The Lighter Side of Leadership: Exploring the Role of Humor in Balancing Work and Family Demands in Tourism and Hospitality

Abstract

Work–family conflict (WFC) is a common issue faced by employees balancing work and family roles, but research exploring individual strategies to reduce its negative effects has been limited. Leaders’ positive humor is a mutually (leader–subordinates) amusing communication tool in the workplace. It has been shown to enhance peer relationships (coworker socializing (CWS)) and may serve as an effective coping mechanism that mitigates the adverse effects of workplace stress (work–family conflict). This study strives to examine the relationship between leaders’ positive humor (LPH) and work–family conflict (WFC), with coworker socializing (CWS) mediating this relationship and sensitivity to favorable interpersonal treatment (SFIT) moderating the relationship between leaders’ positive humor and coworker socializing in the tourism and hospitality industry. The research addresses a significant gap in previous studies by investigating these variables together. A total of 387 valid questionnaires were collected from employees of five-star hotels and tourism organizations in Egypt. This study employed PLS-SEM to analyze the data. The results showed that leaders’ positive humor negatively impacts work–family conflict, positively influences coworker socializing and that coworker socializing negatively affects work–family conflict. Additionally, coworker socializing mediated the association between leaders’ positive humor and work–family conflict, and sensitivity to favorable interpersonal treatment moderated the relationship between leaders’ positive humor and coworker socializing. This study provides theoretical and practical insights by validating the proposed model based on the Stimulus–Organism–Response (S-O-R) framework and the Conservation of Resources (COR) theory. Regarding practical implications, the study recommends leadership training on the effective use of humor to foster follower socialization and promote work–family balance.

1. Introduction

Effective leaders worldwide are generally well-known for being humorous and able to bridge connections and influence their followers (Yuan et al., 2023). Multi-national corporations such as Google, Walmart, and Tencent have successfully incorporated amusement and fun into their corporate culture (L. Tan et al., 2022). Humor has emerged as a pertinent subject for organizational scholars, particularly concerning how leaders employ humor in their communication with their subordinates, such as leader humor (Cooper et al., 2018). Leader humor refers to a leader’s interaction with their subordinates that they find funny or humorous (Cooper et al., 2018; L. Tan et al., 2020). Drawing on the framework of (Martin et al., 2003), this study conceptualizes positive humor as encompassing affiliative and self-enhancing styles associated with psychosocial coping mechanisms, subjective well-being, and prosocial relationship-building (Ford et al., 2014). There is some evidence that the most effective leaders’ humor is consistently and positively associated with several organizational outcomes, such as team performance (Mao et al., 2017), leader status (Evans et al., 2019), employee resilience and coping mechanisms (Elshaer et al., 2022; Vetter & Gockel, 2016), and competence (Bitterly et al., 2017).

As noted by Cooper et al. (2018) in their study examining the effects of the work environment on employees’ family lives, it is essential to explore the role of workplace experiences—particularly leaders’ positive humor (LPH)—in shaping employees’ work– family interface. Positive experiences in one life domain, such as the family, can spill over into the workplace and vice versa, contributing to overall well-being and improved performance. This highlights the importance of examining the positive value of workplace fun and its potential effects on employees’ family lives. In this context, a leader’s positive humor (LPH) has been shown to reduce followers’ experiences of work–family conflict (WFC). Building on this premise, the present study seeks to further explore whether, how, and under what conditions LPH influences followers’ family lives. Such insights are crucial for designing more socially supportive and emotionally enriching work environments.

Work–family conflict (WFC) is one of the main challenges facing the workplace in the 21st century (Maertz et al., 2019), especially in the tourism and hospitality sectors (Elshaer et al., 2024a). WFC has been described through various conceptualizations, such as inter-role conflict, work–family role strain, and job–family incompatibility (Juniarly et al., 2021; R. Wang & Shi, 2022). This conflict arises when individuals prioritize fulfilling work-related obligations over family responsibilities (Brzykcy et al., 2024). The role theory states that the tension between the demands of the roles involved in work and those involved in the family leads to WFC (Kahn et al., 1964). The prevalence of WFC has increased worldwide in recent years due to a number of factors, including rising job demands, demands for availability for work outside of office hours, and the sharp increase in dual-earner households, and more lately, as a response to the COVID-19 pandemic (D. Cheng et al., 2021). Several studies have indicated that fostering a low-stress, socially supportive work environment (coworker socialization (CWS)) may significantly reduce WFC (Trottier & Bentein, 2019).

Socializing at work is essential for success. If employees cannot relate to their workplace and its culture, they are unlikely to prosper (Rather, 2016). Positive and supportive relationships help employees to feel healthier, happier, and more content with their lives (Alzadjali & Ahmad, 2024). These supportive relationships are a means of helping employees to cope with stressful events and to reduce the negative psychological consequences of ongoing stress (Kinman, 2024). In this context, leaders often employ positive humor to engage with colleagues and cultivate a more social and cohesive workplace environment (Rosenberg et al., 2024). Leadership can use humor to interact and socialize with employees (Taylor et al., 2025). Humor is key in organizational communication. It improves performance and overall well-being, reduces stress levels, and improves group cohesion (Fayyad, 2020), thus reducing WFC. Therefore, this study employed coworker socialization (CWS) as a mediator between LPH and WFC.

Sensitivity to favorable interpersonal treatment (SFIT) is an important concept that has multiple workplace effects (Bunk & Magley, 2011). Sensitivity is conceptualized as the level to which people feel cognitively and affectively responsive to interactions with other people. It is a construct: not just an awareness, but an orientation of one’s social interactions in general. (Montoya-Pérez et al., 2024). The capacity to be sensitive to supportive interactions in the workplace enhances creativity and performance, especially in leadership, service, and personal development, as well as enhancing feelings of belonging and motivation. In addition, respect and cooperation during work contribute to mental well-being and compliance. (De Gucht et al., 2022). Sensitivity to favorable interpersonal treatment (SFIT) reduces turnover by strengthening positive perceptions of employee value and personal respect, which leads to increased job satisfaction (Bunk & Magley, 2011).

