to contexts (Sweetman & Luthans, 2010). Despite the importance of engaged and psychologically positive employees at the workplace, research in this domain has been starkly over- looked, especially in the health care sector of emerging countries such as India (Avey, Reichard, Luthans, & Mhatre, 2011; Muduli, Verma, & Datta, 2016). In health care sector, focus is on building a connection with the patients by being respectful and car- ing, and by being compassionate and empathic to them. To cater proactively to the patient’s needs, employees should be immersed in their work and should be positive, hopeful, and optimistic in their approach at their workplace. This, in turn, helps the employees in extending care, empathy, and compassion to the patients (Torpie, 2014).

The broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions postulates that employees’ posi- tive experiences act as a repository for the development of personal resources among the employees (Fredrickson, 2009). Engaged employees accomplish their work and are more satisfied and contented, which leads to more positive experiences and feelings at the workplace (Hakanen, Schaufeli, & Ahola, 2008). Thus, the first objective of this study is to understand the relationship between work engagement and the PsyCap of the employees. Furthermore, it has been found that employees who are high in PsyCap experience positive emotions at the workplace and that becomes the source for several positive behaviors and actions at the workplace (Avey et al., 2008). This viewpoint can also be applicable to health care sector where it can be expected that employees who are themselves positive, confident, and optimistic are behaving in a positive manner such as listening patiently and politely to patient’s need, providing beyond the job service, and extending personalized attention to the patients. The explanation is that positive employees are happy and productive and they keep others also positive and happy through their efforts (Quick & Quick, 2004). A plethora of research has evaluated the influence of employees’ emotions on customer’s assessment of service encounters (Ball & Barnes, 2017; Hennig-Thurau, Groth, Paul, & Gremler, 2006), but limited attention has been given to the influence of employees’ psychological strengths (represented by PsyCap), as a precursor of meaningful interaction between employees and customers leading to customer delight. In the service sector, interaction between customers and employees is a prerequisite for customer satisfaction, and ultimately customer delight. The underlying premise for this association hinges on the fact that services are intan- gible, and employees often represent the services to the customer.

The relational aspect of job design theory also explains the relationship between employees and customer. It states that when employees can see significant impact of

106 Advances in Developing Human Resources 20(1)

their work on the beneficiaries of their services, they get more involved and engaged in their work (Grant, 2012). Scant studies have, to date, tried to explore the impact of ben- eficiary contact (BenfCont; the contact relationship of the employees and customers) in the relationship between employees’ PsyCap and customer’s emotional state such as customer’s delight. Thus, the second and third objectives of this study are to examine the relationship between employees’ PsyCap and customer delight, and to examine the mediation effect of BenfCont on the link of employees’ PsyCap and customer’s delight.

Theory and Hypotheses Development

Work Engagement and PsyCap

Work engagement has its foundation in the definition of employee engagement of Kahn—“how the psychological experiences of work and work contexts shape the pro- cess of people presenting and absenting themselves during task performance” (Kahn, 1990, p. 3). Work engagement was further advanced and conceptualized as a positive and fulfilling state of mind of an individual characterized by vigor, dedication, and absorption in work (Schaufeli, Bakker, & Salanova, 2006; Schaufeli, Salanova, Gonzalez-Romá, & Bakker, 2002). Vigor refers to an individual’s energy levels and mental resilience at the workplace: it is the willingness to invest the required effort and the persistence to accomplish one’s work. Dedication is the experience of a sense of pride, accomplishment, significance, inspiration, and enthusiasm, at the workplace. Finally, absorption is the total immersion in one’s work where one is so much engrossed in the work that he or she finds it difficult to detach himself or herself from the work. Integrating this conceptualization with other workplace outcomes, Bakker and Demerouti (2008) developed a job demands–resource (JD-R) model, where the rela- tionship between job resources, personal resources of employee, and work engage- ment were explained. The model postulates that both job resource (such as supervisory support) and personal resource are positively related to work engagement. PsyCap is one such personal resource (Avey et al., 2011). Empirical evidences also confirm that work engagement has several workplace outcomes such work performance (Kahn, 1990), job satisfaction (Saks, 2006; Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004), organizational com- mitment (Demerouti, Bakker, de Jonge, Janssen, & Schaufeli, 2001; Saks, 2006), low turnover intention (Gupta & Shaheen, 2017), and overall well-being and health out- comes (Rothbard & Patil, 2010).

Work engagement also has a “gain spiral effect” on personal resources (i.e., PsyCap) of employees (Salanova, Schaufeli, Xanthopoulou, & Bakker, 2010). A gain spiral effect is an amplifying loop in which there is a reciprocal relationship between the constructs; for instance, personal resources such as self-efficacy and hope affect work engagement, which in turn generates positive emotions and enhances the personal resources. PsyCap is a multidimensional construct of four such psychological resources—self-efficacy, hope, optimism, and resilience (Luthans et al., 2007). These resources have cumulative effect on several workplace outcomes of employees such as performance (Luthans et al., 2007) and extra-role behaviors (Gupta et al., 2017).

Shaheen et al. 107

Similar to work engagement, PsyCap is also conceptualized as a state-like variable, which can be developed and managed to have beneficial outcomes at the workplace. It has its foundation in positive psychology in general and positive organizational behav- ior in specific (Sweetman & Luthans, 2010). PsyCap is defined as a positive psycho- logical state of an individual that explains an individual’s confidence in his or her own ability to succeed in challenging tasks (self-efficacy), positive attribution about cur- rent and future events (optimism), perseverance toward goals to achieve success (hope), along with sustenance and the ability to bounce back when beset with prob- lems and hurdles to achieve success (resilience; Luthans et al., 2007). Through a meta- analysis of the findings of 51 empirical studies on the consequences of PsyCap, Avey et al. (2011) confirmed that PsyCap does have a positive impact on several workplace outcomes, which includes job satisfaction, organizational commitment, citizenship behaviors, work engagement, and work performance. The authors concluded that PsyCap reduces negative workplace outcomes such as stress, anxiety, turnover inten- tion, and deviance behaviors, and enhances positive outcomes such as organizational citizenship behaviors and work performance.

