Do Qualitative and Quantitative Job Insecurity Influence Hotel Employees’ Green Work Outcomes?

Abstract

The extant literature lacks evidence concerning the effects of qualitative and quantitative job insecurity (JIS) on service workers’ performance outcomes. This is also true for their effects on green work outcomes. To fill in this void, drawing on social information processing, threat-rigidity, and the reformulation of attitude theories as well as the model of attitude–behavior relation, this paper proposes and tests a research model that investigates the effects of both qualitative and quantitative JIS simultaneously on green work outcomes. Data gathered from hotel employees during the COVID-19 pandemic in Turkey were utilized to gauge the hypothesized associations through structural equation modeling. The findings suggest that quantitative JIS weakens harmonious environmental passion, green recovery performance, and proactive pro-environmental behavior. In addition, harmonious environmental passion mediates the impact of quantitative JIS on the aforementioned green work consequences. Contrary to the predictions, the findings lend no credence to the negative impact of qualitative JIS on harmonious environmental passion, green recovery performance, and proactive pro-environmental behavior.

1. Introduction

Intensifying global competition, increasing interest in outsourcing, and cost-cutting pressures associated with uncontrollable economic factors have resulted in the implementation of defensive strategies such as organizational restructuring and prevalent layoffs. This has intensified employees’ perceptions of job insecurity (JIS), which is a critical problem in the hospitality and tourism industry [1,2,3,4]. According to Greenhalgh and Rosenblatt [5], JIS can be defined as the “… potential loss of continuity in a job situation… loss of some subjectively important feature of the job” (p. 440). Hellgren et al. [6] classified JIS into quantitative JIS (threats to the job) and qualitative JIS (threats to job features).

De Witte and Näswall [7] define qualitative JIS as “the uncertainty about the potential loss of (valued) aspects of the job, such as wages, working hours or the content of the job” and quantitative JIS as “…loss of the job itself: people are uncertain about whether they will be able to keep the job or become unemployed” (p. 157). The extant literature presents evidence that JIS engenders undesirable consequences such as job dissatisfaction, poor task performance, erosion in organizational commitment, disengagement from work, heightened mental health problems, and heightened voluntary turnover, e.g., [8,9,10].

JIS does not only erode the abovementioned job outcomes but also impedes employees’ eco-friendly behaviors. Service workers who feel uncertain about the future of their jobs and find that there is a potential loss of the qualities of employment relationships may not have the positive emotions to engage in pro-environmental behaviors and/or may not be willing to display pro-environmental behaviors [11]. Many hotel companies now formulate and implement green strategies due to challenging issues associated with the protection of biological diversity, resource waste, the excessive consumption of water and energy, governmental regulations, and rising consumer environmentalism (cf. [12,13]). However, without service workers’ involvement in the process, hotel companies cannot implement their environmental sustainability programs successfully and accomplish their environmental goals [14].

1.1. Purpose

Against the above backdrop, this paper proposes and tests a research model in which harmonious environmental passion mediates the impacts of qualitative JIS and quantitative JIS on hotel employees’ green recovery performance (GRP) and proactive pro-environmental behavior (PPEB). Specifically, the objectives of this paper are to assess: (1) the effects of qualitative and quantitative JIS on harmonious environmental passion, GRP, and PPEBs; (2) the impact of harmonious environmental passion on GRP and PPEBs; and (3) harmonious environmental passion as a mediator in these associations.

Harmonious environmental passion refers to “…a positive emotion that results in an individual wanting to engage in pro-environmental behaviors” [15] (p. 180), while PPEB refers to “… the extent to which employees take initiative to engage in environmentally friendly behaviors that move beyond the realm of their required work tasks” [16] (p. 158). Utilizing the definition of service recovery performance given by Babakus et al. [17] and concordant with the work of Luu [18], GRP is defined as employees’ “… own abilities and actions to solve a complaint or failure surfacing from environmentally unfriendly efforts to the satisfaction of the customer” [19] (p. 2).

1.2. Contribution

By exploring the aforesaid relationships, the present paper enhances the literature in the following ways. First, one of the challenging issues in today’s work environment is the absence of job security [20]. Employees do not feel comfortable with the content of their job when management amends their responsibilities and/or do not feel secure about their future careers in the current company [10]. In both cases, employees suffer from JIS. Despite this recognition, little is known regarding the effects of qualitative and quantitative JIS simultaneously on employees’ job outcomes [21,22]. Such a critical gap is also evident in the hospitality and tourism literature. More importantly, Zientara and Zamojska [11] claim, “… it might be problematic to expect hotel employees to perform extra-role green behaviors since they endure certain industry-specific inconveniences, such as unsocial hours, emotional labor, relatively low remuneration and job insecurity” (p. 1144). However, this has not been subjected to an empirical inquiry so far. With this realization, this study tests the effects of qualitative and quantitative JIS simultaneously on customer-contact employees’ (CCEs) harmonious environmental passion, GRP, and PPEBs.

Second, a detailed search made in the current literature denotes that there is little empirical research about the underlying mechanism accounting for the effects of qualitative and quantitative JIS simultaneously on work and non-work-related outcomes [23]. To the author’s knowledge, no empirical study has examined the mediating mechanism linking two types of JIS to employees’ green work outcomes so far. Recognizing this gap, the current study assesses harmonious environmental passion as a mediator of the impacts of the two types of JIS on GRP and PPEBs.