Consequently, this study is mainly focused on the relationship between leaders’ positive humor (LPH), work–family conflict (WFC), coworker socializing (CWS), and sensitivity to favorable interpersonal treatment (SFIT) among coworkers in the tourism context. Previous research has not fully examined the mediating role of CWS in relationship between LPH and WFC and the moderating role of SIFT in the intersection between LPH and CWS in developing countries. Hospitality and tourism work–life balance is characterized by emotional labor, long (or irregular) hours, high levels of interpersonal interaction and the need for WFC, leadership style, and coworker relationships (Ye et al., 2024). The majority of research on leaders’ humor was implemented in corporate settings, but the tourism and hospitality industry’s emotional intensity and stressors, such as customer-facing stress and shift work, make it a distinct context in which positive humor from leaders could play a buffering role (Ye et al., 2024).

The tourism and hospitality industry is known for its high emotional demands, unpredictable work hours, and constant interaction with customers, which makes it especially prone to work–family conflict (WFC) (Blomme et al., 2010; Roy, 2023). The industry’s inherent complexities—such as managing diverse guest expectations while maintaining high service standards—can place considerable strain on employees’ psychological well-being and job performance (Suryanarayanan et al., 2021). That is why looking into how positive leader humor (LPH) and interpersonal relationships (i.e., CWS) can play a role in this workplace environment can contribute valuable insights into the intricate balance between work and personal life and the dynamics of leadership and relationships among colleagues.

This knowledge gap has significant implications for HRM in the tourism and hospitality industry. By filling this gap, the study might contribute to the development of theoretical frameworks, provide evidence-based recommendations for organizational action, and enhance employee engagement; this may improve the individual conditions of employees and contribute to success of the sector. Additionally, our findings may benefit academicians, tourism managers, hospitality leadership, policymakers and the hospitality and tourism economy.

In order to increase our knowledge in these domains, this study aims to investigate the following aspects: (1) the relationship between leaders’ positive humor (LPH) and work–family conflict (WFC); (2) the role of leaders’ positive humor (LPH) in coworker socializing (CWS); (3) the role of coworker socializing (CWS) in work–family conflict (WFC); (4) the mediating role of coworker socializing (CWS) in the intersection between leaders’ positive humor (LPH) and work–family conflict (WFC), and (5) the key moderating role of sensitivity to favorable interpersonal treatment (SFIT) in the relationship between leaders’ positive humor (LPH) and coworker socializing (CWS). In addition, our proposed model posits that coworker socializing (CWS) mediates the relationship between leaders’ positive humor (LPH) and work–family conflict (WFC), while sensitivity to favorable interpersonal treatment (SFIT) moderates the relationship between LPH and CWS.

This article is divided into eight distinct parts. Section 2 sets the theoretical foundations and formulates hypotheses. Section 3 and Section 4 delve into the research methodology and the data analysis. The discussion is presented in Section 5, followed by Section 6, which explores the theoretical and practical implications. The study limitations and recommended future work are detailed in Section 7. Section 8 summarizes the findings and conclusions.

2. Theoretical Foundations and Formulation of Hypotheses

2.1. Theoretical Background of the Study

The Stimulus–Organism–Response (S-O-R) (Mehrabian & Russell, 1974) contains three sequential steps that illustrate how “stimuli” (S) affect an “organism” (O) to stimulate “responses” (R) (Choi & Kandampully, 2019). Grounded in the S-O-R model, the proposed research framework posits that positive leader humor serves as a positive social (stimulus) that cultivates a psychologically safe and cohesive work environment (Potipiroon & Ford, 2021). This environment is characterized by interpersonal closeness (coworker socializing) (Kashive & Raina, 2024), the removal of hierarchical barriers (V. Tan, 2024), and knowledge-sharing (Xu et al., 2023). Employees cognitively, emotionally, and behaviorally process these stimuli (organism), particularly when they exhibit high sensitivity to favorable interpersonal treatment (SFIT) (Mast et al., 2012). Such individuals are more attuned to positive interpersonal cues and are therefore more likely to engage in constructive behavior (responses), such as enhancing their work–family balance (or reducing work–family conflict) and mitigating workplace stress (Ten Brummelhuis et al., 2014).

In line with Deegan et al.’s (2000) view, which emphasizes that model development in the social sciences benefits from the integration of multiple theoretical perspectives to gain deeper and more comprehensive insights into practice, the current study adopts a multi-theoretical approach. Accordingly, in addition to the Stimulus–Organism–Response (S-O-R) model, the Conservation of Resources (COR) theory is also employed to strengthen the conceptual framework. The COR theory (Hobfoll, 1989, 2002) posits that employees are inherently motivated to acquire, retain, and protect valuable personal resources—such as time, energy, social support, and emotional well-being—to manage and reduce stress. Employees who possess or are provided with such resources are less vulnerable to the adverse effects of stress and are more capable of coping effectively with workplace demands. Based on COR theory (Hobfoll, 2002), leaders’ positive humor (LPH) may serve as a socioemotional resource to protect subordinates from stress and burnout or help them recover or cope. It stimulates positive emotions, which can act as internal resources that support adaptive coping and facilitate adjustment to workplace stressors (Elshaer et al., 2022). Accordingly, it can be argued that positive leader humor may serve as a valuable resource that enables subordinates to cope with and recover from stress while also fostering stronger social bonds—particularly among those with high sensitivity to favorable interpersonal treatment (SFIT). As a result, such humor may help mitigate challenges such as work–family conflict.

2.2. Leaders’ Positive Humor (LPH) and Work–Family Conflict (WFC)

Humor is a type of communication that aims to amuse (Cooper et al., 2018), and historically, studies of organizations have paid little attention to humor in business, as it was often seen as contrary to the serious nature of business activities (Westwood & Johnston, 2013). Humor is described as anything someone thinks, says, or does that may be considered humorous and tends to cause individuals to laugh (Martin & Ford, 2018). Humor may be directed towards oneself, or can be made with a listener in mind (Plester & Inkson, 2019).

