Workplace spirituality as a mediator between ethical climate and workplace deviant behavior

International Journal of Hospitality Management xxx (xxxx) xxxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Hospitality Management journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijhm

Workplace spirituality as a mediator between ethical climate and workplace deviant behavior Kavitha Haldoraia, Woo Gon Kima, Howook (Sean) Changb, Jun (Justin) Lic,

⁎

a

International Center for Hospitality Research & Development, Dedman School of Hospitality, Florida State University, 288 Champions Way, UCB 4117, P.O. Box 3062541, Tallahassee, FL, 32306, United States b Chaplin School of Hospitality & Tourism Management, Florida International University, 3000 N.E. 151st St., North Miami, FL, 33181-3000, United States c School of Tourism Management, South China Normal University, Higher Education Mega Center, Guangzhou, 510006, China

A R T I C LE I N FO

A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Ethical climate Organizational citizenship behavior Organizational justice Workplace deviant behavior Workplace spirituality Hotel employees India

This study investigates workplace spirituality as a mediator between organizational justice/ethical climate and workplace deviant behavior/organizational citizenship behavior. Data was collected from 641 Indian employees employed at economy to luxury hotels. Workplace spirituality mediated organizational justice-organizational citizenship behavior link and ethical climate-workplace deviant behavior link. The implications can help hospitality professionals in creating an ethical work environment that embraces justice and spirituality for the wellbeing of employees, the organization, and the community at large. Hospitality managers can cultivate workplace spirituality by adopting a humanistic work environment. Hotel employers can give their employees the freedom to bring their physical, emotional, intellectual, and spiritual attributes to the workplace so that employees can realize the meaning and purpose of their work and their full potential as a person. The results can also aid hospitality professionals in formulating new policies by embracing spiritually sensitive services. The limitations and directions for future research are outlined.

1. Introduction In recent years, workplace spirituality has gained prominence because it promotes a positive psychological environment for employees. The demographic shift in the workforce is changing the shape of the workplace and posing challenges to HR professionals in terms of recruitment, training, and managing people. Organizations are facing higher levels of job dissatisfaction and stress, leading to mental exhaustion, workplace aggression, and incivility behavior. These issues have led to the emergence of a new management practice called workplace spirituality that helps in balancing different aspects of employees’ lives and the organization. Workplace spirituality is an underexplored area in the hospitality industry. There are limited studies that focus on workplace spirituality in the hospitality industry (Milliman et al., 2018; Rezapouraghdam et al., 2018). Most of the previous research on workplace spirituality was carried out in hospital settings and accounting firms and focused on the outcomes of workplace spirituality, including organizational performance and job satisfaction (Belwalkar et al., 2018), employee engagement (Tepper, 2003), and organizational citizenship behavior (Rego et al., 2010). In this study, the aim is to empirically test organizational justice and

⁎

ethical climate as the antecedents of workplace spirituality and the mediating effects of spirituality in the workplace on deviant workplace behavior and organizational citizenship behavior among hotel employees. While most of the studies focused on the outcomes of workplace spirituality, to the authors’ knowledge, no research has previously empirically tested the predictors of workplace spirituality in the hospitality setting. Secondly, the hospitality industry faces deviant workplace behavior in the form of anti-service behavior, service sabotage and hiding customer complaints (Harris and Ogbonna, 2012), and workplace ostracism (Zhao et al., 2013). Browning (2008) found that customers’ negative attitudes and behaviors instigated front office employees to become involved in deviant acts. Since the hospitality industry heavily relies on human capital for service delivery, employees’ deviant behavior affects customer satisfaction, which in turn affects customer loyalty. The cost associated with deviant behaviors is high in the hospitality industry (Harris and Ogbonna, 2012); hence it becomes necessary to understand its predictors to curb it. This study can contribute to hospitality literature since workplace spirituality has received limited attention. The findings can help senior management of hotels cultivate spirituality in the workplace so that employees find meaning in their work, and hence, the hotels can garner

Corresponding author. Tel.: +86 20 8521 0010. E-mail address: [email protected] (J.J. Li).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2019.102372 Received 25 February 2019; Received in revised form 22 August 2019; Accepted 26 August 2019 0278-4319/ © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Please cite this article as: Kavitha Haldorai, et al., International Journal of Hospitality Management, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2019.102372

International Journal of Hospitality Management xxx (xxxx) xxxx

K. Haldorai, et al.

helped in restoring faith and developing a more balanced view about justice. Minon (2017) and Sadaghiani et al. (2012) had empirically shown that organizational justice is positively associated with workplace spirituality. Hence, the authors propose the following hypothesis:

the benefits of a highly engaged workforce and can eliminate deviant behavior. Furthermore, the findings can facilitate employees to form deeper interconnections with each other, customers, and the community.

H2. Organizational justice is positively related to workplace spirituality.

2. Literature review and hypotheses development

2.1.3. Workplace spirituality and workplace deviant behavior In a study conducted for police personnel, Adebayo et al. (2007) contended that workplace spirituality was negatively related to cynicism. Researchers have shown that organizational cynicism leads to workplace deviant behaviors (Jiang et al., 2017; Li and Chen, 2018), suggesting possible links between workplace spirituality and workplace deviant behavior. Ahmad and Omar (2014) suggested that workplace spirituality can assist employees in gauging their workplace behavior since it has the capability to act as a personal control. Hence, workplace spirituality can attenuate workplace deviant behavior. Weitz et al. (2012) also found that there was a negative association between workplace spirituality and organizational misbehavior. James et al. (2011) conducted a study among 360 respondents of school employees, and they concluded that workplace spirituality reduced counterproductive work behavior. In addition, Sulaiman and Bhatti (2013) revealed in their qualitative study that workplace spirituality would help to promote positive behavior and an environment that is deviant free in an organization. From the above discussions, it is hypothesized that:

2.1. Organizational justice, workplace spirituality and deviant behavior 2.1.1. Organizational justice and workplace deviant behavior Organizational justice is the perceived fairness in the workplace that can provide long-term benefits, such as cognitive, emotional, attitudinal, and behavioral outcomes for employees (Thornton and Rupp, 2016). Organizational justice includes distributive justice, procedural justice, and interactional justice (Niehoff and Moorman, 1993) that can contribute either separately or together to the variance in deviant behavior. Based on social exchange theory, attitudes and behaviors of employees are the result of the transactions and exchange relationships among employees and their organization (Cropanzano et al., 2001). By applying social exchange theory, one may consider workplace deviance as the consequence of an unfair treatment or unfavorable social exchange between employees and their organization. When employees believe their workplace is unfair, negative attitudes, such as dissatisfaction, mistrust, and stress, are developed. These negative attitudes then lead to deviant behaviors in the workplace affecting both individuals and the organization. Deviant behaviors may include any deliberate negative action and behavior by employees that may threaten other organizational members and violate the norms and standards of the organization. Deviant behaviors toward individuals are termed as interpersonal deviances, and those that are targeted towards organizations are termed as organizational deviances (Bennett and Robinson, 2000). Earlier studies have documented the negative relationship between justice and deviant act. For example, Sims (2010) asserted that when individuals perceived higher degrees of unfair treatment resulting in organizational injustice, workplace deviant behavior was higher. In a similar vein, Mitchell and Ambrose (2007) highlighted that when employees consider that they are not being compensated fairly and when they don’t receive fair treatment from their supervisors, they experience frustration and stress, which ultimately leads to negative behavior in the workplace. In addition, Tuzun and Kalemci (2018) conducted a study among service employees in Turkey, and they concluded that organizational justice was a significant predictor of deviant behavior. Other studies that explored the impact of organizational justice on deviant behavior have documented similar results (Demir, 2011; Thornton and Rupp, 2016). From these discussions, one can conclude that organizational justice is a strong negative predictor of workplace deviant behavior.

H3. Workplace spirituality is negatively related to deviant behavior. 2.1.4. Workplace spirituality as a mediator between organizational justice and workplace deviant behavior Workplace spirituality can act as a potential mediator between organizational justice and deviant behavior. According to Gomam et al. (2017), workplace spirituality as a mediator may redefine the condition under which justice would predict workplace deviant behavior. They suggested that when employees perceive their job to be meaningful and sacred, they tend to experience psychological ownership of their work and hence may not react negatively to the unfair practice at work, thereby resulting in lower involvement in deviant behavior. Golestanipour (2016) found justice had an indirect effect on the outcomes of organizational spirituality. Reza et al. (2010) found spirituality mediated interactional justice and employee outcomes, including commitment and job satisfaction. In addition, from the above literature, it is evident that organizational justice predicts spirituality in the workplace, and spirituality in turn is related to workplace deviant behavior. Hence, the authors assume workplace spirituality can act as a potential mediator between organizational justice and workplace deviant behavior. Furthermore, when employees perceive justice in their workplace, it enhances their psychological well-being and encourages spirituality in the workplace, which leads to improved ethical behavior, and thereby lowers involvement in deviant behavior acts. Therefore, the authors postulate the following:

H1. Organizational justice is negatively related to workplace deviant behavior. 2.1.2. Organizational justice and workplace spirituality Workplace spirituality is a multidimensional phenomenon (Petchsawang and Duchon, 2009). This study focuses on meaningful work, sense of community, and alignment with organization’s values (Milliman et al., 2003) as they surface often in workplace spirituality literature and also has a close relationship with employee work outcomes included in this study. Meaningful work reflects ‘deep sense of meaning and purpose in one’s work’ (Milliman et al., 2003, p. 429). Sense of community involves relationship and connectedness with others, and alignment with organizational value indicates the extent to which individuals believe their personal values are aligned with an organization’s purpose. In his conceptual paper, Pawar (2009) suggested procedural justice can facilitate workplace spirituality. In addition, Eisler and Montuori (2003) believed that workplace spirituality

H4. Workplace spirituality mediates the relationship between organizational justice and workplace deviant behavior. 2.2. Ethical climate, workplace spirituality and organizational citizenship behavior 2.2.1. Ethical climate and organizational citizenship behavior Ethical climate is a subset of organizational climate that specifically refers to the moral work environment. Victor and Cullen (1988) proposed nine theoretical ethical climates using a 3 × 3 matrix based on ethical criteria (principle, benevolence, and egoism) and locus of analysis (individual, local, and cosmopolitan). An ethical climate is one of the prime predictors of positive organizational outcomes. The concept 2

International Journal of Hospitality Management xxx (xxxx) xxxx

K. Haldorai, et al.

organizational outcomes, specifically, organizational citizenship behavior, has been theoretically and empirically well-documented in previous research (Rego et al., 2010; Pawar, 2009). In a study conducted by Kazemipour and Amin (2012) on 305 nurses, the authors found a positive relationship between spirituality in the workplace and citizenship behavior. They concluded that employees who are spiritual at work find meaning and purpose at work and, therefore, exhibit higher levels of citizenship behavior. Kutcher et al. (2010) found similar results, establishing the positive relationship between workplace spirituality and organizational citizenship behavior. Based on the above discussions, the authors hypothesize the following:

of ethical climate was initially put forward by Victor and Cullen (1987), and an organization’s ethical context is best conceptualized using ethical climate (Wimbush and Shepard, 1994). In addition, Wimbush and Shepard (1994) suggested that different types of ethical climates are related to different behaviors among employees. For instance, principled climate is associated with ethical behaviors, whereas egoist climate is associated with self-interest. Rosenblatt and Peled (2002) identified benevolence and principle ethical climate as the most powerful and valid predictors of organization outcomes. Peterson (2002) confirmed caring and formal climates predict employees’ behavior in the workplace. According to social exchange theory, when employees believe that they are being treated fairly, they tend to exhibit extra-role behavior because social relationship exchange develops among employees and the organization, and they tend to reciprocate their goodwill with pro-social behaviors (Moorman, 1991). An ethical climate promotes pro-social behavior and increases the presence of organizational citizenship behavior (Baker et al., 2006; Turnipseed, 2002). Leung (2008) conducted a study among employees from a Hong Kong based trading company and found that ethical climate was positively related to employees’ citizenship behavior. When employees experience a high level of ethics, there is a possibility that they will involve themselves in more citizenship behavior in return for the ethical and fair treatment they received from the organization. Similarly, in a study among 223 CEOs and 6021 employees, Shin (2012) found that ethical climate was positively associated with organizational citizenship behavior. Hence, the authors state the following:

H7. Workplace spirituality is positively related to organizational citizenship behavior. 2.2.4. Workplace spirituality as a mediator between ethical climate and organizational citizenship behavior The authors propose that ethical climate can directly impact citizenship behavior or can be mediated by other factors, such as workplace spirituality. Golestanipour (2016) found organizational spirituality mediated the relationship between ethical climate and civic virtue. When employees perceive the climate to be benevolent, they value the well-being of all employees, thus encouraging a sense of community that may manifest in the form of helping others, showing courtesy, leading to altruism and extra-role behavior. Another basis of this premise is based on the following logic: Parboteeah and Cullen (2003) demonstrated that ethical climate is positively related to spirituality in the workplace, while Golestanipour (2016) and Pawar (2009) confirmed that workplace spirituality is related to citizenship behavior. Thus, workplace spirituality serves as a connector between ethical climate and organizational citizenship behavior. Hence, the following is proposed:

H5. Ethical climate is positively related to organizational citizenship behavior. 2.2.2. Ethical climate and workplace spirituality Parboteeah and Cullen (2003) and Novalien (2017) studied the relationship between ethical climate and workplace spirituality. Parboteeah and Cullen (2003) proposed that benevolent and principle ethical climates are ‘the most conducive to foster the development of workplace spirituality’ (2003, p. 149). However, egoistic ethical climate would be the least desirable climate that facilitates the development of workplace spirituality since it stresses on gains at the expense of others. They further argued that egoistic climate will create a barrier to enhancing a sense of community. It also creates a situation that encourages alienation from many aspects of work, such as group benefits and social responsibility. Similarly, Badrinarayanan and Madhavaram (2008) posited that benevolent and principled ethical climate was positively linked to the dimensions of workplace spirituality. When moral values, beliefs, and shared norms that affect attitude and behavior of employees are nurtured, they foster the development of workplace spirituality. A caring climate promotes a concern for others (Victor and Cullen, 1987, 1988). Mutual caring promotes deep connection and relationships among employees and thus is likely to promote a sense of community. In a caring environment, employees help each other, and this environment makes them feel more valuable and connected to their work. This connection further increases their self-efficacy, thus encouraging them to find deeper meaning from their work. Principle ethical climate encourages employees to apply their personal ethics during ethical predicaments. This climate helps employees earn mutual trust and respect for each other that develop a sense of community. Making ethical decisions requires better and deeper understanding of work. Furthermore, Golestanipour (2016) and Otaye-Ebede et al. (2019) demonstrated the strong positive correlation between ethical climate and workplace spirituality. Hence, the authors hypothesize the following:

H8. Workplace spirituality mediates the positive relationship between ethical climate and organizational citizenship behavior. 2.3. Organizational justice and organizational citizenship behavior The relationship between perceptions of fairness and organizational citizenship behavior stemmed from Blau’s (1964) definition of social exchange. He purported that employees signify their relationship with an organization as a social exchange. Moorman (1991) examined the relationship between three sub dimensions of organizational justice and five sub dimensions of organizational citizenship behavior among employees from two medium-sized firms in the United States. His findings suggest that there exists a strong positive relationship between organizational justice and extra-role behavior. Employees who perceive fairness in procedures exhibit higher levels of citizenship behavior. In addition, Fahr et al. (1990) investigated the relationship between justice and citizenship behavior in a Chinese context. They found justice was strongly related to citizenship behavior. Hence, the authors state the following: H9. Organizational justice will be positively related to organizational citizenship behavior. 2.4. Ethical climate and workplace deviant behavior The relationship between ethical climate and workplace deviant behavior can be understood using Blau’s (1964) social exchange framework, which explains that social exchange is based on interpersonal behavior exchange. Organizational factors affect the attitude and behavior of employees. Among all organizational factors, scholars consider ethical climate to have a significant impact on employee behavior (Turnipseed, 2002). Also, Wimbush and Shepard (1994) proposed that

H6. Ethical climate is positively related to workplace spirituality. 2.2.3. Workplace spirituality and organizational citizenship behavior The impact of spirituality in the workplace on positive 3

International Journal of Hospitality Management xxx (xxxx) xxxx

K. Haldorai, et al.

between 95–300. The authors encouraged voluntary participation, and all participants were guaranteed anonymity. In addition, the HR directors were given sealed envelopes containing the questionnaire, a cover letter that explained the objective of the research, and a blank return envelope. In order to ensure the validity and clarity of the survey, a pretest was conducted with 40 employees to determine the effectiveness of the measurement. Based on the feedback obtained, the authors further finetuned the modified questionnaire and sent them to the HR managers. The participating hotels had two weeks to return the completed questionnaires. Data collection took place between June and September 2018. 1500 questionnaires were handed out and 711 questionnaires were received. Due to varying employee numbers in the participant hotels, the authors distributed a higher number of questionnaires to luxury and upscale hotels compared to economy and midscale hotels to ensure there was adequate representation from all the hotels. The authors eliminated 31 questionnaires due to missing information on key variables of the study. They removed 39 surveys since those respondents did not meet the criteria of full-time employed with a minimum of one-year experience. They retained 641 surveys for further analysis, yielding a response rate of 42.73%.

ethical climate is a negative predictor of counterproductive behavior. Vardi (2001) demonstrated a strong negative relationship between ethical climate and organizational misbehavior in a metal products company. Peterson (2002) found ethical climate was a negative predictor of deviant behavior. The unethical atmospheres of organizations are conducive for deviant employee behaviors. The results showed that the higher the ethical climate of a firm, the lower the deviance in behaviors exhibited by the employees. Aryati et al. (2018) further confirmed the negative relationship between ethical climate and deviant workplace behavior among civil servants. Hence, the authors postulate the following: H10. Ethical climate is negatively related to workplace deviant behavior. Furthermore, based on the above discussions, organizational justice is positively related to workplace spirituality, and workplace spirituality is positively related to organizational citizenship behavior. Similarly, ethical climate is positively related to workplace spirituality, and workplace spirituality is negatively related to deviant behavior. Hence, the following is deduced: H11. Workplace spirituality mediates the relationship organizational justice and organizational citizenship behavior.

between

H12. Workplace spirituality mediates the relationship between ethical climate and deviant behavior.

3.2. Survey structure and measures There were five sections in the questionnaire. The first section focused on workplace spirituality, organizational justice, and organizational citizenship behavior. The items in the questionnaire used a 5point Likert scale. Workplace spirituality, organizational justice, and citizenship behavior anchored between strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5). The second section dealt with deviant workplace behavior measured from never (1) to always (5). The next section, which focused on ethical climate, measured on a 5-point scale, ranging from completely false (1) to completely true (5). In the fourth section, the authors asked questions about demographic information, including gender, age, education level, years of experience, and affiliated department. The questions in the last section checked the quality of responses to ensure the responses were sincere and honest. The authors assessed organizational justice (OJ) using 20 items from Niehoff and Moorman (1993). This scale has three subsets: distributive justice (DJ) measured by five items, procedural justice (PJ) measured by six items, and interactional justice (IJ) measured by nine items. The authors assessed workplace spirituality (WS) using items from Ashmos and Duchon (2000) and Milliman et al. (2003). The three dimensions of workplace spirituality include the following: meaningful work (MW) with six items and alignment with organization values (AOV) with eight items from Ashmos and Duchon (2000). The authors adapted sense of community (SC) with seven items from Milliman et al. (2003). They

In sum, the proposed hypotheses are summarized in Fig. 1.