Third, there are empirical pieces that have focused on JIS during the COVID-19 pandemic [24,25,26]. However, it is still critical to ascertain the negative impacts of qualitative and quantitative JIS on employees’ green work outcomes. This is congruent with Jung et al.’s [25] call for research: “Since it seems impossible for employees to perform their work without anxiety over their employment conditions during the current pandemic, it may be fruitful to determine the effects of JIS based on the responses and behaviors of employees and to identify how they can be alleviated. Despite its importance, such research has been scarce” (p. 2). Lastly, this paper presents useful implications for managerial practice regarding how to mitigate the effects of JIS on employees’ green work outcomes.

The next section presents the literature review of the study that includes the development of research hypotheses under the umbrella of social information processing (SIP) theory [27], threat-rigidity theory [28], the model of attitude–behavior relation [29], and the reformulation of attitude theory [30] as well as the research model. This is followed by discussions of the method and results of the empirical study. The study culminates with implications of the results for theory and practice.

2. Literature Review

Employees are among the most important actors that would help the organization to achieve environmental sustainability goals, e.g., [14,31,32]. In such an organization, it is important to enhance employees’ harmonious passion, which refers to “an autonomous internalization that leads individuals to choose to engage in the activity the person likes” [33] (p. 756). Employees at work are not forced to do the enjoyable activity but they freely choose or prefer to do it [34]. Those who are high in harmonious environmental passion enjoy engaging in environmentally friendly behaviors and act as environmentalists [31]. However, employees’ perceptions of work-related stressors undermine their harmonious passion. For example, the current literature delineates evidence about the detrimental effects of work gossip [35] and hindrance stressors [36] on harmonious passion. However, no prior research has touched on the investigation of the impact of qualitative JIS on harmonious environmental passion, GRP, and PPEBs so far.

Employees’ perceptions of qualitative JIS are deeply influenced by the social environment where they are expected to serve customers based on organizational standards [37]. Therefore, SIP theory serves as the theoretical underpinning for the development of hypotheses regarding the effect of qualitative JIS on the abovementioned green work outcomes. Specifically, SIP theory states, “… individuals, as adaptive organisms, adapt attitudes, behavior, and beliefs to their social context and to the reality of their own past and present behavior and situation” [27] (p. 226). In a social environment where there are signs of qualitative JIS, employees will try to interpret these signs to see whether there are threats to the features of the job. They will also try to understand how their colleagues interpret signs of qualitative JIS. If employees find that management takes decisions to modify the features of the job to reach cost reduction, they experience elevated levels of qualitative JIS. They will exhibit negative affective and behavioral outcomes when such threats are visible and they are likely to lose control over their job in the form of autonomy and career progress. That is, qualitative JIS, as one of the stressors in the workplace, leads to a number of negative consequences.

Although employees high in harmonious passion choose to do a number of activities rather than being compelled to do them [38], the risk of qualitative JIS erodes their inclination to be passionate about the environment. Such employees are unlikely to contribute to the company by trying to make customers satisfied with proper solutions against the complaints associated with environmentally unfriendly activities and being involved in environmental protection activities in the workplace. Thus, it is hypothesized that:

Hypothesis 1.

Qualitative JIS relates negatively to harmonious environmental passion.

Hypothesis 2.

Qualitative JIS relates negatively to GRP.

Hypothesis 3.

Qualitative JIS relates negatively to PPEBs.

The empirical studies have documented that quantitative JIS hinders work engagement and subjective well-being and exacerbates withdrawal cognitions [2,25,39]. However, as is the case with the effect of qualitative JIS on green work outcomes, no past study has explored the impact of quantitative JIS on harmonious environmental passion, GRP, and PPEBs so far.

Employees’ perceptions of quantitative JIS are also deeply affected by the social environment [37]. However, they feel worried about the loss of their present job (unemployment) in the future. Therefore, threat-rigidity theory is used for the development of hypotheses regarding the impact of quantitative JIS on harmonious environmental passion, GRP, and PPEBs. Broadly speaking, threat-rigidity theory postulates that employees are likely to show responses to a threat through different mechanisms. “Constriction in control” is one of these mechanisms, denoting employees’ proclivity to “… emit dominant, well-learned or habituated responses in threat situation” and increased drive [28] (p. 506). Employees who are beset with elevated levels of quantitative JIS or heightened threat of job loss in the future show habituated responses in the form of negative motivational and behavioral outcomes, e.g., [40,41]. In line with this thought, it is surmised that employees are unlikely to be passionate about the environment and display effective GRP and PPEBs since downsizing and restructuring threaten the continuity of their job in the company in the future. These are the negative outcomes or habituated responses as a result of employees’ perceptions of quantitative JIS.

CCEs who have already experienced that some of their colleagues lost their jobs due to the company’s retrenchment strategies display reactions or habituated responses to quantitative JIS by having low levels of harmonious passion for the environment. That is, quantitative JIS erodes harmoniously passionate employees’ concentration on the preservation of the environment. Quantitative JIS also impedes their willingness to manage various complaints arising from environmentally unfriendly activities of the company and show active engagement in the protection of the environment. Therefore, it is hypothesized that:

Hypothesis 4.