According to Campbell et al. (2025), humor has recently been recognized as vital to workplace interactions and relationships. Lehmann-Willenbrock and Allen (2014) observed 54 work meetings and noted an average of 15.5 examples of humor in a meeting. Additionally, research shows that humor is linked to positive work outcomes, like improved staff performance and group cohesion (Mesmer-Magnus et al., 2012). Studies indicate that the humor of leaders is linked to a range of results, such as organizational citizenship behaviors (OCB) (Cooper et al., 2018), staff engagement (Yam et al., 2017), and views on leadership effectiveness (Priest & Swain, 2002). As a result, humor and humorous behavior can help create a culture that is celebrated and strengthened throughout the organization and can become an essential part of its shared values, norms, and traditions (Robert et al., 2016).

In contrast, humor can have aggressive aspects that can unintentionally offend the target, leading to disagreements and undesirable outcomes at work (Wijewardena et al., 2024). Accordingly, employees may use different humor styles in the workplace (E. Romero & Pescosolido, 2008). Some people might use aggressive humor to harm others. Still, others tend to use a positive form of humor to assist them in recovering their sense of control and help them resolve problems that may otherwise be overlooked (D. Cheng et al., 2021), such as workplace–family conflict. Martin et al. (2003) identified four main humor styles. The first two humor styles, self-enhancing and affiliative, are mainly positive to oneself or others; the other two types, self-defeating and aggressive, are mainly harmful to oneself or others. People with an affiliative humor style use humor to obtain social rewards and amuse others, while those who have a self-enhancing humor utilize it to sustain a positive psychological quality of life and separate themselves from adversity. Both types of humor sustain a humorous outlook on life, adapting to difficult conditions through a humorous outlook. Self-enhancing humor is deeply related the use of humor as a means of coping (Cann et al., 2010; Martin et al., 2003).

Scholars have based their justification for the benefits of humor on the superiority and relief theories, arguing that humor evokes positive feelings in the environment in which it is practiced (Martin & Ford, 2018). Relief theory conceptualizes humor as a mechanism that aids individuals in releasing accumulated tension and stress. Here, laughter is interpreted as a socially acceptable and psychologically beneficial outlet that facilitates emotional regulation and stress reduction, particularly in high-pressure environments such as the hospitality industry (Lintott, 2016). Additionally, the superiority theory posits that humor arising from the perceived shortcomings or deviant behavior of others can function as a social mechanism that reinforces group cohesion. Laughing at those who break work rules, rather than punishing them, may help maintain socialization at work. Moreover, shared amusement directed at nonconforming behavior serves to strengthen in-group solidarity and affirm collective values (Wilkins & Eisenbraun, 2009). Generally, positive humor increases performance (D. Cheng & Wang, 2015; E. Romero & Pescosolido, 2008), enhances communication among co-workers and between employees and supervisors (Greatbatch & Clark, 2003; Heiss & Carmack, 2012), and enriches co-workers’ relationships (Jarzabkowski & Lê, 2017; Pundt & Herrmann, 2015; Yam et al., 2017). This has led to calls to use humor more frequently in workplaces and training programs (Gostick & Christopher, 2010; McGhee, 2010) to overcome problems such as work–family conflict.

Work–family conflict (WFC) can be conceptualized as a form of inter-role struggle that exists when the energy, time, or behavioral “demands” of the workplace conflict with family roles (Colombo & Ghislieri, 2008). WFC is gaining significance in society as it influences work, non-work, and personal life outcomes, such as productivity, turnover, family well-being, health, and stress (Kossek & Lee, 2017).

Additionally, positive humor makes light of a stressful situation and helps people feel better and think more positively about a problematic situation (Abel, 2002; Martin & Ford, 2018). It can be used to explain a situation playfully and amusingly so that the expected harm looks less severe than when initially perceived (Warren & McGraw, 2016). Accordingly, humor has the ability to minimize a threat (Warren & McGraw, 2015). Thus, positive humor can be employed successfully to mitigate the stress a person experiences due to work–family conflict. It minimizes the threat, permitting employees to reappraise their circumstances and take back control.

In this context, the ability to interpret any WFC through humor enables an individual to realize that they can resolve the situation, easing the tension they experience. When individuals use positive humor to assist them in coping, they commonly discover something about the stressor or the condition to laugh about (Abel, 2002), which requires them to reappraise the stressor as less threatening, thus relieving any stress encountered in the future. Hence, we propose the following:

H1. 

Leaders’ positive humor (LPH) is negatively associated with work–family conflict (WFC).

2.3. Leaders’ Positive Humor (LPH) and Coworker Socializing (CWS)

Tews et al. (2014) described three main connected types of workplace fun: (1) fun practices, (2) coworker socialization, and (3) support from the manager for fun. Fun practices are social activities that are organized by the company to bring joy to staff. Coworker socialization describes coworkers who are amiable, sociable, and extroverted. Support from the manager for fun is recognized as leaders motivating workers to appreciate themselves at work, which, to a certain extent, suggests that workplace fun is facilitated at the corporate level.

Workplace humor, which can lead to colleague socializing and leader support for fun, was shown to assist hotel staff in developing confidence and promoting positive mutual interactions between the organization and employees, allowing them to respond to conflicts in a helpful manner. This mechanism of interaction leads to better organization within the workplace (Chen & Ayoun, 2019). Hotel employees’ positive humor can positively influence their perception of their supervisors’ approval of fun activities and coworker socializing. This aligns with previous research that found that employing affiliative humor in the workplace can unite workers and reinforce team cohesion (Holmes, 2006; Martin et al., 2003). Furthermore, affiliative humor might have a positive influence on coworker relationships (Gully et al., 1995). Conversely, E. J. Romero and Arendt (2011) found that aggressive humor is negatively correlated with coworker satisfaction and cooperation among teams. Similarly, Chen and Ayoun (2019) argued that employees’ might use aggressive humor at work, which is negatively associated with their perception of supervisor support for fun and coworker socializing.