3. Methods 3.1. Data collection and participants In order to test the hypotheses, the authors collected data from various classes of hotels, ranging from economy to luxury in Coimbatore, India. Eligible respondents included full-time hotel employees with a minimum of 1-year working experience in Coimbatore, India. Coimbatore, also known as the “Manchester of South India” and “India's motorsports hub,” is the 16th largest urban agglomeration in India and the 93rd fastest growing city in the world (National Informatics Center, 2018). First, the researchers obtained the list of hotels in India from the Smith Travel Research (STR) census database. According to STR, there are 51 hotels ranging from economy to luxury in Coimbatore. Initially, invitation emails were sent to the human resource directors of these hotels. Out of 51 hotels, 38 hotels agreed to participate in the study, including one luxury hotel and one upscale. Two hotels belonged to the upper-middle class. 12 hotels belonged to the midscale, while 22 were in the economy category. The number of employees ranged between 80–345, and the number of rooms ranged

Fig. 1. Proposed model. Note: H4: Organizational justice → Workplace spirituality → Workplace deviant behavior H8: Ethical climate → Workplace spirituality → Organizational citizenship behavior H11: Organizational justice → Workplace spirituality → Organizational citizenship behavior H12: Ethical climate → Workplace spirituality → Workplace deviant behavior

4

International Journal of Hospitality Management xxx (xxxx) xxxx

K. Haldorai, et al.

0.383), deviant work behavior (1.789, 0.270), and organizational citizenship behavior (3.701, 0.638).

also adapted the 15 item benevolence and principle ethical climate (EC) scale from the study of Victor and Cullen (1987). The authors used a five-point scale, ranging from mostly false to completely true. In addition, the authors measured workplace deviant behavior (WDB) using a 19-item scale from Bennett and Robinson (2000). They anticipated that this scale would make a difference between deviant behavior directed against the organization (WDB-O), measured using 12 items, and deviant behavior against individuals at work (WDB-I), measured using seven items. Higher scores reflect higher levels of WDB. They also measured organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) using 16 items from Lee and Allen (2002). They used 8 items to measure citizenship behavior that benefited individuals (OCB-I) and 8 items to measure the behavior that indirectly benefited the organization (OCBO). Higher scores reflect higher levels of participation in extra-role behavior. Items for all scales used in the study are listed in Appendix A.

4.2. Common method bias testing Common method bias (CMB) might affect the results of this study since the authors collected data using self-reported questionnaires (Podsakoff et al., 2003). The authors used both the procedural remedy and statistical techniques to test CMB. The procedural remedy that was put in place ensured the anonymity and confidentiality of the participants to reduce social desirability bias. To statistically test for the possibility of CMB, Harman’s single factor test was performed. Following, the authors extracted five factors with eigen values of more than one. The cumulative loading was 62.49%, and the first factor loading was 19.31%. These results suggest that no serious method bias exists (Podsakoff et al., 2003). Additionally, the correlation matrix procedure proposed by Bagozzi et al. (1991) was employed. None of the correlations were substantially large, r > 0.9 (Bagozzi et al., 1991), further confirming CMB was not a serious concern in the current study.

3.3. Data analysis Data analysis for this study included descriptive statistics, an assessment of the measurement, and structural model. The descriptive statistics included the mean and standard deviation of the constructs. SmartPLS version 2 (Ringle et al., 2005) was used to analyze the data because the model has both reflective and formative constructs, and the data violated the assumption of multivariate normality. Moreover, it matches the researchers’ prediction-oriented objective. The indicators of the first order construct were reflective, and the second order constructs were formative in nature (Type II). In addition, the authors adopted repeated measure indicator approach to assess the model. Using this approach, the second-order construct was constructed by including all the items of its lower-order construct. The main advantage of adopting this approach in this study is that instead of estimating the second-order and first-order constructs separately, all the latent variables are estimated simultaneously (Becker et al., 2012).

4.3. Assessment of measurement model The psychometric properties of the questionnaire were assessed by testing for its reliability and validity. Composite reliability scores and Cronbach’s alpha was used to assess the internal consistency (Hair et al., 2010). Both scores exceeded the required threshold of 0.7, respectively (Hair et al., 2010; Nunnally, 1978). Factor loadings were used to assess the indicator reliability. Items with loadings less than 0.5 were removed (PJ6, IJ6, AOV6, AOV7, AOV8, SC1, SC3, SC5, SC6, SC7, ODB8, ODB10, ODB12, ODB14, IDB2, IDB4, IDB6 and EC11, EC12, EC13, EC14 and EC15). Looking at the figures in Table 1, it is evident that the loadings are greater than 0.5. Hence, it can be concluded that the model has met the necessary conditions for reliability. The authors assessed discriminant validity using the Fornell-Larcker criterion (Fornell and Larcker, 1981). Here, the square root of the average variance extracted (AVE) from each of the construct should be greater than its correlation with other constructs. Table 2 shows that the square root of AVE, shown along the diagonal of each of the latent variables, was higher than its correlation with the other latent variable, thus confirming that the authors achieved discriminant validity. To assess the formative second-order constructs, the authors examined issues of collinearity by employing the threshold value of the variance inflation factor (VIF) values as less than five (Hair et al., 2010). Collinearity was not an issue since the value of the VIF for all the constructs was less than five (Hair et al., 2010). In order to assess the significance of the weights of the formative constructs, the bootstrapping procedure of 1000 resamples was used. Andreev et al. (2009) recommended that greater than 0.1 weights for an indicator is significant. The weights of the indicators were above the recommended value of 0.1. The results for the formative second-order constructs are depicted in Table 3.