Quantitative JIS relates negatively to harmonious environmental passion.

Hypothesis 5.

Quantitative JIS relates negatively to GRP.

Hypothesis 6.

Quantitative JIS relates negatively to PPEBs.

Ajzen and Fishbein’s [29] model of attitude–behavior relation delineates guidance about the development of hypotheses concerning the effect of harmonious environmental passion on GRP and PPEBs. Specifically, Ajzen and Fishbein [29] state, “A person’s attitude has a consistently strong relation with his or her behavior when it is directed at the same target and when it involves the same action” (p. 912). Harmoniously passionate employees are energetic and are inspired by their job to make a difference in the workplace [15]. This leads to higher motivation for employees to engage in the enjoyable activity. Positive emotions enhance pro-environmental behaviors and harmonious environmental passion is also considered a positive emotion [15]. Harmoniously passionate employees find time, help their colleagues voluntarily, and participate in or attend organizational (e.g., environmental) events arranged by the company [38].

In this study, it is posited that CCEs’ passion for the environment is likely to result in better GRP and higher PPEBs. Evidence about the linkage between harmonious environmental passion and pro-environmental behavior appears to be abundant. However, this is not true for GRP as one of the critical green work outcomes. For instance, Afsar et al.’s [31] study in Thailand demonstrated a positive association between harmonious environmental passion and pro-environmental behavior. A study of academics in Malaysia documented that harmonious environmental passion boosted pro-environmental behavior [42]. A study of Chinese employees in the manufacturing industry demonstrated that team pro-environmental harmonious passion fostered team pro-environmental behavior [43]. Likewise, Li et al.’s [44] research in the same country revealed that harmonious environmental passion triggered pro-environmental behavior. Using the model of attitude–behavior relation and the findings mentioned above, it is hypothesized that:

Hypothesis 7.

Harmonious environmental passion relates positively to GRP.

Hypothesis 8.

Harmonious environmental passion relates positively to PPEBs.

Harmonious passion is a motivational force resulting in employees’ engagement in different activities under their control [45]. When employees are high in harmonious passion, they dedicate themselves fully to various activities, exhibit persistence in the face of obstacles, and finally reach excellence [34].

The reformulation of attitude theory is utilized as the theoretical framework to develop the hypotheses pertaining to harmonious environmental passion as a mediator of the effects of qualitative and quantitative JIS on GRP and PPEBs [30]. This theoretical framework has been widely utilized for the cognitive appraisal → emotional response → behavioral response linkage in other studies, e.g., [2,26,45]. This theory contends that individuals evaluate past, present, and future outcomes [30,46]. These outcomes result in particular emotions, which govern individuals’ behaviors [17]. For example, CCEs who perceive that there are specific threats to the features of their job and feel threatened about the continuity of their current position in the company in the future display negative emotional responses. Likewise, CCEs who feel threatened by the potential loss of their jobs exhibit undesirable emotional responses. These responses can be in different forms. In the current study, it is proposed that qualitative and quantitative JIS lead to erosion in CCEs’ harmonious environmental passion.

Harmonious passion for the environment is considered a positive emotion [15] that enables employees to contribute to the protection of the environment and less consumption of scarce resources such as water and energy. However, the presence of qualitative and quantitative JIS at work mitigates employees’ willingness to be sensitive to the environmental sustainability programs and green activities of the company. This is due to the fact that JIS deteriorates their energy, motivation, and inspiration to make a difference for the environment. In other words, though employees who possess a passion for the environment act as eco-citizens [31], the threatening situations caused by qualitative and quantitative JIS hinder their willingness to contribute to the company’s green activities. These employees in turn exhibit poor GRP and PPEBs. That is, they are unlikely to respond to customers’ requests and complaints about any potential environmentally unfriendly problems within the company and engage in behaviors that can contribute to the organization’s environmental activities. Such information implicitly suggests the qualitative and quantitative JIS → harmonious environmental passion → GRP and PPEBs linkages.

In empirical terms, Liu et al. [47] reported that harmonious passion was the motivational mechanism linking job resources to job creativity in different industries in China. Chen [36] examined the challenge and hindrance stressors → harmonious passion → safety performance associations among air technicians in Taiwan. Though not reported in Chen’s [36] work, the effects of these stressors on safety performance were mediated by harmonious passion. Hence, it is hypothesized that:

Hypothesis 9.

Harmonious environmental passion mediates the effect of qualitative JIS on GRP.

Hypothesis 10.

Harmonious environmental passion mediates the effect of qualitative JIS on PPEBs.

Hypothesis 11.

Harmonious environmental passion mediates the effect of quantitative JIS on GRP.

Hypothesis 12.

Harmonious environmental passion mediates the effect of quantitative JIS on PPEBs.

According to the model in Figure 1, qualitative and quantitative JIS erode employees’ harmonious environmental passion and impede their GRP and PPEBs. Employees who have a harmonious passion for the environment exhibit better GRP and PPEBs. The model further contends that harmonious environmental passion mediates these associations. As discussed in the preceding parts, such relationships are developed based on SIP theory [27], threat-rigidity theory [28], the model of attitude–behavior relation [29], and Bagozzi’s [30] reformulation of attitude theory. Organizational tenure is utilized as a control variable because it may have a significant association with the study variables and may amend the significance of the effects [2,31,32].