As employees repeatedly interact with their co-workers and leaders, positive humor can strengthen the ties between peers at a workplace, generating more support for fun from the manager and increasing interaction among co-workers (McDowell & Ashworth, 2004). Socializing with coworkers facilitates the development of friendships and yields a source of social contact and support (Tews et al., 2014). Deep relationships among coworkers causes employees to feel connected to their company and anticipate greater feelings of sacrifice if they depart from their current job (Chen & Ayoun, 2019). Additionally, leaders’ positive humor can also facilitate workplace socialization between newcomers and established members, maintaining a social structure and positive atmosphere (Mak et al., 2012). While individuals may seek a range of attributes in friends and romantic partners, a good sense of humor consistently ranks among the most highly valued traits. Humor and shared laughter serve as important mechanisms for fostering social bonds, enhancing interpersonal attraction, and facilitating connection (Treger et al., 2013). Accordingly, the use of humor in leadership may contribute to cultivating a more socially cohesive and supportive work environment across the entire organizational structure. Considering this, we propose the following:

H2. 

Leaders’ positive humor (LPH) is positively associated with coworker socializing (CWS).

2.4. Coworker Socializing (CWS) and Work–Family Conflict (WFC)

Work–family conflict is conceptualized as “a form of inter-role conflict in which the role pressures from the work and family domains are incompatible in some respect. That is, participation in the work (family) role is made more difficult by virtue of participation in the family (work) role” (Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985). WFC can have a dramatic adverse influence on corporate productivity. Consequently, associations are adopting initiatives that strive to assist workers in reaching a balance between work and family obligations, such as cultivating a family-friendly work culture and establishing supportive supervisors (Mesmer-Magnus & Viswesvaran, 2009).

Coworkers have a distinctive opportunity to provide family-facilitative support as they can comprehend the nature of their fellow workers’ stressors. Additionally, with the aggregate prevalence of team-based corporate structures, coworkers are better equipped to provide important emotional support to coworkers who are struggling to balance conflicting work and family demands (Mesmer-Magnus et al., 2010).

While work–family challenges in the tourism sector have attracted attention, being an important issue for all stakeholders (Kim et al., 2023), the industry still has longstanding challenges, such as the extreme, extended, and unconventional workloads (Yavas et al., 2008). An absence of support in the workplace causes employees to neglect family requirements, preventing tourism employees from creating a successful balance between their work and family life (Fotiadis et al., 2019). Due to a lack of sensitivity regarding the demands on employees regarding their family lives, the impact on employees’ quality of life has been adverse (Zhao et al., 2020). To improve employees’ quality of life and well-being, scholars have increasingly raised awareness of the need for appropriate work–family support. Work–family supports are conceptualized as “discretionary and formal organizational policies, services, and benefits aimed at reducing employees’ work-family conflict and/or supporting their family roles outside of the workplace” (Zhao et al., 2020).

Hospitality studies have gradually become aware of the significance of balancing employees’ work–family lives. The research has shown increasing interest in work–family conflict (O’Neill & Follmer, 2020; Zhao et al., 2020). More specifically, workplace supports (i.e., leader support and a supportive corporate climate) have been continually highlighted as being important in decreasing work–family- and family–work-related conflict (J.-C. Cheng & O-Yang, 2018; Dai et al., 2016; García-Cabrera et al., 2018; Karatepe & Kilic, 2009).

Ismail et al.’s (2010) study found that a co-worker’s social support network partially moderates the relationship between work stress and work–family conflict. Employees in the studied organization declared that the willingness of co-workers to help each other increased their ability to cope with stress. This may decrease the extent to which their job interferes with their family affairs and decrease work–family conflict.

While much of the current literature about coworker support mitigating work–family conflict (WFC) has focused on areas such as emotional support, another instrumental form of support, practical assistance with work-related official tasks, is increasingly being shown as important in assisting staff with managing competing demands. Coworkers often provide an immediately accessible source of assistance in day-to-day workplace obligations, especially when staff are under severe pressure from both work and family responsibilities (Mesmer-Magnus et al., 2010).

Given that corporate operations are sociotechnical systems, the corporate social environment, of which coworkers are a fundamental part, play a fundamental role in reshaping staff experiences. Coworker support has progressively been identified as a valuable resource for staff striving to strike a balance between their professional and personal obligations (Anderson et al., 2002; Elshaer et al., 2024b). In this context, social support can take the form of emotional support or tangible support and has been roughly defined as “the availability of helping relationships and the quality of those relationships” (Lapierre & Allen, 2006). Lapierre and Allen (2006) similarly highlighted that both instrumental and emotional support are connected dimensions of this interpersonal dynamic (Leavy, 1983).

Furthermore, a supportive organizational climate that promotes coworker socialization (CWS) can be a form of perceived organizational support (POS). POS reflects employees’ beliefs regarding how much their employer values their contributions, cares about their well-being, and supports their emotional and social needs by providing resources that can help them manage the demands of their role (Eisenberger et al., 1986). This notion extends to family-supportive organizational perceptions (FSOP), which refer to the degree to which employees perceive their organization as supportive of their family responsibilities (Allen, 2001). Organizations that are perceived as family-supportive demonstrate concern for employees’ ability to perform both their work and family roles effectively and cultivate a social environment (CWS) in which employees feel they do not have to compromise their family roles to meet demands and can share work–family concerns (Kossek et al., 2011). Looking at this theoretical background and empirical results, the current study formulated its hypotheses by investigating the intersections between leader psychological health (LPH), work–family conflict (WFC), and coworker support (CWS). The hypotheses are grounded in previous research that highlighted the direct relationship between LPH and WFC, and WFC and CWS, and the mutual relationship between CWS and WFC.

H3. 

Coworker socializing (CWS) is negatively associated with work–family conflict (WFC).

H4. 

Coworker socializing (CWS) is expected to mediate the relationship between leaders’ positive humor (LPH) and work–family conflict (WFC).

2.5. Sensitivity to Favorable Interpersonal Treatment (SFIT) as a Moderator

According to the contingency perspective of leadership, leadership is a socially constructed process that must be understood within the context in which it occurs. Follower characteristics are among the key contextual factors (Wu et al., 2013). Similarly, the person–environment interaction theory suggests that individual psychological attributes affect subjective well-being more than external environmental conditions (J. Wan et al., 2024). Therefore, employees’ sensitivity to interpersonal relationships within the workplace represents a critical contextual factor influencing their evaluation of leaders’ behaviors. SFIT reflects employees’ sensitivity to the quality and harmony of positive interpersonal relationships and social exchanges within the workplace (Bunk & Magley, 2011).