Past studies found a direct relationship between PsyCap and work engagement (Avey et al., 2011; Bakker, Albrecht, & Leiter, 2011). In the JD-R model, PsyCap is considered as the personal resource of employees, which has a positive impact on the work engagement of employees (Bakker & Demerouti, 2008). The rationale given for this relationship was that employees, who believe in their capabilities and mobilize their energies and motivation to meet workplace demands, were immersed and engrossed in their work (Xanthopoulou, Bakker, Demerouti, & Schaufeli, 2007). But, the present study posits a different relationship between work engagement and PsyCap. It proposes that work engagement will enhance the personal resource of employees. This phenomenon can be explained through the “gain spiral effect” of Hobfoll’s con- servation of resource theory (COR; Hobfoll, 1989). One of the important assumptions of COR is that people utilize their resources to perform their tasks and to protect them- selves against any loss of resource in the future. For this, people try to gain new resources and develop their “resource caravan.” For example, at the workplace, resources can be developed and enhanced through positive experiences, positive feel- ings, appreciations, positive feedbacks, and support from colleagues or supervisor (Salanova et al., 2010). Work engagement as noted earlier, leads to accomplishment of work goals, thereby making employee experience a success that is filled with positive emotions. The accomplishment also leads to positive appreciations, positive feed- backs, and support from the supervisors (Salanova et al., 2010), which holistically makes them more confident and optimistic about their future goals. Fulfillment of work goal generates hopefulness among employees wherein they feel they are bursting with energy with renewed pathways to achieve more successes (Shaheen, 2017).

The relationship between work engagement and PsyCap can also be explained by the propositions of the broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions (Fredrickson, 2009). According to this theory, positive affect and emotion broadens an individual’s momentary repertoires of thought and action, which in turn develop their personal resources. Work engagement leads to improvement in work and fulfillment of task

108 Advances in Developing Human Resources 20(1)

goals, which generate positive emotions such as joy, contentment, and satisfaction among the employees. These emotions will broaden the thought-action repository of the employees and will build their personal resource such that their confidence level will be boosted wherein they will become more optimistic and hopeful about success. They will also become more resilient and resistant to challenges and hindrances. To examine the relationship between work engagement and PsyCap, Xanthopoulou, Bakker, Demerouti, and Schaufeli (2009) did a longitudinal study and collected data from 163 engineers in the Netherlands twice on the same constructs. They found work engagement has positive influence on PsyCap level of the engineers. Thus, based on the above argument, the following hypothesis is posited:

Hypothesis 1 (H1): Work engagement has a positive relationship with PsyCap.

Work Engagement, PsyCap, and Customer Delight

The interaction between service employees and customer is considered to be a crucial factor for the assessment of services received (Parasuraman, Zeithaml, & Berry, 1985). Despite a considerable amount of research on service relationship, several aspects such as the role of employee’s emotion, perception, and abilities in service encounters have remained unexplored (Hennig-Thurau et al., 2006). For instance, a friendly staff, who provides service with a smile and is fully dedicated has been suggested as being the success mantra for service firms (Hatfield, Cacioppo, & Rapson, 1994). It is imperative to understand and appreciate the fact that employees are the interface by which organizations extend their services to the customers. The element of surprise has been suggested as an important determinant of delight (Barnes, Ponder, & Hopkins, 2015). Proximity and interaction between employees and customer have been seen enhancing customer delight (Barnes et al., 2015). Specifically, Arnold, Reynolds, Ponder, and Lueg (2005) brought to the forefront “interpersonal factors” that is one of the most important factors that influence delightful customer experiences. Interpersonal factors relate to how employees are helpful to customers, their friendliness toward customers, their willingness to go beyond their job and bend rules for customers, not being pushy toward customers, and finally their time and commitment toward cus- tomer’s need. Homburg and Stock (2004), in one empirical study on 1,305 salesper- sons, found that a salesperson’s interaction with customers during service delivery does mediate the relationship between the salesperson’s positive feelings and the cus- tomers’ positive emotions.

Work engagement is an employee-level psychological construct that determines how employees are feeling and experiencing the service interaction with customers (Barnes, Collier, & Robinson, 2014). The customers’ positive experiences with the service level are dependent on the services delivered by the organization. Engaged employees are highly motivated, immersed, and dedicated to their works and thus can be one of those vital sources in providing a high level of customer service (Barnes et al., 2014; Salanova, Agut, & Peiró, 2005). When an employee is involved and engrossed in the workplace, one can expect that the frequency and quality of

Shaheen et al. 109

interaction with the customers will be more (Homburg & Stock, 2004) as they perform to the highest level in handling the customers, which in turn would exceed customer’s expectations (Salanova et al., 2005) and delight them. Customer delight is a positive emotional state that results when customers’ expectations are exceeded by the perfor- mance of the service provider (Arnold et al., 2005; Oliver, Rust, & Varki, 1997). Thus, based on the above discussion, it may be hypothesized that

Hypothesis 2 (H2): Work engagement has a positive relationship with customer delight.