3. Method

3.1. Respondents and Data Collection

Data came from a purposive sample of hotel CCEs (e.g., food servers, bartenders, guest relations representatives, reception clerks, and bell attendants) in Ankara, the capital city of Turkey cf. [48]. Information obtained from the Ministry of Culture and Tourism at the time of this study denoted that there were 46 four-star and 28 five-star hotels in Ankara, which were registered by this Ministry. The professional network was utilized to obtain permission for data collection during the COVID-19 pandemic. As a result, only two four-star and 11 five-star hotels agreed to partake in the research. There are at least two reasons for choosing these hotels and their CCEs. First, CCEs spend time handling customer requests and problems. These employees’ efforts arising from GRP are also critical in service encounters [18]. However, they are beset with heightened JIS [2,25,41]. Second, the management of the aforesaid hotels is more committed to green-related issues and environmental sustainability (cf. [14]).

Self-report data were used to measure the study linkages. Despite its prevalent use, this practice is susceptible to the risk of common method variance (CMV). In accordance with the guidelines given by Podsakoff et al. [49], several procedural remedies were utilized. First, the cover page of the survey included the following information: “Management of your hotel fully endorses participation”, “Participation is voluntary but encouraged”, “There are no right or wrong answers in this questionnaire”, and “Any sort of information collected during our research will be kept confidential”. Second, the cover page of the survey also contained the information presented below: “Agreeing to fill out this questionnaire shows your consent.” Third, the surveys were returned to the researcher in sealed envelopes.

Data collection took place in February 2021. The representatives assigned to each company distributed 300 surveys to respondents. Two hundred surveys were returned. However, 21 surveys had missing information in various items. Therefore, 179 surveys were utilized in the analysis, representing a response rate of 59.7%. Respondents’ profiles are given in

Table 1. Subject profile (n = 179).

	Frequency	%
Age
18–27	37	20.7
28–37	66	36.9
38–47	55	30.7
48–57	16	8.9
58–67	5	2.8
Gender
Male	121	67.6
Female	58	32.4
Education
Primary school	8	4.5
Secondary and high school education	45	25.1
Two-year college degree	37	20.7
Four-year college degree	79	44.1
Graduate degree	10	5.6
Organizational tenure
Less than 1 year	30	16.8
1–5	88	49.2
6–10	36	20.1
11–15	13	7.3
16–20	6	3.3
Longer than 20 years	6	3.3

. It appeared that male employees dominated the hotel industry in the capital city of Turkey. This is also evident in empirical studies that have used hotel employees as the sample in the same area [50].

3.2. Instruments

The survey was originally prepared in English and then translated into Turkish taking into consideration the back-translation technique. The survey was pilot tested with 10 hotel employees. Respondents did not report any problems concerning the readability and understandability of the items. Respondents answered the survey items associated with qualitative JIS, quantitative JIS, harmonious environmental passion, and GRP via a 5-value scale that ranged from “1 (strongly disagree)” to “5 (strongly agree)”. The scale items are given in the Appendix A.

3.2.1. Qualitative Job Insecurity

Qualitative JIS was operationalized with a recently developed scale that contained eight items [51]. Therefore, the quantitative JIS items were subjected to an exploratory factor analysis via principal components with varimax rotation. The results revealed that two items loaded onto a second factor, while one item had a cross-loading of 0.472. This resulted in the deletion of three items. Said items are “I worry I might get another supervisor in the future”, “I am not sure which colleagues I will be soon cooperating with”, and “I am insecure about my chances of promotion”. The remaining five items had an eigenvalue of 3.14 and accounted for 62.72% of the total variance. Coefficient α for the qualitative JIS scale was 0.850.

3.2.2. Quantitative Job Insecurity

A four-item scale from Delery and Doty [52] was utilized to assess quantitative JIS. All of the items were reverse-coded. Coefficient α for the quantitative JIS scale was 0.726.

3.2.3. Harmonious Environmental Passion

Nine items used for assessing employees’ harmonious environment passion were developed by Robertson and Barling [15]. Coefficient α for the harmonious environmental scale was 0.923.

3.2.4. Green Recovery Performance

GRP was measured with five items from Darban et al. [19]. Darban et al. [19] adapted the service recovery performance items from Babakus et al. [17] to measure GRP. Therefore, an exploratory factor analysis using principal components with varimax rotation was employed. The results explained 54.17% of the total variance. Since this is lower than 60% [53], one item with the lowest factor loading was deleted. This item is “Considering all the things I do, I handle customers who are dissatisfied with the organizations’ environmentally unfriendly activities quite well”. The remaining four items had an eigenvalue of 2.52 and accounted for 63.01% of the total variance. Coefficient α for the GRP scale was 0.793.

3.2.5. Proactive Pro-Environmental Behavior

Three items from Bissing-Olson et al. [16] were tapped to operationalize PPEBs. Respondents used scoring categories ranging from “1 (never)” to “5 (almost always)”. Coefficient α for the PPEB scale was 0.898.