Prior studies have emphasized the importance of examining SFIT’s role in shaping the effects of leadership humor in the workplace, particularly how subordinates perceive and react to it (Wu et al., 2020). In this context, as recipients of humor signals, employees’ personal differences shape their perception of this humor, affecting their evaluation of leader behaviors. Followers with high SFIT are likelier to perceive their leaders’ humor as benevolent, promoting a prosocial workplace atmosphere (Peng et al., 2020). Additionally, leadership involving humor is intrinsically rooted in relational dynamics. Humorous leaders strive to understand their followers’ emotional demands and motivations, and promote coworker socialization, and are more likely to have favorable and supportive relationships with their employees. This effect is particularly salient among employees with high sensitivity to favorable interpersonal treatment (SFIT), for whom humorous leadership can create a sense of interpersonal congruence. Such congruence enhances leader–follower rapport and strengthens organizational socialization (Mast et al., 2012). Accordingly, we propose the following hypothesis (see Figure 1):

H5. 

The relationship between leaders’ positive humor and coworker socializing is moderated by SFIT.

3. Methodology and Measurement

3.1. Instrument and Measures

This study employed a structured questionnaire with two sections: the first gathered key demographic information from participants, while the second measured the study’s constructs (see Appendix A). Leaders’ positive humor (LPH) was assessed using five items adapted from the Positive Supervisor Humor Scale developed by Decker and Rotondo (2001). Employees responded to statements such as “My supervisor uses humor to communicate information.” Five (5) items from Boles et al. (2001) were used to gauge work–family conflict (WFC). An example item is as follows: “My job produces strain that to hard to fulfil family duties.” The mediating variable (coworker socializing (CWS)) was measured using four items borrowed from Tews et al. (2014). A sample item is as follows: “My coworkers and I socialize outside of work.” Finally, four items developed by Bunk and Magley (2011) were used to assess sensitivity to favorable interpersonal treatment (SFIT). A sample item is as follows: “If my supervisor appreciates my co-workers’ hard work, it stays on my mind.” Except for demographic items, all survey questions were measured using a five-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (“strongly disagree”) to 5 (“strongly agree”). To ensure content validity, the questionnaire was thoroughly evaluated by 17 academic scholars and industry professionals. According to their reviews, minor changes were made to the wording of some phrases. Additionally, according to Brislin (1980), to ensure the accuracy and linguistic validity of the questionnaire, the study survey was initially developed in English and subsequently translated into Arabic by two proficient bilingual experts. A separate team of specialists then conducted a back-translation into English. The comparison between the original and the back-translated versions revealed no significant discrepancies, indicating a high level of translation equivalence.

3.2. Data Collection and the Sample

The study used convenience sampling to collect data from employees working in five-star hotels, as well as Category A travel agencies and tourist companies in Egypt. The study adopted convenience sampling to collect the data because of some practical considerations, including time constraints, cost efficiency, and ease of access to participants (Abas et al., 2024). Although worries about its representativeness and generalizability remain, this technique is effective, particularly when applied to large sample sizes. Additionally, Andrade et al. (2021) suggest that convenience sampling can produce findings that meaningfully reflect broader population trends while facilitating an efficient data collection process (Stratton, 2021). Highly rated organizations were intentionally selected, as they are typically committed to excellence and adopt modern management and leadership approaches to cultivate a socially supportive work environment that aligns with family life. This strategic orientation is intended to retain existing staff and attract outstanding talent. Data was collected during February and March 2025, and 387 employees (231 from hotels and 156 from travel agencies and tourist companies) completed the survey. All responses were considered valid, as the E-questionnaire forms contained mandatory fields for the relevant items. Participation was completely voluntary, and strict confidentiality was maintained regarding all responses and personal data. The survey link was initially distributed to managers at the selected organizations, who subsequently conveyed it to their employees. The sample comprised 212 (54.8%) males and 175 (45.2%) females. The prevalent age group was less than 25 years (43.4%), followed by 25 up to 35 years (33.3%). Regarding education, 55.6% of participants held a bachelor’s degree, while 18.1% had a doctorate.

3.3. Data Analysis

SmartPLS v3.0’s PLS-SEM was used to test the hypothesis, and SPSS 22.0 was used to test Skewness, Kurtosis, mean, and standard deviation. The PLS-SEM represents a relatively recent analytical advancement that offers distinct methodological advantages and has attracted increasing recognition within hospitality and tourism research (L.-H. Wang et al., 2022). Additionally, PLS-SEM is especially well-suited for analyzing complex models that include dependent, independent, mediating, and moderating variables due to its flexibility regarding sample size and minimal distributional assumptions. Regarding this study, the PLS is reasonable over CB-SEM because the investigation aims to predict one or more variables rather than to validate an existing theoretical framework, which implies expanding an “existing structural theory” (Hair et al., 2011). The PLS-SEM procedure involves two primary stages: assessment of the measurement model and evaluation of the structural model (Hair et al., 2017).

4. Results

4.1. Tests of Common Method Bias (CMB) and Normality

Harman’s single-factor test was conducted to ensure that CMB was not a significant problem. The analysis demonstrated a total variance of 29.043% for a factor below 50%, meaning CMB was not an issue (Podsakoff et al., 2012). Moreover,

Table 1. Reliability and validity.