Similarly, employees who are high on PsyCap are expected to provide high level of customer service, which would keep the customers delighted, as they themselves are positive, confident, resilient, and hopeful (Luthans et al., 2010). This phenomenon can be better understood by the broaden-and-build theory of positive emotion, which pos- its that an “individual’s thought-action repertoires” of positive emotions become a source for several workplace behaviors such as listening patiently to the customers, providing extra information, showing interest in their needs, and so forth. In typical service settings such as hospitals, customers come for treatment of their ailments (Torpie, 2014) due to which they’re naturally anxious and stressed out. Under such situations, the primary need of customers revolves around a dedicated assurance and positive behavior from the hospital staff. The positive resources of employees such as PsyCap enable them to handle the customer (patient) in an efficacious, positive, and dedicated way. Positive and dedicated approach were found leading to beyond the job behaviors (Avey et al., 2008; Gupta et al., 2017) and such behaviors can be expected that will exceed the patients’ expectations and thereby delight them. Thus, we hypoth- esize the following:

Hypothesis 3 (H3): PsyCap has a positive relationship with customer delight.

PsyCap, BenfCont, and Customer Delight

Organizations have clients, customers, patients, and other recipients or end users of goods and services as primary beneficiaries (Blau & Scott, 1962; Katz & Kahn, 1966). Out of several social characteristics of jobs, a key social characteristic that influences meaningfulness of a job is BenfCont, that is, the degree to which employees have the opportunity to interact with customers or others affected by their work (Grant, 2007). Furthermore, BenfCont shapes the quality and quantity of interactions that employees have with recipients of goods and services (Grant & Parker, 2009). This was con- tended by Kanfer (2009) who said that what employees do at work have importance and meaning for those who benefit from employees’ efforts. We propose that when employees have rich contact with their aforementioned beneficiaries, it enables them to see the tangible, meaningful consequences of their actions for a living and breathing person (Grant & Parker, 2009). It can be said that BenfCont does influence the impact of employees’ PsyCap on customer delight. Owing to the presence of positive

110 Advances in Developing Human Resources 20(1)

influence of PsyCap, employees having BenfCont can see how their efforts comes to life in delighting customers, which further motivate them to work harder and more efficiently (Grant & Parker, 2009). Thus, we hypothesize the following:

Hypothesis 4 (H4): BenfCont mediates the effect of PsyCap on customer delight.

Method

Context

The context of the present study is the health care service providers of India. This encompasses nursing homes, hospitals, and diagnostics centers, accounting for 65% of the overall health care market in India (Indian Brand Equity Foundation [IBEF], 2017) The rationale for selecting this sector is twofold: First, it is one of the fastest growing sectors in India both in terms of revenue and employment. The overall health care market in India is worth US$100 billion. It is growing at a compound annual growth rate of 22.9% and is expected to grow to US$280 billion by the year 2020 (IBEF, 2017). Second, health care units need employees who are self-motivated, dedicated, positive, optimistic, hopeful, and resilient as in health care services customers are not normal customers who are healthy and who enjoy their purchases of goods and ser- vices. In the health care sector, customers are generally patients who are ill, injured, and/or are in distress. They are vulnerable, exhausted, frightened, and confused. They are purchasing goods in the hope of returning to good health and thereby need utmost trust and care from the health care service providers (Torpie, 2014). The relationship between health care service providers and health care customers (i.e., patients) requires far more than “customer service.” Customer service in other service sectors could “possibly” be scripted, superficial, detached, but polite and empathy are required in healthcare sector (Torpie, 2014). The health care sector focuses on building an empathic connection with the patients by respecting and caring for them. These factors contribute to the emotional dimension of a patient’s service experience and feelings (Tea, Ellison, & Feghali, 2008). A patient is delighted and contented when the employ- ees of the health care units are proactive and responsive to his or her needs (Tea et al., 2008). To cater proactively to the patient’s needs, one has to be involved and engaged in one’s work. Similarly, to extend care, empathy, and compassion to patients, an indi- vidual has to be positive, hopeful, and optimistic in his or her approach. Thus, the health care sector is one of the service contexts where customers’ (patients) delight could be possible only when the health care employees are totally engaged in their service (both physically and mentally) and when they are themselves positive, opti- mistic, hopeful, and resilient.

Sample and Data Collection

Our unit of analysis is the employees working in health care service centers and their customers. Employees have direct interaction with customers in these service centers.

Shaheen et al. 111

A dyadic approach was taken to collect data from both the health care employees and their respective customers (i.e., patients). The data collection procedure was com- pleted in two steps. In the first step, employees working in health care deliveries in one of the metropolitan cities of India were selected randomly from a list of 24,000 health care service centers accredited by National Accreditation Board for Hospitals & Healthcare Providers of India (National Accreditation Board for Hospitals and Healthcare [NABH] Accredited Hospitals, 2015). A market research agency operating in the same metropolitan city was approached for data collection. A structured ques- tionnaire was designed with a cover letter stating the purpose of the study and was distributed to 1150 employees after taking prior consent from the management of the health care centers. 200 employees responded on the items of work engagement, PsyCap, and customer delight constructs. It took 2 months—December 2015 and January 2016—to collect responses from the employees. This resulted in 200 usable responses from the employees.

During the data collection process, the employees were asked to provide for at least two addresses of customers they have interacted on a frequent basis. These 200 employees provided a total of 348 customers’ details. In the second step of the data collection, these customers were contacted by the research agency between the time periods January 2016 to February 2016. Through matched sample approach, 348 cus- tomers were contacted over phone by the research agency. For those who agreed to participate, an online survey link having a unique code to match with the employees was sent to their email addresses. Care was taken to obtain at least one customer’s response per employee. Customers were essentially asked about their delightful expe- rience with that particular health care unit from which they had taken the services. The procedure yielded a total of 200 dyadic cases consisting of health care employee responses along with their customer responses. Detailed information about the employee sample characteristics is presented in Table 1.