3.3. Strategy of Analysis

The five-factor measurement model was subjected to confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to verify the convergent and discriminant validity of the measures and confirm the internal consistencies of the scales via composite reliability [54]. The relationships were gauged through structural equation modeling (SEM) with the maximum likelihood estimation [55]. The input for CFA and SEM in LISREL 8.30 was the covariance matrix of the items [56]. To verify the significance of the mediating effects, the Sobel test was performed [2,57]. To assess both the measurement and structural models, the fit statistics such as “χ²/df, comparative fit index (CFI), parsimony normed fit index (PNFI), standardized root mean square residual (SRMR), and root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA)” were used.

4. Results

4.1. Measurement Model Results

The skewness and kurtosis values were <±3.00 (

Table 2. Assessment of the five-factor measurement model: confirmatory factor analysis results.

Variables and Items	S	K	Standardized Loadings	t-Values
(QUAL) Qualitative job insecurity (AVE = 0.54; CR = 0.85)
QUAL1	−0.26	−1.11	0.73	10.55
QUAL2	0.38	−0.86	0.62	8.64
QUAL3	−0.52	−0.40	0.69	9.95
QUAL4	−0.04	−1.14	0.81	12.28
QUAL5	0.13	−1.14	0.79	11.81
(QUAN) Quantitative job insecurity (AVE = 0.40; CR = 0.73)
QUAN1 (R)	0.57	−0.38	0.67	8.47
QUAN2 (R)	0.25	−0.81	0.64	8.10
QUAN3 (R)	0.54	−0.05	0.59	7.32
QUAN4 (R)	0.13	−1.08	0.64	8.10
(HEP) Harmonious environmental passion (AVE = 0.59; CR = 0.93)
HEP1	−0.97	0.85	0.74	11.33
HEP2	−1.08	1.00	0.86	14.23
HEP3	−1.35	2.05	0.89	14.85
HEP4	−1.36	2.45	0.78	12.14
HEP5	−0.91	0.74	0.79	12.46
HEP6	−1.10	1.17	0.77	12.01
HEP7	−0.88	0.34	0.79	12.37
HEP8	−0.57	−0.43	0.56	7.88
HEP9	−0.74	0.23	0.67	10.00
(GRP) Green recovery performance (AVE = 0.53; CR = 0.81)
GRP1	−0.84	−0.22	0.70	10.15
GRP2	−0.84	0.28	0.83	12.74
GRP3	−0.99	0.81	0.85	13.02
GRP4	−0.38	−0.14	0.47	6.18
(PPEB) Proactive pro-environmental behavior (AVE = 0.77; CR = 0.91)
PPEB1	−1.02	0.55	0.83	13.38
PPEB2	−0.97	0.37	0.95	16.50
PPEB3	−1.12	0.64	0.84	13.68

Note: All loadings were significant (p < 0.05). AVE = Average variance extracted; CR = Composite reliability; S = Skewness; K = Kurtosis; (R) denotes reverse-coded items.

), showing evidence of the normality of the data [2]. The findings from CFA showed that there was a good fit of the five-factor measurement model to the data: χ² = 470.35, df = 261; χ²/df = 1.80; CFI = 0.92; PNFI = 0.73; RMSEA = 0.067; SRMR = 0.068. All loadings (Table 2) were significant. These findings presented evidence of convergent validity [55]. The average variance extracted (AVE) and composite reliability scores were also computed (Table 2). The AVE by qualitative JIS, quantitative JIS, harmonious environmental passion, GRP, and PPEB was 0.54, 0.40, 0.59, 0.53, and 0.77, respectively. Composite reliability for qualitative JIS, quantitative JIS, harmonious environmental passion, GRP, and PPEB was 0.85, 0.73, 0.93, 0.81, and 0.91, respectively. These scores were >0.60 [58]. Though the AVE by quantitative JIS was below 0.50, its composite reliability was 0.73 and the magnitudes of the loadings ranged from 0.59 to 0.67. Jiang et al. [59] (p. 151) state, “… this test is quite conservative. Very often, variance extracted estimates will be below 0.50, even when reliabilities are acceptable”. On the whole, convergent validity was corroborated [55,59].

There was acceptable discriminant validity in this paper since the shared variances (Φ²) between pairs of variables were <the AVE by each variable [54]. For example, the correlation between harmonious environmental passion and PPEB was 0.65. The shared variance (0.65 × 0.65 = 0.42) was <the AVE for harmonious environmental passion and PPEB. Means, standard deviations, and correlations of observed constructs are provided in

Table 3. Correlation matrix with means and standard deviations.

Constructs	Mean	SD	OT	QLJIS	QNJIS	HEP	GRP	PPEB	POB
Organizational tenure (OT)	2.41	1.16	-
Qualitative job insecurity (QLJIS)	3.02	1.03	−0.070	-
Quantitative job insecurity (QNJIS)	2.58	0.88	−0.058	0.033	-
Harmonious environmental passion (HEP)	4.00	0.75	0.240 **	−0.057	0.327 **	-
Green recovery performance (GRP)	3.72	0.87	0.025	−0.016	−0.302 **	0.495 **	-
Proactive pro-environmental behavior (PPEB)	4.15	0.87	0.169 *	0.003	−0.313 **	0.633 **	0.449 **	-
Place of birth (POB)	0.36	0.48	−0.025	0.060	−0.082	0.060	0.036	0.040	-

Note: Organizational tenure was measured in six categories. * p < 0.05 and ** p < 0.01 (one-tailed test).