4. Results 4.1. Sample characteristics and descriptive statistics Out of 641 participants, 73.8% were male, and 26.2% were female respondents. In India, the percentage of women employees in the hospitality industry is less compared to other service industries, such as education. Gupta (2015) reported that in terms of gender diversity in the hospitality sector, women made up 9.1% of the workforce and men 90.9%. The average age of the respondents was 33.3 years: the minimum was 19, and the maximum was 56. 9.4% of the respondents were below 24 years, and 73.9% were 25–41 years of age. 16.7% of the respondents were above 42 years of age. According to Deloitte Insights (2017), by 2025, 75% of the Asian workforce will comprise of millennials, and 5% will be iGeneration. The age wise distribution of the respondents matches well with the projected Asian workforce distribution. The average years of experience in the current hotel organization were 3.25 years, the maximum 18 years. The participants had on average eight years of experience in the hotel industry, and the maximum was 32 years. 60.5% of the respondents were degree holders, and 13.9% had diploma qualifications. The remaining 25.6% of the respondents were post graduates. Regarding their affiliated departments, 40.7% of the respondents were from F&B service department (front-ofhouse), while 18.3% were from kitchen operations (back-of-house). 14% of the participants belonged to front office, and 15.1% were from housekeeping. The service department, including HR, accounting, marketing and sales, and engineering, accounted for 11.9%. The mean value of the second-order constructs ranged from 1.789 to 4.101, while the standard deviation fluctuated between 0.270 to 0.648 on a five-point Likert scale. The descriptive statistics (mean and standard deviation) for the constructs were organizational justice (4.101, 0.648), ethical climate (3.303, 0.873), workplace spirituality (3.589,

4.4. Hypotheses testing The results confirmed that organizational justice (OJ) was a significant negative predictor of workplace deviant behavior (WDB), with path coefficient β = −0.139 (p < .05), supporting H1. The relationship between OJ and the mediator WS was significant and positive, with path coefficient β = 0.254 (p < .05), supporting H2. WS was not significantly related to WDB, with path coefficient β = 0.008 (p = 0.669). Hence, H3 was not supported. To test the mediation effect, the bootstrapping procedure was used. If the 95% confidence interval (CI) does not include zero, then one can conclude that mediation has taken place. WS did not mediate the relationship between OJ and WDB since the indirect effect straddled zero between the lower limit confidence interval (Boot LLCI) and the upper limit confidence interval 5

International Journal of Hospitality Management xxx (xxxx) xxxx

K. Haldorai, et al.

Table 1 Results of reliability and validity. Model Construct

Measure

Measurement Items

Cronbach Alpha

Loading

Composite Reliability

AVE

Organizational Justice (OJ)

Distributive Justice (DJ)

DJ1 DJ2 DJ3 DJ4 DJ5 PJ1 PJ2 PJ3 PJ4 PJ5 IJ1 IJ2 IJ3 IJ4 IJ5 IJ7 IJ8 IJ9 EC1 EC2 EC3 EC4 EC5 EC6 EC7 EC8 EC9 EC10 MW1 MW2 MW3 MW4 MW5 MW6 SC2 SC4 AOV1 AOV2 AOV3 AOV4 AOV5 IDB1 IDB3 IDB5 IDB7 ODB9 ODB11 ODB13 ODB15 ODB16 ODB17 ODB18 ODB19 IOCB1 IOCB2 IOCB3 IOCB4 IOCB5 IOCB6 IOCB7 IOCB8 OOCB9 OOCB10 OOCB11 OOCB12 OOCB13 OOCB14 OOCB15 OOCB16

0.909

0.849 0.857 0.889 0.850 0.841 0.502 0.873 0.853 0.851 0.863 0.930 0.515 0.534 0.535 0.841 0.891 0.582 0.916 0.696 0.695 0.537 0.797 0.855 0.839 0.849 0.830 0.708 0.520 0.741 0.771 0.777 0.884 0.744 0.630 0.968 0.794 0.826 0.843 0.891 0.532 0.517 0.795 0.789 0.705 0.698 0.795 0.711 0.697 0.688 0.787 0.646 0.769 0.752 0.709 0.759 0.735 0.698 0.724 0.707 0.682 0.682 0.774 0.729 0.597 0.771 0.744 0.738 0.679 0.761

0.933

0.735

0.897

0.642

0.901

0.547

0.922

0.551

0.888

0.536

0.818

0.613

0.851

0.501

0.832

0.501

0.901

0.507

0.892

0.508

0.893

0.511

Procedural Justice (PJ)

Interactional Justice (IJ)

Benevolence and Principle Ethical Climate (EC)

–

Workplace Spirituality (WS)

Meaningful Work (MW)

Sense of Community (SC) Alignment with Organizational Values (AOV)

Workplace Deviant Behavior (WDB)

Deviant Behavior towards Individual (WDB-I)

Deviant Behavior towards Organization (WDBO)

Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB)

OCB-Individual (OCB-I)

OCB-Organization (OCB-O)

Note: AVE represents average variance extracted score.

6

0.834

0.849

0.907

0.852

0.762 0.742

0.736

0.704

0.839

0.817

International Journal of Hospitality Management xxx (xxxx) xxxx

K. Haldorai, et al.

Table 2 Fornell-Larcker Criterion.

Alignment with Organizational Value (AOV) Distributive Justice (DJ) Ethical Climate (EC) Workplace Deviant Behavior-Individual (WDB-I) Interactive Justice (IJ) Organizational Citizenship Behavior-Individual (OCB-I) Meaningful Work (MW) Workplace Deviant Behavior-Organization (WDB-O) Organization Citizenship Behavior-Organization (OCB-O) Procedural Justice (PJ) Sense of Community (SC)

AOV

DJ

EC

WDB-I

IJ

OCB-I

MW

WDB-O

OCB-O

PJ

SC

0.708 0.036 0.150 −0.023 0.029 0.040 0.108 −0.001 0.046 0.056 0.032

0.857 0.014 −0.369 0.725 0.008 0.011 −0.365 0.053 0.743 0.026

0.742 −0.030 0.001 0.011 0.122 −0.001 0.010 0.004 0.011

0.708 0.437 −0.164 0.056 0.564 0.120 0.400 −0.041

0.739 0.033 0.022 −0.449 0.082 0.709 0.009

0.713 0.031 −0.194 0.709 0.025 0.039

0.732 −0.037 0.009 0.001 0.026

0.712 −0.132 0.409 −0.005

0.715 0.033 0.042

0.789 0.019

0.783

Note: The square roots of AVE are the diagonal elements highlighted in bold. Other elements are simple bivariate correlations between the constructs.

between LLCI (0.016) and ULCI (0.109). Hence, H11 was supported. Similarly, WS also mediated the relationship between EC and WDB since the indirect effect did not straddle zero between LLCI (−0.192) and ULCI (−0.082). Hence, H12 was supported. Table 4 shows the summary of the hypotheses testing.