Measures

Previously validated scales were used to measure all the constructs under study. Work engagement was measured using a nine-item scale (consisting of vigor, dedication, and absorption) from Schaufeli et al. (2006) explaining a positive and fulfilling state of mind, which is characterized by vigor, dedication, and absorption. Alok (2013) has validated this scale in the Indian context. A sample item is “When I get up in the morn- ing, I feel like going to work.” Next, we measured PsyCap using Luthans et al.’s (2007) 12-item scale to capture the individual’s positive psychological state. A sample item is “I always look on the bright side of things regarding my job.” Similarly, BenfCont was assessed using a four-item scale developed by Grant (2012) that cap- tured the degree to which employees have the opportunity to interact with clients, customers, or others affected by the work. A sample item is “The job involves interac- tion with the people affected by my work.” Finally, customer delight was used to capture positive emotional state resulted from an unexpected customer service experi- ence. For this, a three-item scale from Finn (2005) was adapted to measure customer

112 Advances in Developing Human Resources 20(1)

delight of health care consumers (patients). All the previously developed scales had a reliability score of Cronbach’s alpha above .70. A sample item of customer delight is “During this visit to the hospital I feel delighted.” Responses for all these constructs were captured on a 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).

Demographic details such as age, gender, and total work experience were also col- lected to understand the characteristics of the respondents. The impacts of these demo- graphic factors were kept controlled to examine the independent effect of the variables under investigation.

Data Analysis

The focus of the present study was on the relationships among four major constructs— work engagement, PsyCap, BenfCont, and customer delight. To test the relationships among these constructs, the study first calculated the overall score of all the con- structs, that is, work engagement, PsyCap, BenfCont, and customer delight (CD) by taking the average of all the items under a single construct. Cronbach’s alpha values

Table 1. Sample Characteristics.

Variable Employees (%) Customers (%)

Gender Male 69 37 Female 31 63 Health care type Private 93 93 Government 07 07 Designation Pharmacy in charge 18 — Nurse 19 — Receptionist 17 — Ward boy 14 — Operation Theater staff 15 — Lab technician 14 — Others 03 — Age Young adults (18-35) 64 22 Middle-aged adults (36-55) 34 33 Older adults (>55) 02 45 Patient (consumer) type Outpatient 68 68 In-house 32 32 Total work experience (M value)

10 years —

Shaheen et al. 113

were also computed to assess the reliability (internal consistency among the items of the constructs). Results revealed that all the constructs of the study had achieved the threshold value of reliability, that is, .70 (Hair, Black, Babin, & Anderson, 2010). Please refer to Table 2 of the present study for the reliabilities values. The values sug- gest that all the items are from homogeneous scales and have strong indicator of reliability.

Descriptive statistics such as means, standard deviations, and bivariate correlations were also calculated. Findings suggest a significant variation in all the constructs of the study. Correlation coefficients among all the constructs revealed a significant rela- tionship between independent and dependent variables (please refer Table 2). A posi- tive correlation was found between PsyCap and work engagement (r = .71, p < .01). Similarly, a series of significant positive correlations were also found between cus- tomer delight and PsyCap (r = .43, p < .01), customer delight and BenfCont (r = .41, p < .01), and finally, work engagement and customer delight (r = .32, p < .01).

The proposed hypotheses (please refer Figure 1) were tested using hierarchical regression analyses, and the mediation effect was analyzed following the procedure suggested by Baron and Kenny (1986). All the direct relationships proposed in the Hypotheses 1, 2, and 3 were tested first through hierarchical regression analysis.

Table 2. Descriptive Statistics, Correlation, and Scale Reliability Values.

M SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

1 Age 34.35 7.68 — — — — — — — 2 Gender — — .22** — — — — — — 3 Total work experience 10.90 5.42 .62** .33** — — — — — 4 Work engagement 4.04 0.48 −.08 −.27** −.19** (.81) — — — 5 Psychological capital 4.20 0.47 −.17* −.24** −.25** .71** (.85) — — 6 Beneficiary contact 4.26 0.58 −.15* −.23** −.18** .65** .71** (.83) — 7 Customer delight 3.81 0.71 −.08 −.29** −.16* .32** .43** .41** (.87)

Note. Values in parentheses are Cronbach’s alpha values. *p < .05. **p < .01.

Figure 1. Conceptual model.

114 Advances in Developing Human Resources 20(1)

Table 3. Summary of Hierarchical Regression Analysis.

Model 1 Model 2

Psychological capital Customer delight

Step 1 Step 2 Step 1 Step 2

Age −0.03 −0.08 0.04 0.02 Gender −0.18 −0.02** −0.27*** −0.21*** Total work

experience −0.17 −0.06 −0.101 −0.06

Work engagement — 0.69*** — 0.26*** F statistics 6.69*** 54.14*** 6.57*** 8.72*** R2 .09 .52 .10 .15 ΔR2 .09*** .43*** .10*** .06***

*p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

The conditions suggested by Baron and Kenny (1986) were next checked to establish the mediating effect (Hypothesis 4) of BenfCont on the relationship between PsyCap and CD. The first condition (Hypothesis 3) was related to direct effect of PsyCap on CD. The second condition was related to the direct relationship between PsyCap and BenfCont. The third condition was related to the direct relationship between BenfCont and CD. The fourth condition is to analyze the impact of the direct relationship between PsyCap and CD when BenfCont is entered into the model. To investigate Hypotheses 1, 2, and 3, the control variables (i.e., age, gender, and total work experience) were entered first in the hierarchical regression analysis, followed by the dependent variables that were entered in the second step of the analysis. After all direct relationships and the conditions of mediation were examined and found significant, BenfCont was intro- duced in the hierarchical regression analysis to test whether it mediates the relationship. In case of presence of partial mediation, Sobel test (Sobel, 1982) was performed to assess the significance of the partial mediation effect.