.

4.2. Common Method Variance Check: Statistical Remedies

The threat of CMV was checked via two statistical techniques. First, concordant with the work of Kim et al. [60], the place of birth was used as the marker variable, which is theoretically unrelated to the study constructs. The findings in

Table 4. Tests of the structural model and research hypotheses.

Parameter	Path Estimate	t-Value	Supported/Not Supported
Direct effects
Qualitative job insecurity → Harmonious environmental passion (β31)	−0.02	−0.21	Not supported
Qualitative job insecurity → Green recovery performance (β41)	−0.02	−0.27	Not supported
Qualitative job insecurity → Proactive pro-environmental behavior (β51)	0.06	0.91	Not supported
Quantitative job insecurity → Harmonious environmental passion (β32)	−0.35	−3.70 **	Supported
Quantitative job insecurity → Green recovery performance (β42)	−0.21	−2.21 *	Supported
Quantitative job insecurity → Proactive pro-environmental behavior (β52)	−0.15	−1.94 *	Supported
Harmonious environmental passion → Green recovery performance (β43)	0.49	5.08 **	Supported
Harmonious environmental passion → Proactive pro-environmental behavior (β53)	0.59	6.78 **	Supported
Control variable
Organizational tenure → Harmonious environmental passion (γ31)	0.23	3.12 **	-
Organizational tenure → Green recovery performance (γ41)	−0.13	−1.80 *	-
Mediating effects		z-value
Quantitative job insecurity → Harmonious environmental passion → Green recovery performance		−3.22 **	Supported
Quantitative job insecurity → Harmonious environmental passion → Proactive pro-environmental behavior		−3.49 **	Supported
R2 for harmonious environmental passion 0.19; green recovery performance 0.33; and proactive pro-environmental behavior 0.45

Note: T-values corresponding to one-tail tests at various significance levels: * t > 1.65, p < 0.05; and ** t > 2.33, p < 0.01. The significant impact of organizational tenure was not reported for the sake of simplicity.

indicated the place of birth was not significantly associated with any of the study constructs. In addition, the significance of the correlations did not change with or without the marker variable. Second, the unmeasured latent method factor (ULMF) technique was performed [49]. The fit statistics for the model were: CFI = 0.96; PNFI = 0.69; RMSEA = 0.048; SRMR = 0.048. A comparison between the model fit statistics with the ULMF and the ones without the ULMF did not demonstrate any substantial differences. The Δχ² difference test result between the study model (χ² = 470.35, df = 261) and the one with the ULMF (χ² = 334.19, df = 236) was significant (Δχ² = 136.16, df = 25). However, the differences regarding CFA (0.04), RMSEA (0.02), and SRMR (0.02) were <0.05 [61]. As expected, PNFI concerning the five-factor measurement model (0.73) was >the one with the ULMF (0.69). Overall, CMV did not appear to be a risk in this study.

4.3. Tests of the Structural Model and Research Hypotheses

The recommended minimum sample size was 113 (“anticipated effect size” = 0.5 large effect size; “desired statistical power level” = 0.95; “number of latent variables” = 5; “number of observed variables” = 26; and “probability level” = 0.05). This study’s sample size (n = 179) was > the one recommended above [62].

The hypothesized model (χ² = 498.11, df = 283) was compared with the completely mediated model (χ² = 513.62, df = 287) using the χ² difference test. The finding was significant (Δχ² = 15.51, df = 4, p < 0.05). The fit statistics also showed a good fit of the hypothesized model to the data: χ² = 498.11, df = 283; χ²/df = 1.76; CFI = 0.92; PNFI = 0.72; RMSEA = 0.065; SRMR = 0.069.

Table 4 provides the findings obtained for each of the hypothesized paths. The findings illustrated that qualitative JIS did not significantly influence harmonious environmental passion (H1, β₃₁ = −0.02, t = −0.21), GRP (H2, β₄₁ = −0.02, t = −0.27), and PPEBs (H3, β₃₁ = 0.06, t = 0.91). Hence, H1, H2, and H3 were not supported. Quantitative JIS was negatively associated with harmonious environmental passion (β₃₂ = −0.35, t = −3.70). Therefore, H4 was supported. As expected, quantitative JIS had a negative association with GRP (β₄₂ = −0.21, t = −2.21). This finding supported H5. H6, which predicts that quantitative JIS relates negatively to PPEBs, was supported (β₅₂ = −0.15, t = −1.94). In support of H7, the findings denoted that harmonious environmental passion positively affected GRP (β₄₃ = 0.49, t = 5.08). A significant path from harmonious environmental passion to PPEBs was also evident (β₅₃ = 0.59, t = 6.78). Thus, H8 was supported.

The indirect impact of quantitative JIS on GRP via harmonious environmental passion was significant based on the Sobel test result (z-value = −3.22). This finding supported H11. H12 was also supported because the indirect effect of quantitative JIS on PPEBs via harmonious environmental passion was significant as a result of the Sobel test result (z-value = −3.49). These findings reveal that harmonious environmental passion partly mediates the impact of quantitative JIS on GRP and PPEBs. Due to the absence of the significant effect of qualitative JIS on harmonious environmental passion, the mediating impacts cannot be calculated. Consequently, H9 and 10 were not supported.