Diemsnions and Variables	Λ	[VIF]	μ	σ	SK	KU
Leaders’ positive humor (LPH) (α = 0.900; CR = 0.926; AVE = 0.715)
LPH_1	0.818 **	2.147	3.594	1.256	−0.546	−0.820
LPH_2	0.830 **	2.245	3.649	1.241	−0.625	−0.764
LPH_3	0.848 **	2.710	3.804	1.357	−0.677	−1.049
LPH_4	0.864 **	2.844	3.672	1.182	−0.723	−0.551
LPH_5	0.867 **	2.852	3.770	1.264	−0.752	−0.697
Coworker socializing (CWS) (α = 0.894; CR = 0.926; AVE = 0.759)
CWS_1	0.886 **	2.630	3.680	1.237	−0.777	−0.436
CWS_2	0.896 **	2.770	3.592	1.232	−0.740	−0.412
CWS_3	0.874 **	2.504	3.610	1.224	−0.704	−0.463
CWS_4	0.826 **	2.102	3.566	1.246	−0.482	−0.774
Work–family conflict (WFC) (α = 0.855; CR = 0.895; AVE = 0.632)
WFC_1	0.723 **	1.672	3.140	0.891	0.518	−0.087
WFC_2	0.766 **	1.975	3.165	0.884	0.418	−0.292
WFC_3	0.819 **	2.158	3.088	0.994	0.381	−0.712
WFC_4	0.837 **	2.229	3.142	1.004	0.360	−0.523
WFC_5	0.821 **	2.146	3.266	1.012	0.246	−0.576
Sensitivity to favorable interpersonal treatment (SFIT) (α = 0.866; CR = 0.908; AVE = 0.713)
SFIT_1	0.850 **	2.360	3.623	1.144	−0.633	−0.268
SFIT_2	0.892 **	2.578	3.667	1.134	−0.659	−0.136
SFIT_3	0.862 **	2.134	3.685	1.169	−0.755	−0.082
SFIT_4	0.768 **	1.670	3.628	1.249	−0.630	−0.510

Note: SK = skewness; KU = kurtosis; μ: mean, σ: standard deviation; Λ: factor loadings; α: coefficient alpha; CR: construct reliability (CR); AVE: the average variance extracted; **: p < 0.01.

contains no multicollinearity matter because all VIF values varied from 1.670 to 2.852, below the cut-off of 5.0 (Hair et al., 2019). Further, kurtosis and skewness were tested to assess the normality of the data. The kurtosis and skewness scores for all items were below the suggested values of 2.1 and 7.1 (Curran et al., 1996), as portrayed in Table 1, displaying that non-normality was not a problem (skewness values ranged from −0.777 to 0.518, and kurtosis values ranged from −1.049 to −0.082).

4.2. Reliability and Validity

Hair et al. (2019) suggested some criteria to evaluate the “convergent validity” (CV) in PLS-SEM measurement, including factor loadings (λ) (ranging from 0.723 to 0.896), coefficient alpha (α) (ranging from 0.855 to 0.900), and construct reliability (CR) (ranging between 0.895 and 0.926). The recommended threshold for these indicators is ≥0.70, while the average variance extracted (AVE) (ranged from 0.632 to 0.759) should be ≥0.50. As presented in Table 1, the measurement model met all the necessary conditions for an adequate CV, thereby validating the consistency of the internal model and the reliability of responses to items associated with the same construct.

Further,

Table 2. Discriminant validity.

	Fornell–Larcker Criterion				HTMT Matrix
	CWS	LPH	SFIT	WFC	CWS	LPH	SFIT	WFC
Coworker socializing (CWS)	0.871
Leaders’ positive humor (LPH)	0.370	0.846			0.408
Sensitivity to favorable interpersonal treatment (SFIT)	0.320	−0.001	0.844		0.357	0.039
Work–family conflict (WFC)	−0.431	−0.305	−0.219	0.795	0.479	0.337	0.247

establishes that AVEs should surpass the subsequent squared inter-dimensions correlations, consequently approving the discriminant validity (DV) (Fornell & Larcker, 1981). Moreover, some studies advised looking at the HTMT test to validate the DV. Table 2 also states that the DV is acceptable as the HTMTs are < 0.90 (Gold et al., 2001).

4.3. Structural Model and Testing Hypotheses

The structural model was validated by measuring beta coefficients (β), R², and Q². According to (Cohen, 2013), in the context of social and behavioral sciences, an R² value of approximately 0.02 indicates a small effect size, 0.13 reflects a medium effect, and 0.26 or higher represents a large effect. β must be significant and the Q² results must be >0.0 (Hair et al., 2019). As depicted in

Table 3. Results for each hypotheses.

Hypothesis	β		t		p	F2		Results
Direct effects
H1: LPH → WFC	−0.169		2.871		0.004	0.031		✔
H2: LPH → CWS	0.389		7.796		0.000	0.203		✔
H3: CWS → WFC	−0.369		5.872		0.000	0.149		✔
Indirect mediating effect
H4: LPH → CWS → WFC	−0.144		5.074		0.000			✔
Moderating effect					Confidence Intervals
					2.5%		97.5%
H5: LPH × SFIT → CWS	−0.202		−0.091		0.007	−0.202	−0.091	✔
Coworker socializing	R2	0.263	Q2	0.187
Work to family conflict	R2	0.210	Q2	0.120

Note: Leaders’ positive humor = LPH; coworker socializing = CWS; work–family conflict = WFC; sensitivity to favorable interpersonal treatment = SFIT; ✔ = supported.

, the R² and Q² values demonstrate acceptable predictive relevance. Coworker socializing (CWS) (R² = 0.263; Q² = 0.187) shows acceptable explanatory and predictive power, followed by Work–Family Conflict (WFC) (R² = 0.210; Q² = 0.120). Additionally, β values were significant at 0.0, as shown in Table 3. Furthermore, the current study evaluates the model’s GoF by examining the discrepancies between the observed and predicted correlations using “the Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR).” Hu and Bentler (1998) indicated that an SRMR < 0.08 implies an acceptable model fit. Our model’s SRMR value is 0.054, implying a satisfactory GoF. Moreover, Following Cohen’s (1992) guidelines, effect sizes were categorized as small (f² ≥ 0.02), medium (f² ≥ 0.15), and large (f² ≥ 0.35). As depicted in Table 3, the effect sizes of our study’s endogenous constructs ranged from small to medium.