Results

To test the first hypothesis (H1), the results of the hierarchical regression analysis were inspected (please refer Table 3). The results of the regression analysis indicated that the predictor (work engagement) explained a significant portion (52%) of the vari- ance, R2 = .52, F(4, 195) = 54.14, p < .001, in the dependent variable (PsyCap). Such variance has also been supported by a significant difference presented by R2 change statistics (ΔR2 = .43, p < .001) of the second step of the analysis, after controlling the effect of control variables in Step 1. The results obtained indicated a significant posi- tive relationship between work engagement and PsyCap (β = .69, p < .001), supporting the first hypothesis (H1). It was also found that work engagement significantly pre- dicts customer delight (β = .26, p < .001) and this provided support for H2. To validate the results of the second hypothesis (H2) pertaining to the positive relationship

Shaheen et al. 115

between work engagement and customer delight, F statistics of the Model 2 of the hierarchical regression analysis (shown in Table 3) was inspected. The results indi- cated that the overall model is statistically significant, F(4, 195) = 8.72, p < .001, and is explaining 15% of the variance in customer delight (R2 = .15). In addition, the change in R2 (ΔR2) of the second step was also significant (ΔR2 = .06, p < .001).

Mediating Effect of BenfCont

In addition to the direct effect of work engagement on PsyCap and on customer delight, the mediating role of BenfCont on the relationship between PsyCap and customer delight was also examined. Results of the mediation test were split into different steps. In the first step, control variables were entered, which was followed by one indepen- dent variable in each subsequent step. Hierarchical regression analysis results are pre- sented in Table 4. In Step 1 of the analysis, all the demographic variables are regressed on customer delight. In Step 2, PsyCap was regressed on CD and the result was signifi- cant (β = .38, p = .001), which provides evidence for H3. To meet the conditions of Baron and Kenny’s (1986) mediation effect, the direct relationship between PsyCap and BenfCont (mediator) was also examined and was found to be significant (β = .69, p = .001). Furthermore, Step 3 of the analysis showed that the mediator (BenfCont) is significantly (β = .18, p = .05) related to customer delight. In Step 3 of the hierarchical regression analysis (please refer Table 4 of the study), when the mediator (BenfCont) was entered, significant β values were found for both the independent and mediating variable (βPsyCap = .26, p = .01; βBenfCont = .18, p = .05) in predicting the dependent vari- able (customer delight). But, the magnitude of the beta value of the relationship of PsyCap with customer delight was lower than the previous direct relationship between PsyCap and customer delight. This suggested that the relationship between PsyCap and customer delight is partially mediated by the BenfCont as posited in the fourth hypothesis (H4). In addition to Baron and Kenny’s (1986) procedure as mentioned above, the study also conducted a Sobel test (Sobel, 1982) to check the significance of the mediating effect of BenfCont and it was found significant (z = 4.97, p < .001).

Table 4. Mediation Effect of Beneficiary Contact Between PsyCap and Customer Delight.

Customer delight

Step 1 Step 2 Step 3

Age 0.04 0.05 0.06 Gender −0.27*** −0.19** −0.17** Total work experience −0.10 −0.03 −0.04 Psychological capital — 0.38*** 0.26** Beneficiary contact — — 0.18* F statistics 6.57*** 14.09*** 12.23*** R2 .10 .22 .24 ΔR2 .10*** .13*** .01*

*p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

116 Advances in Developing Human Resources 20(1)

Out of the three demographic variables (i.e., age, gender, and total work experi- ence), gender was found to have a significant relationship (p < .001) with the variables under investigation. It suggests that gender does have some influence on dependent variables. Future studies can explore the influence of gender and can validate the find- ings of the present study.

Discussion

The main purpose of this study was to understand the positive influence of work engagement on employees’ PsyCap and on customer delight in the health care sector. Another purpose was to analyze the impact of PsyCap on customer delight and the cata- lytic role of BenfCont in the form of mediator between PsyCap and customer delight. The results of the present study support the proposed hypotheses that work engagement enhances the personal resource of employees (PsyCap) as well as facilitates customer delight in the health care sector. Similarly, the personal resource of employees (i.e., PsyCap) directly contributes to customer delight of the patients. This relationship between PsyCap and customer delight is found to be partially mediated by BenfCont.

The support for the first hypothesis (H1) provides empirical evidence for the argu- ments of Barnes et al. (2014) that the level of engagement at work is positively related to the personal resource of the employees in the form of PsyCap. It also validates Salanova et al.’s (2010) and Xanthopoulou et al.’s (2009) findings that work engage- ment has “gained spiral effect” on the personal resources of employees. In other words, the workplace personal resource such as PsyCap can be enhanced through positive experiences, appreciations, and feedback accrued due to immersion, dedication, and accomplishments of work goals. It further gives empirical support to the propositions of Fredrickson’s (2009) broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions that work engagement generates positive emotions, which build the personal resources (PsyCap) of the employees. Findings also provide evidence that engaged employees build PsyCap. Thus, this answers not only the previous research gaps to empirically explore the antecedents to PsyCap (Luthans et al., 2010) but it also provides support for this relationship in the novel context of the health care sector in India.

As posited, the empirical support for the second hypothesis (H2) augments the find- ings of Homburg and Stock (2004) revealing that interaction of engaged employees with customers does have a positive effect on the customers’ positive service experi- ences. There was a positive relationship between work engagement and customers’ perception of delight in the health care sector in emerging markets like India. The results add value to the literature on customer delight, considering the lack of research evaluating the impact of the contribution of engaged, dedicated, and immersed employees toward the patients’ (customer) emotions, namely, delight by exceeding their expectations during a service encounter. The results do support previous research that employee attitudes and behaviors can have a profound impact on customers’ emo- tions (Salanova et al., 2005). This is extremely relevant to the health care service providers, as engaged employees and their performances are considered a key catalyst in value creation within the health care service-profit chain (Barnes et al., 2015).