Organizational tenure was negatively related to GRP (γ₄₁ = −0.13, t = −1.80), while it was positively associated with harmonious environmental passion (γ₃₁ = 0.23, t = 3.12). Employees with longer tenure are more passionate about the environment, while the ones with longer tenure exhibit lower GRP. The findings accounted for 19% of the variance in harmonious environmental passion, 33% in GRP, and 45% in PPEBs. No changes in the significance of the effects without the control variable were observed.

Table 5. Research hypotheses: supported or not supported.

Hypotheses	Result
Hypothesis 1: Qualitative JIS relates negatively to harmonious environmental passion.	Not supported
Hypothesis 2: Qualitative JIS relates negatively to GRP.	Not supported
Hypothesis 3: Qualitative JIS relates negatively to PPEBs.	Not supported
Hypothesis 4: Quantitative JIS relates negatively to harmonious environmental passion.	Supported
Hypothesis 5: Quantitative JIS relates negatively to GRP.	Supported
Hypothesis 6: Quantitative JIS relates negatively to PPEBs.	Supported
Hypothesis 7: Harmonious environmental passion relates positively to GRP.	Supported
Hypothesis 8: Harmonious environmental passion relates positively to PPEBs.	Supported
Hypothesis 9: Harmonious environmental passion mediates the effect of qualitative JIS on GRP.	Not supported
Hypothesis 10: Harmonious environmental passion mediates the effect of qualitative JIS on PPEBs.	Not supported
Hypothesis 11: Harmonious environmental passion mediates the effect of quantitative JIS on GRP.	Supported
Hypothesis 12: Harmonious environmental passion mediates the effect of quantitative JIS on PPEBs.	Supported

Note: JIS = Job insecurity; GRP = Green recovery performance; PPEBs = Proactive pro-environmental behaviors.

delineates a detailed picture of research hypotheses, which are supported or not supported.

5. Discussion and Conclusions

5.1. Conclusions

To contribute to the dearth of empirical research about the potential green work outcomes of both qualitative JIS and quantitative JIS, this study developed and tested a research model that explored the interrelationships of qualitative JIS, quantitative JIS, harmonious environmental passion, GRP, and PPEBs. The results based on data obtained from CCEs in the hotel industry in Ankara, the capital city of Turkey, suggest that harmonious environmental passion acts as a mediator of the effect of quantitative JIS on hotel employees’ GRP and PPEBs. On the other hand, the results lend no credence to harmonious environmental passion as a mediator of the impact of qualitative JIS on the abovementioned green work outcomes. The findings were in support of most of the hypotheses. This paper yields some insightful findings.

First, the results suggest that quantitative JIS undermines CCEs’ passion for the environment, GRP, and PPEBs, while qualitative JIS does not significantly influence these outcomes. It seems that when there are threats to the features of the job, employees do not perceive it as a threat that would lead to erosion in their passion for the environment, GRP, and PPEBs. Though the literature delineates evidence about the deleterious impact of qualitative JIS on outcomes such as task performance and organizational identification [21,37], the results emanating from this paper do not support the premise that qualitative JIS diminishes CCEs’ efforts toward the protection of the environment (i.e., pro-environmental behavior), their harmonious passion for the environment, and GRP. This is not congruent with SIP theory [27] that employees display negative consequences when they use cues about the potential threat to the valued features of the job observed in the social environment.

On the other hand, the finding pertaining to the impact of quantitative JIS on CCEs’ harmonious environmental passion, GRP, and PPEBs is concordant with the tenets of threat-rigidity theory [28]. Quantitative JIS does not only erode employees’ work outcomes such as innovative work behavior and job embeddedness [1,40] but also hinders their harmonious passion for the environment and green work outcomes. Employees who are faced with heightened quantitative JIS behave rigidly and display habituated responses to threatening circumstances. In this study, employees’ habituated responses are in the form of diminished harmonious environmental passion and poor GRP and PPEBs. The findings reported here are congruent with the studies that have denoted that employees working under threatening conditions exhibit negative emotional and behavioral outcomes [10,39].

When employees feel threatened by future involuntary job loss in the present company, they display undesirable outcomes. This raises the issue of how employees perceive JIS. The COVID-19 pandemic has already resulted in millions of job losses and significant declines in business revenues. When quantitative JIS is coupled with the COVID-19 pandemic, the severity of the threat of job loss is higher. These workers lose their concentration on their tasks and responsibilities that are related to the company’s environmental sustainability program and green activities.

Second, the results suggest that harmoniously passionate CCEs handle customers’ complaints about the environmentally unfriendly activities of the company and proactively act in environmentally friendly ways. As claimed and reported by Robertson and Barling [15], harmonious environmental passion is a strong predictor of employees’ eco-friendly behaviors. More specifically, these findings are not only in accord with Ajzen and Fishbein’s [29] model of attitude–behavior relation but also receive support from recent studies [43,44].