Table 3 and Figure 2 show that LPH is significantly and negatively associated with WFC (β = −0.169, p = 0.004, t = 2.871, f² = 0.031), and is positively associated with CWS (β = 0.389, p < 0.001, t = 7.796, f² = 0.203). These results support H1 and H2. In addition, CWS is negatively associated with WFC (β = −0.369, p < 0.001, t = 5.872, f² = 0.149), supporting H3. The mediation analysis also indicates that CWS significantly mediates the association between LPH and WFC (β = −0.144, t = 5.074, p < 0.001), providing support for H4. The Variance Accounted For (VAF) was calculated to assess the strength of the mediation effect (Hair et al., 2014). A VAF value exceeding 80% indicates full mediation, a value between 20% and 80% suggests partial mediation, and a value below 20% implies no mediation. In this study, the VAF for LPH was 46%, which falls within the range indicating partial mediation (Hair et al., 2014). This result confirms that CWS partially mediates the relationship between LPH and WFC. Additionally, the bootstrapped indirect effect (mediation effect) of LPH on WFC via CWS was −0.144. The confidence interval ranged from −0.202 to −0.09. The mediation effect is considered statistically significant because this interval does not include zero (Hayes, 2018).

Finally, the moderating examination presented in Figure 3 shows that SFIT significantly moderates—through strengthening—the relationship between LPH and CWS (β = 0.138, t = 2.693, p = 0.007), proving H5.

5. Discussion and Theoretical Implications

The Egyptian cultural context is notably characterized by a strong inclination toward humor, which is often employed as a means of communication and a social lubricant in interpersonal interactions. This cultural trait—reflected in the common reference to Egyptians as having a natural sense of wit (“ibn nokta”)—suggests that the use of humor as a leadership strategy may be particularly well-received and effective in the Egyptian hospitality sector (Fayyad, 2020). Therefore, leveraging positive leader humor within this cultural framework may significantly enhance workplace relationships, employee morale, and the overall organizational climate.

The study’s results showed that leaders’ positive humor (LPH) is negatively correlated with work–family conflict (WFC) (H1). This result agrees with the studies of McGraw and Warren (2010) and Abel (2002). The negative connection between leaders’ positive humor (LPH) and work–family conflict (WFC) shows that humor can be a great way to ease stress and enhance work–life balance. This is due to humor’s ability to act as a stress buffer, helping employees manage work pressures and preventing those stresses from spilling over into their family lives. In the context of the tourism and hospitality industry, the negative impact of leaders’ positive humor on work–family conflict can have important effects, enhancing employee performance, fostering a positive work environment, motivating employees to provide exceptional customer service, improving mental well-being and retention rates, and ensuring a more stable and productive workforce. This provides benefits for an organization, such as higher employee engagement, better customer service, and a more positive work environment.

Moreover, the research findings indicate that leaders’ positive humor (LPH) is positively associated with coworker socializing (CWS) (H2), a finding consistent with that of Cooper et al. (2018) and Goswami et al. (2016). The favorable relationship between a leader’s positive humor (LPH) and coworker socializing (CWS) stresses the significance of organizational social support in the hotel workplace. This result confirms that hotel leaders use positive humor as a leadership mechanism, building a sense of friendship and socializing among coworkers’. This can lead to many great benefits, such as enhanced teamwork, increased social support, improved communication, and increased moral (Yuan et al., 2023). The positive influence of these concepts may have consequences in tourism and hospitality organizations through improving employee well-being, providing a better customer experience, and creating a supportive environment of collaboration and innovation, which will help to enhance coworker socializing as well as increasing the quality of service and customer satisfaction in such high-pressure industries.

Concerning (H3), the data showed that the study found a negative relationship between coworker socializing (CWS) and work–family conflict (WFC). This result is in line with the results obtained by Mesmer-Magnus and Viswesvaran (2009) and M. Wan et al. (2022). The negative connection between coworker socializing (CWS) and work–family conflict (WFC) implies that a supportive work environment can mitigate the conflict between work and family responsibilities. This finding can be attributed to several factors. The first is emotional support: coworkers can provide emotional support, helping employees cope with stress and pressure within the workplace, which can reduce the likelihood of work–family conflict. In addition, coworkers can offer practical assistance, such as covering tasks or providing advice, which can help employees manage work demands and reduce the impact on their family life. Additionally, coworkers can provide a sense of community: a supportive work environment can foster a sense of community, reduce feelings of isolation, and increase employees’ sense of belonging, which can help mitigate work–family conflict. CWS can also act as a buffer against work-related stress, reducing the negative spillover into family life and minimizing the conflict between work and family responsibilities (Mesmer-Magnus & Viswesvaran, 2009). The negative impact of coworker socializing on work–family conflict in the tourism and hospitality industry implies that coworker socializing helps reduce work–family conflict by fostering a supportive and enjoyable work environment in the tourism and hospitality sector. This social interaction boosts psychological well-being and provides emotional resources that enable employees to better cope with their work and family demands. As a result, organizations benefit from higher employee satisfaction, lower turnover, and improved service quality.

Regarding the fourth hypothesis, the study results proved that coworker socializing mediates the relationship between leaders’ positive humor and work–family conflict (H4). Sensitivity to favorable interpersonal treatment (SFIT) influences the connection between leader personality traits (LPH) and employee creativity (CWS), highlighting how vital individual differences are to the effectiveness of leader humor. Managers must recognize these differences and tailor their humor to fit their employees’ needs. By doing this, they can foster a more supportive and collaborative workplace that benefits their staff and the organization. Coworker socializing mediates the relationship between leaders’ positive humor and work–family conflict by fostering a more supportive and positive work environment, which can reduce the negative spillover from work to home life (M. Wan et al., 2022). When leaders use positive humor, it encourages social interaction and camaraderie among coworkers, enhancing social support and buffering employees against work stress, as well as decreasing work–family conflict (L. Tan et al., 2022). Therefore, the mediating role of coworker socializing suggests that leaders’ positive humor is most effective in reducing work–family conflict when it is accompanied by strong coworker relationships and social support.