Shaheen et al. 117

Finding for the third hypothesis (H3) was in concordance of the broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions (Fredrickson, 2009), where the positive relationship between employees’ PsyCap and customer delight was found to be significant. PsyCap employees are confident, optimistic, and proactive, which makes them happy and positive at the workplace. This positive state of mind enables them to experience posi- tive emotions, which broadens their thought-action repertoires, leading to an array of positive behaviors such as helping customers, providing them transparent information, and providing them personalized care.

The finding of the mediation hypothesis (H4) augments the propositions of rela- tional aspect of job design theory (Grant & Parker, 2009). Previous studies demon- strate that employees engage in prosocial behaviors when they have contact with the beneficiary; in other words, the contact with the beneficiary enables them to appreciate the tangible and meaningful consequences of their actions toward others (Grant, 2012).

Theoretical Contributions

Theoretical contributions of the study are subsequently discussed. First, this study endeavors to represent an interdisciplinary approach to empirically examine work engagement as an important antecedent of both employee-level construct (PsyCap; Luthans et al., 2010) and customer-level construct (customer delight; Arnold et al., 2005). Second, this study is among the few empirical studies that have undertaken an interdisciplinary approach to test the linkage between employees’ positive states and customers’ positive emotional state, which fulfills the call for research in positive psy- chology that one should delve into the positive aspects of human interaction (i.e., interaction between health care service provider and patients as customers; Arnold et al., 2005; Barnes et al., 2015; Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2014 ). Third, the find- ings of the present study provide practical implications as they confirm that happy employees are productive employees (Quick & Quick, 2004). Happy employees can be a source of competitive advantage for health care organizations in a turbulent and competitive environment, where personalized attention is of paramount importance to keep patients happy and delighted. Fourth, this study is one of the few empirical stud- ies that render support to the Grant (2007) conceptualization of BenfCont in the under- explored domain of health care, which further explains the relational interactional aspect between employees and customers as the key social characteristics of a job.

Practical Implications

This study has several practical implications for HRD professionals within the health care sector. The results of this study inform HRD professionals within the health care sector of how engaged and positive employees work with their full zeal to make cus- tomers (patients) happy by delighting them. Companies with the highest customer satisfaction scores are identified as the “best places to work for.” For instance, Zappos was continuously ranked as one of the top performing companies from a customer service perspective, as well as from the perspective of “best places to work for”

118 Advances in Developing Human Resources 20(1)

(Fortune, 2013). Thus, HRD professionals of the health care sector should focus on designing interventions to motivate employees in converting the moments of truths of service deliveries into “WoW” moments for the customers by exceeding the expecta- tions of the customers’ service experiences (Oliver et al., 1997). Furthermore, these service experiences can be enhanced in two ways by interdepartmental collaboration between employees working in both HR and marketing departments. This can be done when HRD professionals and the head of marketing department could design the job duties and responsibilities of the employees of both the departments in such a way that cross-functional team is facilitated. This ensures that employees of these departments do not work in silos but remain engaged and absorbed into their work (Saks, 2006; Wollard & Shuck, 2011) with a common goal of making the customer delighted. Apart from making the employees engaged, the findings of the present study also provide insight to the HRD professionals that the personal resource of employees (PsyCap) should also be enhanced to delight the customer. They can design modules and formu- late strategies that provide feedbacks, appreciations, and counseling to them to enhance their engagement level as well as psychological personal resources (PsyCap; Luthans et al., 2010; Saks, 2006). Thus, such an initiative will make the implementation of service-profit chain that delineates the fact that happy and engaged employees’ make customers’ happy (Heskett, Jones, Loveman, Sasser, & Schlesinger, 1994).

Limitation and Direction for Future Research

One major limitation of this study is its cross-sectional design, which restricts the causal interpretations. Future studies can delve in a longitudinal or experimental study design to get the interpretations about the causal associations between the constructs. Furthermore, future studies can validate the findings of this study in other service contexts wherein the service interaction between customers and service providers are high like banking, financial services, and insurance sector. This will aid in the gener- alizability of the findings of the present study. The authors encourage researchers to explore the other constructs in the nomological net pertaining to customer-level con- structs like customer trust, customer satisfaction, and customer loyalty.

Conclusion

Work engagement is a well-desired outcome in practice, yet the impact of work engagement on customer’s perception and emotions have not been explored (Shuck & Reio, 2011; Wollard & Shuck, 2011). Findings of the present study are appropriate in understanding work engagement as one of the vital antecedents of customer delight. Saks (2006) has suggested several consequences of work engagement, but to date, limited research has been done to understand the gain spiral effect of work engage- ment on the development and conservation of personal resource of employees. The present study confirms that work engagement has a gain spiral effect on the personal resource of the employees. Furthermore, the present study is one of the studies where, using the dyadic approach, the predictive ability of work engagement and PsyCap on

Shaheen et al. 119

customer-level variable (customer delight) is provided. The study has successfully delineated the vital role of employees’ state-like variables (work engagement and PsyCap) in the underexplored domain of health care in India. The findings of the pres- ent study also provide insights to the practitioners and HRD professionals, as to how engaged and high PsyCap employees can delight customers. They should look for avenues to develop a conducive work environment that promotes work engagement and enhances employees’ PsyCap. They can formulate strategies to foster a transparent relationship between the employees and their supervisors, and encourage open com- munication channels, positive work-related feedbacks, organizational support, learn- ing opportunities, and a collaborative spirit among the employees.

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) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

References

Alok, K. (2013). Work engagement in India: A factorial validation study of UWES-9 scale. Management and Labour Studies, 38, 53-62.