Third, the results suggest that harmonious environmental passion mediates the impact of quantitative JIS on GRP and PPEBs. In congruence with the reformulation of attitude theory [30], CCEs’ evaluation of the work environment shows that they feel insecure about the continuity of their job in the company in the future (cognitive appraisal). Under these threatening circumstances, such employees lose their motivation to actively get involved in environmental events (emotional response). They in turn display poor GRP and PPEBs (behavioral outcomes). The abovementioned findings are in harmony with empirical studies that have reported emotional response as a mediator linking cognitive appraisal to behavior outcomes under the umbrella of the same theoretical framework. For example, Karatepe et al. [2] showed that work engagement was a mediator between JIS and hotel employees’ non-green behaviors.

5.2. Theoretical Implications

This paper significantly contributes to the nascent literature on JIS and employees’ environmental attitudes and behaviors. First, this study has drawn attention to the importance of the often-overlooked dimension of JIS, which is qualitative JIS and the impacts of qualitative and quantitative JIS simultaneously on employee outcomes [21]. The findings reported in this paper also concur with Zientara and Zamojska’s [11] assertion that service workers who feel threatened by the uncertainty of their job in the future should not be expected to have pleasure from taking care of the environment and perform green recovery and pro-environmental behaviors. The results also add to the literature that quantitative JIS has a more negative impact on harmonious environmental passion, GRP, and PPEBs than qualitative JIS.

Second, harmonious environmental passion was assessed as the mediating mechanism relating qualitative and quantitative JIS to employees’ GRP and PPEBs. The current literature is bereft of evidence about the impact of JIS on green work outcomes [2]. Though qualitative JIS is not related to any green work outcomes, the findings support the notion that employees who are beset with heightened quantitative JIS are less passionate about the environment and therefore exhibit ineffective GRP and PPEBs. Third, it is important to ascertain the impact of JIS on employee outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic because anxiety surfacing from such an infectious disease impedes employee performance at work [25]. In this paper, it was found that quantitative JIS is a substantial threat to the certainty of the job in the organization, hampers employees’ willingness to actively participate in environmental events, and impairs their GRP and PPEBs.

5.3. Managerial Implications

On practical grounds, this paper delineates recommendations for managing human resources in a market environment where motivated, talented employees are ever more required. First, quantitative JIS is a source of involuntary job loss and is still an unresolved issue in the hospitality industry [2]. Management should guarantee job security to talented employees via transparent communication despite the presence of salary cuts emerging from the COVID-19 pandemic and thereupon seek their participation in decision-making to show that the company really cares about employees. This is so critical because such employees would be among the most important actors in helping the company recover once the COVID-19 pandemic is pacified.

Second, there are many unprecedented booking cancellations due to the COVID-19 pandemic, which has already hit the hotel industry hard. Therefore, management can organize online training programs to enhance the knowledge, skills, and abilities of employees since employees are likely to have a lower workload than before. In these programs, management can focus on the importance of environmental sustainability programs and the green activities of the organization [63]. Case studies on these issues can be used to increase awareness about the preservation of scarce resources and the importance of investment in green activities. These case studies would also activate employees’ GRP and PPEBs based on organizational standards.

Third, the findings highlight the importance of green recruitment and personnel selection regarding the acquisition of employees who are passionate about the environment (cf. [32,45]). This is important because hospitality and tourism are not “green” enough to contribute to environmental sustainability [64]. In order to attract such individuals to the company, management should share the company’s environmental sustainability program and green activities with the public via its vision and mission statements, webpage, and social media. Once these candidates apply for the vacant posts, managers should uncover their prior experiences about how they were actively involved in environmental events and contributed to the company they quit.

5.4. Limitations and Avenues for Future Research

There are several limitations that suggest that our evaluations should be viewed cautiously. First, cross-sectional data were used. This prevents us from making causal inferences about the associations. With this realization, future studies should gather longitudinal data to establish causality among the study constructs. Second, the COVID-19 pandemic precluded us from gathering data in different waves and/or multiple sources of data. Therefore, self-reported data collected from hotel employees were used to gauge the relationships in Figure 1. Since this practice is prone to CMV, both procedural and statistical remedies were tapped [49]. The results associated with the marker variable and the ULMF technique documented that CMV was not a problem in this paper. Nevertheless, future research should collect data at least in three waves and obtain supervisor ratings for the behavioral outcomes.

Third, GRP and PPEBs were utilized as the green work outcomes of harmonious environmental passion. Future research can take into account green creativity, task-related pro-environmental behavior, PPEBs, GRP, and green adaptive performance as the potential outcomes of harmonious environmental passion at the same time and enhance the understanding of these associations. Fourth, personal resources such as job resourcefulness can moderate the detrimental effects of quantitative JIS on green work outcomes. Since job-resourceful employees can carry out their tasks effectively in a workplace where there are insufficient resources [65], testing job resourcefulness as a moderator and ascertaining whether the detrimental impact of quantitative JIS on green work consequences is weaker among employees high on job resourcefulness would make significant additions to the relevant literature. Fifth, the survey instrument did not include any items about respondents’ income levels. In future studies, collecting data about this issue would present additional information about respondents’ profiles. In closing, replication studies with larger sample sizes in different service contexts would add to the literature on JIS, harmonious environmental passion, and different types of green work outcomes.