As for the last hypothesis, the study’s findings demonstrated that sensitivity to favorable interpersonal treatment (SFIT) moderates the relationship between leaders’ positive humor and coworker socializing (H5). This outcome is consistent with a number of investigations carried out by various academics, including (Wu et al., 2020), (Montoya-Pérez et al., 2024), and (Wu et al., 2013). This finding indicates that the success of LPH in encouraging CWS really hinges on individual differences in SFIT. This result underscores the need to take employee traits into account when crafting leadership approaches. The finding implies that, in the tourism and hospitality industry, employees who are more sensitive to favorable interpersonal treatment (SFIT) respond more positively to leaders’ use of positive humor, which in turn enhances socializing among coworkers. This means that leader humor is especially effective at fostering teamwork and a supportive atmosphere when staff are attuned to positive social cues. Managers should recognize individual differences in SFIT and use positive humor strategically to foster stronger, more collaborative teams. Egyptians are renowned for their deep appreciation of humor in all aspects of life, including jokes, satire, wordplay, and everyday wit. This is strongly reflected in the nature of Colloquial Egyptian Arabic, which is often described as especially conducive to humorous expression. Several cultural and sociolinguistic studies have observed that Egyptians demonstrate a pronounced receptivity to comedic content and satirical commentary, positioning humor as a salient and enduring feature of Egyptian social interaction and communication (Helmy & Frerichs, 2013). Accordingly, hotel leaders can leverage these traits in their Egyptian employees to implement humor-based leadership practices and foster a more positive and socially supportive work environment, alleviating workplace stress. In turn, this can contribute to an improved work–life balance.

6. Practical Implications

This research expands our knowledge of the relationship between leaders’ positive humor (LPH), work–family conflict (WFC), coworker socializing (CWS), and sensitivity to favorable interpersonal treatment (SFIT) in the tourism and hospitality industry in relation to a specific workplace task: the work of tourism and hospitality. Leading with positive humor may contribute to reduced stress levels and bonding with coworkers, and ultimately reduce work–family conflict through reframing stressors and reducing the depressant effects of stress in workers’ lives. In addition, due to the mediation effect of CWS, the facilitative role of positive humor in tourism and hospitality may indirectly reduce work–family conflict through increasing supportive co-worker relations.

Practically, tourism and hospitality organizations may benefit from training leaders in affiliative humor (i.e., self-enhancing or inclusive humor) to encourage trust and reduce WFC (Neves & Karagonlar, 2020). Leadership development programs and workshops should focus on teaching leaders to use humor effectively to enhance team cohesion and reduce workplace stress, while organizations can promote CWS through structured team-building activities, mentorship, and informal gatherings (Hart, 2016). Combining humor elements in health programs, such as comedy clubs, and providing personalized work options are considered “holistic” approaches to resolving WFC (Savage et al., 2017).

The study results suggest that LPH can improve the workplace environment by boosting employee engagement and mental well-being and alleviating stress by encouraging supportive relationships among coworkers (CWS). Thus, designing leadership training on employing humor as a strategic relational and motivational mechanism is essential. Such training should also consider individual and cultural differences in the perception and acceptance of humor to ensure its appropriateness and effectiveness across diverse workplace contexts. These approaches may bring a variety of opportunities: LPH supports a positive work culture that moves employees to provide excellent customer service and engage in organizational citizenship behaviors that lead to positive interactions with guests and the success of the organization itself. By applying CWS, LPH facilitates supportive networks that can best promote mental health and reduce stress, in addition to increasing retention by ensuring a highly functioning workforce. It is also clear that LPH significantly improves leadership by establishing trust and collaboration, and humor assessments during recruitment could identify leaders who are intrinsically attuned to this method of leading, providing organizations with a competitive advantage in terms of innovation and customer loyalty.

Using LPH in the workplace can elevate employee energy and motivation, ultimately enhancing customer service and proactive customer-focused behaviors. The influence of LPH is greater when applied to employees with high sensitivity to favorable interpersonal treatment (SFIT), so it is important for managers to adapt their humor, communication, and managerial style to their individual employees’ preferences and cultural backgrounds. By strategically using LPH, tourism and hospitality organizations can develop a more engaged, collaborative, and high-performing workforce that enhances overall satisfaction levels for guests and improves business outcomes.

In conclusion, applying LPH can offer tourism and hospitality organizations a competitive advantage in three important ways: it can increase employee health and wellness, improve customer experiences, and facilitate collaboration and innovation among and within organizations. With the careful implementation of these practices, organizations can effectively prosper in an industry in which humans are fundamental to success.

7. Limitations and Future Research

While this study sheds light on the connections between leaders’ positive humor (LPH), work–family Conflict (WFC), coworker socializing (CWS), and sensitivity to favorable interpersonal treatment (SFIT) within the Egyptian tourism sector, there are a few limitations and alternative explanations that we should keep in mind. One key limitation is that our research is geographically focused, which might not reflect the dynamics of other cultures or industries. Future studies could delve into these relationships in other major tourism destinations in the MENA region or even further afield, enhancing the overall applicability of the findings. Given the cultural variability in the perception of humor, future research is encouraged to draw on Hofstede’s cultural dimensions theory (Hofstede, 1980) to better understand when and how humor can be effectively employed as a leadership strategy in hotel management across different cultural contexts. It would also be beneficial to conduct longitudinal studies to see how leader humor impacts employee well-being and work–life balance over time. Additionally, while this study operates PLS-SEM due to its suitability for complicated models and prediction-oriented purposes, future research may consider applying CB-SEM to validate the model using covariance-based approaches and to enable a more rigorous evaluation of model fit indices. Regarding the study sample, the use of the convenience sampling method was one key limitation because the findings were limited in generalizability. Future research should adopt other rigorous sampling methods, such as stratified or random sampling, to overcome these concerns. This study leans on self-reported measures, which can sometimes be influenced by social desirability bias. To strengthen future research, it might be helpful to include more objective measures or gather data from multiple sources to back up the findings

8. Conclusions

This study highlights how leaders’ positive humor (LPH) plays a crucial role in creating a healthier and more collaborative work environment. By easing work–family conflict (WFC) through coworker socializing (CWS), LPH helps build trust, foster closeness, and improve work–life balance. The research also points out the important role of sensitivity to favorable interpersonal treatment (SFIT), indicating that how employees respond to positive social cues can affect how effective LPH is. In summary, this research emphasizes the importance of positive humor as a leadership strategy for boosting employee well-being and promoting harmony in the workplace.