Table 3 Results for second-order formative constructs. Second-order construct

First-order construct

Item weights

t statistics

VIF

Organizational Justice

Distributive justice Procedural justice Interactional justice Meaningful work Sense of Community Alignment with organizational values Deviant Behavior towards Individual Deviant Behavior towards Organization OCB-Individual OCB-Organization

0.394 0.639 0.685 0.296 0.207 0.203

26.629 34.14 39.835 10.072 9.219 9.089

1.998 1.327 1.70 2.327 2.449 2.917

0.509

18.727

2.117

0.438

15.576

2.418

0.534 0.748

34.238 43.813

2.516 2.301

Workplace Spirituality

Workplace Deviant Behavior

Organizational Citizenship Behavior

5. Discussions and academic implications The authors developed the proposed model to investigate the impact of organizational justice and ethical climate on workplace deviant behavior and organizational citizenship behavior mediated through the workplace spirituality of hotel employees. This study shows that organizational justice negatively relates to workplace deviant behavior. When employees perceive there is a lack of fairness in the organization, they tend to involve themselves in deviant behaviors directed both towards individuals and the organization. When organizational justice is prevalent, employees are bonded to the organization, and they are less inclined to commit deviant acts. They develop a trust towards their organization that may decrease deviant behaviors. This relationship implies that employees will respond to fair or unfair treatment, such that their behavioral responses would be proportionate to the experiences they have had. The finding further suggests that behavior in the workplace significantly depends on employees’ judgment about fairness. This finding is in line with those of previous researchers (Aquino et al., 1999; Moorman, 1991). According to social exchange theory, employees who believe they are recipients of fair rewards and treatment are more likely to become less stressed and, hence, do not get involved in deviant behaviors. From the descriptive statistics, organizational justice has the highest mean score of 4.101. Therefore, it can be considered that the hotel employees received fair treatment, and the employees felt they were respected, valued, and treated as worthy members of the organization.

(Boot ULCI). Hence, H4 was not supported. Ethical climate (EC) had a significant and positive relationship with organizational citizenship behavior (OCB), with path coefficient β = 0.247 (p < .05), supporting H5. The positive relationship between EC and WS was also significant, β = 0.945 (p < .05), supporting H6. WS was also significantly related to OCB, β = 0.169 (p < .05). Hence, H7 was supported. WS did not mediate the positive relationship between EC and OCB since the indirect effect straddled a zero between Boot LLCI and Boot ULCI. Hence, H8 was not supported. The relationship between OJ and OCB was positive and significant, β = 0.275 (p < .05), supporting H9. It is evident that the relationship between EC and WDB was significant, with path coefficient β = −0.154 (p < .05), supporting H10. WS mediated the relationship between OJ and OCB since the indirect effect did not straddle zero

Table 4 Summary of hypotheses testing. Hypotheses

Path coefficient

t value

Decision

Direct effects H1: Organizational justice is negatively related to workplace deviant behavior H2: Organizational justice is positively related to workplace spirituality H3: Workplace spirituality is negatively related to workplace deviant behavior H5: Ethical climate is positively related to organizational citizenship behavior H6: Ethical climate is positively related to workplace spirituality H7: Workplace spirituality is positively related to organizational citizenship behavior H9: Organizational justice will be positively related to organizational citizenship behavior H10: Ethical climate is negatively related to workplace deviant behavior Indirect effects H4: Workplace spirituality mediates the negative relationship between organizational justice and workplace deviant behavior H8: Workplace spirituality mediates the positive relationship between ethical climate and organizational citizenship behavior H11: Workplace spirituality mediates the relationship between organizational justice and organizational citizenship behavior H12: Workplace spirituality mediates the relationship between ethical climate and workplace deviant behavior

−0.139 0.254 0.008 0.247 0.945 0.169 0.275 −0.154 LLCI −0.010 −0.038 0.016 −0.192

8.904 7.336 0.428 4.933 32.715 2.478 3.942 7.436 ULCI 0.009 0.321 0.109 −0.082

Supported Supported Not supported Supported Supported Supported Supported Supported Decision Not supported Not supported Supported Supported

7

International Journal of Hospitality Management xxx (xxxx) xxxx

K. Haldorai, et al.

treated ethically, they consider themselves to be a part of the organization and will try to compensate through extra-role behavior. It was proposed that ethical climate positively relates to workplace spirituality. Ethical climate promotes a concern for others. The ethical climate in the Indian hospitality industry encourages employees to have a sincere interest in the well-being of everyone, thereby promoting a sense of community. Ethical climate prevailing in the industry also facilitates people finding meaning at work. In the presence of ethical climate, employees come forward to help their colleagues with their tasks. This makes employees feel more valuable and connected to their work. Workplace spirituality also positively relates to organizational citizenship behavior. This significant relationship indicates that the hospitality employees do not consider their work merely a means to an end. Workplace spirituality motivates employees to engage in more frequent citizenship behavior by increasing the awareness of other employees’ needs and inspiring helping behaviors (Rego et al., 2010). Employees who find greater meaning and purpose from their work tend to conduct frequent acts of citizenship behavior. Although the direct relationships were significant, workplace spirituality did not mediate the relationship between ethical climate and organizational citizenship behavior. The reason could be because there are other dominant internal factors in the Indian hospitality industry that mediate the relationship between ethical climate and citizenship behavior. Factors including individual’s moral ethics, commitment, and organizational trust (Martin and Cullen, 2006) may mediate the relationship. Organizational justice positively relates to citizenship behavior, and workplace spirituality mediates this relationship. The results indicate that organizational citizenship behavior is a function of the degree to which employees feel they are treated fairly by their hotel firms. This finding is also in agreement with equity theory proposed by Adams (1963), which theorizes that employees who perceive unfairness in the organization may lower the frequency and magnitude of their extra-role behaviors, whereas employees who perceive fairness will continue to display citizenship behavior as a meaningful contribution to the organization (Moorman, 1991). Based on social exchange theory, when employees are treated fairly, they feel indebted and committed to the organization. They reciprocate by involving themselves in citizenship behaviors. The results imply that justice enhances employees’ trust in their organization, and this trust in turn leads to citizenship behavior. Similarly, workplace spirituality helped in restoring faith and developing a more balanced view about justice. The results show that employees who find intense meaning and purpose from their work will engage in repeated acts of citizenship behaviors that benefit their colleagues. The findings further provide adequate empirical support on Pawar’s (2009) conceptual study that shows that when employees have a greater meaning at and purpose to their work, they feel more connected to their colleagues. Ethical climate negatively relates to workplace deviant behavior, and workplace spirituality mediated this relationship. Based on social exchange theory, the results indicate that when an organization shows concern for employees and emphasizes ethics, the employees are less involved in deviant behaviors. The results also suggest that ethical climates that emphasize compliance to company rules, along with adherence to professional standards and the law (principle ethical climate), promote employees that are less likely to involve themselves in deviant behaviors. The findings are consistent with Peterson (2002). The results also indicate that spirituality plays a significant role in organizations and shapes employees’ attitudes and behaviors. Ethical climate promotes workplace spirituality values, thereby reducing deviant behaviors. This finding further indicates that Indian hospitality employees have significant workplace spirituality, which has visible implications for their workplace performances and attitudes towards ethical issues. This study has led to several academic implications that can contribute to hospitality literature. First, workplace spirituality is an