Arnold, M. J., Reynolds, K. E., Ponder, N., & Lueg, J. E. (2005). Customer delight in a retail context: Investigating delightful and terrible shopping experiences. Journal of Business Research, 58, 1132-1145.

Avey, J. B., Reichard, R. J., Luthans, F., & Mhatre, K. H. (2011). Meta-analysis of the impact of positive psychological capital on employee attitudes, behaviors, and performance. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 22, 127-152.

Avey, J. B., Wernsing, T. S., & Luthans, F. (2008). Can positive employees help positive orga- nizational change? Impact of psychological capital and emotions on relevant attitudes and behaviors. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 44, 48-70.

Bakker, A. B., Albrecht, S. L., & Leiter, M. P. (2011). Key questions regarding work engage- ment. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 20, 4-28.

Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2008). Towards a model of work engagement. Career Development International, 13, 209-223.

Ball, J., & Barnes, D. C. (2017). Delight and the grateful customer: Beyond joy and surprise. Journal of Service Theory and Practice, 27, 250-269.

Barnes, D. C., Ponder, N., & Hopkins, C. D. (2015). The impact of perceived customer delight on the frontline employee. Journal of Business Research, 68, 433-441.

Barnes, D. C., Collier, J., & Robinson, S. (2014). Customer delight and work engagement. Journal of Services Marketing, 28, 380-390.

Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173-1182.

Bennett, N., & Lemoine, G. J. (2014). What a difference a word makes: Understanding threats to performance in a VUCA world. Business Horizons, 57, 311-317.

120 Advances in Developing Human Resources 20(1)

Blau, P. M., & Scott, W. R. (1962). Formal organizations: A comparative approach. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Indian Brand Equity Foundation (IBEF). (2017). Healthcare Industry in India. Retrieved from http://www.ibef.org/industry/healthcare-india.aspx

Demerouti, E., Bakker, A., de Jonge, J., Janssen, P., & Schaufeli, W. (2001). Burnout and engagement at work as a function of demands and control. Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health, 27, 279-286.

Finn, A. (2005). Reassessing the foundations of customer delight. Journal of Service Research, 8, 103-116.

Fortune. (2013). 100 best companies to work for. Retrieved from http://archive.fortune.com/ magazines/fortune/best-companies/2013/list/?iid%20bc_sp_full

Fredrickson, B. (2009). Positivity. New York, NY: Crown. Grant, A. M. (2007). Relational job design and the motivation to make a prosocial difference.

The Academy of Management Review, 32, 393-417. Grant, A. M. (2012). Leading with meaning: Beneficiary contact, prosocial impact, and the perfor-

mance effects of transformational leadership. Academy of Management Journal, 55, 458-476. Grant, A. M., & Parker, S. K. (2009). 7 redesigning work design theories: The rise of relational

and proactive perspectives. The Academy of Management Annals, 3, 317-375. Gupta, M., & Shaheen, M. (2017). Impact of work engagement on turnover intention: Moderation

by psychological capital in India. Business: Theory & Practice, 18, 136-143. Gupta, M., Shaheen, M., & Reddy, P. K. (2017). Impact of psychological capital on organi-

zational citizenship behavior: Mediation by work engagement. Journal of Management Development, 36, 973-983.

Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Hakanen, J. J., Schaufeli, W. B., & Ahola, K. (2008). The job demands-resources model: A three-year cross-lagged study of burnout, depression, commitment, and work engagement. Work & Stress, 22, 224-241.

Harvard Business Review. (2013). The impact of employee engagement on performance. Harvard Business School Publishing. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/resources/pdfs/comm/ achievers/hbr_achievers_report_sep13.pdf

Hatfield, E., Cacioppo, J. T., & Rapson, R. L. (1994). Emotional contagion. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Hennig-Thurau, T., Groth, M., Paul, M., & Gremler, D. D. (2006). Are all smiles created equal? How emotional contagion and emotional labor affect service relationships. Journal of Marketing, 70, 58-73.

Heskett, J. L., Jones, T. O., Loveman, G. W., Sasser, W. E., & Schlesinger, L. A. (1994). Putting the service-profit chain to work. Harvard Business Review, 72, 64-170.

Hobfoll, S. E. (1989). Conservation of resources: A new attempt at conceptualizing stress. American Psychologist, 44, 513-524.

Homburg, C., & Stock, R. M. (2004). The link between salespeople’s job satisfaction and customer satisfaction in a business-to-business context: A dyadic analysis. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 32, 144-158.

Kahn, W. A. (1990). Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at work. Academy of Management Journal, 33, 692-724.

Kanfer, R. (2009). Work motivation: Advancing theory and impact. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 2, 118-127.

Katz, D., & Kahn, R. L. (1966). The social psychology of organizations. New York, NY: John Wiley.

Shaheen et al. 121

Kim, N., & Kang, S. W. (2016). Older and more engaged: The mediating role of age-linked resources on work engagement. Human Resource Management, 56, 731-746. doi:10.1002/hrm.21802

Lee, Y., Kwon, K., Kim, W., & Cho, D. (2016). Work engagement and career proposing research agendas through a review of literature. Human Resource Development Review, 15, 29-54.

Luthans, F., Avey, J. B., Avolio, B. J., & Peterson, S. J. (2010). The development and result- ing performance impact of positive psychological capital. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 21, 41-67.

Luthans, F., Avolio, B. J., Avey, J. B., & Norman, S. M. (2007). Positive psychological capital: Measurement and relationship with performance and satisfaction. Personnel Psychology, 60, 541-572.

Muduli, A., Verma, S., & Datta, S. K. (2016). High performance work system in India: Examining the role of employee engagement. Journal of Asia-Pacific Business, 17, 130-150.