It also found that organizational justice positively relates to workplace spirituality. Workplace spirituality provides a setting where employees are able to realize their prime purpose in life, establish strong relationships with colleagues and others connected with the workplace, and develop an alignment between their core beliefs and the values of the organization. Workplace spirituality is about individuals seeing work as an opportunity to contribute to society in a meaningful way. As predicted, the relationship was significant. The code of conduct of the Ministry of Tourism, India is “Atithi devo bhava” (Guest is God) and aims to instil Indian traditions, culture, and ethical values in every hospitality employee and expects hospitality employees to live up to the code. When employees perceive that strong organizational justice prevails, they devote themselves to fulfilling the needs of their guests (customers). “Atithi devo bhava” can be regarded as the means by which employees contribute to society in a meaningful way. The presence of justice ensures that the interests of the employees are protected. As Pawar (2009) suggested, fair procedures have the mechanism to satisfy employees’ need for a sense of community in the workplace. The authors also postulated that workplace spirituality negatively relates to workplace deviant behavior. The presence of workplace spirituality will provide a moral foundation that will resist counterproductive behaviors. Contrary to the authors’ assumption, the relationship was not significant. Hence, workplace spirituality as a mediator of organizational justice and workplace deviant behavior was also not supported. Much of the proposed relationship between workplace spirituality and workplace deviant behavior are based on conceptual studies (Ahmad and Omar, 2014; Baharom et al., 2017; Chawla, 2014; Majeed et al., 2018; Malik and Lenka, 2018; Novalien, 2017). The relationship between workplace spirituality and workplace deviant behavior may differ for various participants across industries and also based on the research design. For instance, Sulaiman and Bhatti (2013) used the Islamic workplace spirituality and James et al. (2011) adopted the general spiritual orientation to measure workplace spirituality among academicians. They found a negative relationship between workplace spirituality and deviant behavior. On the other hand, Prasanna and Madhavaiah (2017) found positive relationship between workplace spirituality and deviant behavior in automobile manufacturing sector. Ayoun et al. (2015) found no significant relationship between workplace spirituality (spiritual transcendence scale) and ethical intention among hotel professionals. Given the mixed results for the relationship between workplace spirituality and deviant behavior and the fact that workplace spirituality research is in its formative stage (Petchsawang and McLean, 2017), this calls for further empirical evidence to understand the relationship. Further rigorous research in the future is needed to clarify the extent to which and the means by which workplace spirituality affects workplace deviant behavior. Ethical climate positively relates to organizational citizenship behavior. The prevalence of ethical climate can be a powerful force for explaining individual behavior in the Indian hospitality industry. The findings suggest that ethical climate can directly impact the extra-role behavior of hospitality employees. The current findings are similar to previous findings, indicating a positive relationship between ethical climate and organizational citizenship behavior (Baker et al., 2006; Leung, 2008; Turnipseed, 2002). The results indicate that the employees have a good understanding of the ethical climate prevailing in their firms, and hence, they put more effort into positive work behaviors as evidenced by higher levels of citizenship behavior (mean = 3.701). Ethical climate in the hospitality industry cultivated positive attitudinal outcomes among employees. The findings indicate that when employees perceive a higher degree of ethical climate within an organization, their citizenship behaviors toward other co-workers and the organization is higher. This result coincides with the positive correlation between ethical climate and extra-role behaviors. The findings further confirm that employee perceived congruence between an organization and his/her own ethical values lead to extra-role behavior. According to social exchange theory, when employees are 8

International Journal of Hospitality Management xxx (xxxx) xxxx

K. Haldorai, et al.

implications of policies and procedures. Hospitality firms should encourage supervisors to treat their subordinates equitably and with fairness so that employees are assured that justice prevails in the organization. Enhancing justice at the organizational level will lead to improved positive outcomes, such as citizenship behavior. Hospitality HR can demonstrate justice in its activities, such as employee performance appraisal, disciplinary actions, resolving employee conflicts, and employee termination to win the loyalty and commitment of its employees. Hospitality managers may cultivate workplace spirituality to create a win-win situation for employees by adopting a humanistic work environment. This change will enhance innovation, teamwork, and employee commitment (Daniel, 2010). Spirituality in the workplace can impact long-term behavioral change. Hotel employers should give their employees the freedom to bring their physical, emotional, intellectual, and spiritual attributes (wholeness) to the workplace so that employees can realize the meaning and purpose of their work and their full potential as a person. Indian hospitality firms’ HR can effectively facilitate workplace spirituality by adopting the Indian doctrine of ‘karma’ and ‘yoga’ since the national culture also affects workplace spirituality (Jurkiewicz and Giacalone, 2004). The role of ‘karma’ and ‘yoga’ in promoting workplace spirituality are explained further. The doctrine of ‘karma’ and ‘yoga’ are the fundamental beliefs of the Indian philosophy of work (Dasgupta, 1991). The word ‘karma’ means action and effects of actions. ‘Nishkam Karma’ suggests that deeds should not be performed with an attachment to the outcomes. It emphasizes that one should perform duty with utmost dedication and not for personal gains (Chakraborty and Chakraborty, 2006). This is very closely related to ‘meaningful work.’ ‘Loksangrah’ stands for ‘the unity of the world and the interconnectedness of society’ (Radhakrishnan, 1970, p. 139). It implies that the actions taken by individuals and organizations should be directed towards promoting the welfare of the society. This idea has a striking relationship with sense of community. ‘Alignment with organizational values’ dimension of workplace spirituality exists when personal values of individuals are in line with organizational values. Employees will feel they are aligned to the organization when they believe that employees in their organization have appropriate values. ‘Daivi sampat’ and ‘Asuri sampat’ indicate that one should develop ‘daivi’ work values such as- ‘fearlessness, purity, self-control, sacrifice, calmness, absence of fault finding, absence of greed, modesty, absence of envy’ (Desai, 2009, p. 166) in contrast to ‘asuri’ work that is marked by ‘egoism, delusion, personal desires, improper performance, work not oriented towards service’ (Desai, 2009, p. 167). ‘Yoga’ is a spiritual practice that leads to total transformation through self-realization (Pandey and Navare, 2018). ‘Jnana yoga’ means ‘acquiring knowledge about ultimate truth, and ‘Dhayana yoga’ means increasing ‘citta’ (inner consciousness) to understand true self. ‘Sarvadharma’, a component of ‘Karma yoga’ is a state when a person starts to appreciate the ‘interconnectedness’ and ‘interdependence’ between ‘sva’ (self) and the universe. ‘Lokasaṃgraha’ means performing actions for developing a connection between the self and the social environment (Bhawuk, 2011). These concepts are, again, the essence of workplace spirituality. By promoting workplace spirituality practices in the hospitality industry, pressure handling capabilities, and productivity, by extension, the hospitality industry can achieve improved quality of service to customers. Fostering a culture of spirituality in the workplace could help in promoting and maintaining an ethical climate. To reinforce ethical behaviors, HR can tie performance measurements and the rewards associated with them to ethical behavior. Enhancing workplace spirituality in hospitality industry may improve employees’ responsiveness and courtesy, which influences service delivery and, hence, customer satisfaction. By fostering workplace spirituality, employees may get intrinsically motivated, and they may perform to their fullest potential. Thus a spirituality centered workplace may act as a positive lever to boost employee morale and increase self-efficacy. Overall,