National Accreditation Board for Hospitals and Healthcare (NABH) Accredited Hospitals. (2015). Retrieved from http://nabh.co/frmViewAccreditedHosp.aspx

Noblet, A. J., Allisey, A. F., Nielsen, I. L., Cotton, S., LaMontagne, A. D., & Page, K. M. (2016). The work-based predictors of job engagement and job satisfaction experienced by com- munity health professionals. Health Care Management Review, 42, 237-246. doi:10.1097/ HMR.0000000000000104

Oliver, R. L., Rust, R. T., & Varki, S. (1997). Customer delight: Foundations, findings, and managerial insight. Journal of Retailing, 73, 311-336.

Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1985). A conceptual model of service quality and its implications for future research. The Journal of Marketing, 49, 41-50.

Quick, J. C., & Quick, J. D. (2004). Healthy, happy, productive work. Organizational Dynamics, 33, 329-337.

Rothbard, N. P., & Patil, S. V. (2010). Being there: Work engagement and positive organi- zational researchership. In G. Spreitzer & K. Cameron (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of positive organizational researchership (pp. 56-69). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Saks, A. M. (2006). Antecedents and consequences of employee engagement. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 21, 600-619.

Salanova, M., Agut, S., & Peiró, J. M. (2005). Linking organizational resources and work engagement to employee performance and customer loyalty: The mediation of service cli- mate. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 1217-1217.

Salanova, M., Schaufeli, W. B., Xanthopoulou, D., & Bakker, A. B. (2010). Gain spirals of resources and work engagement. In A. B. Bakker & M. P. Leiter (Eds.), Work engagement: A handbook of essential theory and research (pp. 118-131). New York, NY: Psychology Press.

Schaufeli, W. B., & Bakker, A. B. (2004). Job demands, job resources, and their relationship with burnout and engagement: A multi-sample study. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25, 293-315.

Schaufeli, W. B., Bakker, A. B., & Salanova, M. (2006). The measurement of work engage- ment with a short questionnaire: A cross-national study. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66, 701-716.

Schaufeli, W. B., Salanova, M., González–Romá, V., & Bakker, A. B. (2002). The measure- ment of engagement and burnout: A two sample confirmatory factor analytic approach. Journal of Happiness Studies, 3, 71-92.

Seligman, M. E., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2014). Positive psychology: An introduction. In Flow and the foundations of positive psychology (pp. 279-298). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9088-8_18

Seligman, M. E., Steen, T. A., Park, N., & Peterson, C. (2005). Positive psychology progress: Empirical validation of interventions. American Psychologist, 60, 410-421.

122 Advances in Developing Human Resources 20(1)

Shaheen, M. (2017). Development of work performance model of psychological capital an empirical analysis. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/10603/170489

Shuck, B., & Reio, T. G. (2011). The employee engagement landscape and HRD: How do we link theory and researchership to current practice? Advances in Developing Human Resources, 11, 156-181.

Shuck, M. B., Rocco, T. S., & Albornoz, C. A. (2011). Exploring employee engagement from the employee perspective: Implications for HRD. Journal of European Industrial Training, 35, 300-325.

Sobel, M. E. (1982). Asymptotic confidence intervals for indirect effects in structural equation models. Sociological Methodology, 13, 290-312.

Sweetman, D., & Luthans, F. (2010). The power of positive psychology: Psychological capital and work engagement. In A. B. Bakker & M. P. Leiter (Eds.), Work engagement: A hand- book of essential theory and research (pp. 54-68). Hove, UK: Psychology Press.

Tea, C., Ellison, M., & Feghali, F. (2008). Proactive patient rounding to increase customer ser- vice and satisfaction on an orthopaedic unit. Orthopaedic Nursing, 27, 233-240.

Torpie, K. (2014). Customer service vs. Patient care. Patient Experience Journal, 1, 6-8. Wollard, K. K., & Shuck, B. (2011). Antecedents to employee engagement a structured review

of the literature. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 13, 429-446. Xanthopoulou, D., Bakker, A. B., Demerouti, E., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2007). The role of

personal resources in the job demands-resources model. International Journal of Stress Management, 14, 121-141.

Xanthopoulou, D., Bakker, A. B., Demerouti, E., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2009). Reciprocal rela- tionships between job resources, personal resources, and work engagement. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 74, 235-244.

Authors Biographies

Musarrat Shaheen, is an assistant professor in ICFAI Business School (IBS) Hyderabad at IFHE University. Her research is currently focused on psychological capital, organizational citi- zenship behaviors, work engagement, customer delight, and customer advocacy. She has con- tributed several research articles to Scopus indexed, Thomson Reuters, Australian Business Deans Council (ABDC) ranked, and peer-reviewed journals published by reputed international publishers. She has presented papers in the conferences of international repute and has also contributed several teaching cases to The Case Centre, UK.

Farrah Zeba, is currently working as assistant professor in ICFAI Business School (IBS) Hyderabad at IFHE University. She has also worked as market research analyst in a reputed retail organization in India. Her research is currently focused on customer advocacy, online marketing, customer delight, and perceived value. During her visiting scholar program at the University of Memphis, USA, she received an award at the Student Research Forum. She has presented papers in conferences of international repute and has contributed research articles to Scopus indexed journals. She has also contributed a teaching case to The Case Centre, UK.

Pankaj Kumar Mohanty, is currently pursuing a full-time doctoral program in management in ICFAI Business School (IBS) Hyderabad at IFHE University. He has more than 6 years of aca- demic experience and has worked with many reputed institutes in India. His research is cur- rently focused on customer engagement with online service brands in India. He has presented papers at conferences of national and international repute. He has also contributed a case on SELCO India Pvt. Ltd. to ET Cases publishing house, India.