underexplored area in the hospitality context. This study empirically proves how hospitality managers can use workplace spirituality to attenuate negative behaviors and thus promote positive behaviors in the workplace for hospitality firms. Secondly, while most studies explored the outcomes of spirituality in the workplace, the authors empirically tested the predictors of workplace spirituality that was conceptually developed by Pawar (2009). Thirdly, while most studies neglected the nature of constructs or failed to mention it, this paper explored it a step further. The authors treated workplace spirituality as a second order formative construct (Belwalkar et al., 2018). Organizational justice was treated as a formative second order construct. Previous research modeled justice as a reflective second order construct (e.g., Judge and Colquitt, 2004), ignoring the fact that the underlying dimensions form organizational justice as suggested by Karriker et al. (2017). Citizenship behavior was also treated as a formative second order construct (Mohammad and Quoquab, 2016) with two dimensions, OCBO (citizenship behavior directed at organizations) and OCBI (citizenship behavior directed at individuals), as suggested in the seminal work of Rego et al. (2010). Similarly, this paper captures deviant behavior as a formative construct since yelling, stealing, lying, and other deviant behaviors are not interchangeable and, hence, are not reflective in nature (Tepper and Henle, 2011). Furthermore, the authors assessed the potentiality of workplace spirituality as a mediator. Besides empirically testing the predictors of workplace spirituality that was conceptually developed by Pawar (2009), this study also advances the field by empirically testing the relationship between workplace spirituality and deviant behavior in hospitality setting. Additionally, Vasconcelos (2018) suggested that workplace spirituality theory would be further enriched if there was more empirical research from countries in Africa and Asia. This study contributes to filling this gap. 6. Practical implications The hospitality industry often faces strained relationships among employees and with customers and has a high turnover, leaving employees demoralized. The hospitality industry should give attention to workplace spirituality, the formation of an ethical climate, and demonstrate justice to enhance the quality of life of employees. By doing so, employees will be able to buffer the negative impact of workplace deviant behaviors and enhance citizenship behaviors. Employers can create more functional work environments by facilitating and promoting spirituality and ethicality in the workplace. Hospitality HR managers may adopt ethical approaches that focus on benevolence and creating a principle climate to encourage employees to positively engage in their work. They can conduct regular workshops to reinforce ethical behaviors among employees. Institutionalizing ethical values in hospitality firms will encourage employees to maintain the standards. HR managers can also use simulation exercises, role plays, and videos to demonstrate the impact of deviant behaviors on employees and the organization. To provide a safe working environment, they can collect anonymous employee feedback regarding workplace deviance and ethical issues. They could also conduct periodic background checks and psychological assessments for severe deviant behaviors in employees before those behaviors significantly affect the workplace. If employees involve themselves in deviant acts due to their work environment (an uncooperative coworker, rude and impolite customers, or an unsupportive and abusive supervisor), they should put in place adequate social support and counseling services to assist employees. To establish a climate of justice, hospitality HR managers may come out with clear-cut policies and procedures and consistently apply the policies and procedures in an unbiased manner. HR should provide opportunities for employees to express their views. Hospitality HR should also make an effort to explicitly explain the job related decisions it makes and provide justification for its decisions to maximize employee outcomes. The department should openly communicate the 9

International Journal of Hospitality Management xxx (xxxx) xxxx

K. Haldorai, et al.

workplace spirituality can have a strong influence on the on-the-job conduct of employees. At the individual level, employees meaningfully engage in their work and make a difference through their unique contribution. At the group level, workplace spirituality emphasizes teamwork. Employees make their work meaningful through their relationships with coworkers and work-related community (Dik and Hill, 2012). At the organizational level, workplace spirituality results in organizational performance, including citizenship behavior. In short, the outcomes of the study are helpful to organizational development (OD) practitioners and hospitality HR professionals in creating a work culture that focuses on ethics, justice, and spirituality.

leadership to deviant workplace behavior mediated by ethical climate and organizational commitment. Manag. Law 60 (2), 233–249. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJLMA03-2017-0053. Ashmos, D.P., Duchon, D., 2000. Spirituality at work: a conceptualization and measure. J. Manag. Inq. 9 (2), 134–145. https://doi.org/10.1177/105649260092008. Ayoun, B., Rowe, L., Yassine, F., 2015. Is workplace spirituality associated with business ethics? Int. J. Contemp. Hosp. Manag. 27 (5), 938–957. https://doi.org/10.1108/ IJCHM-01-2014-0018. Badrinarayanan, V., Madhavaram, S., 2008. Workplace spirituality and the selling organization: a conceptual framework and research propositions. J. Pers. Sell. Sales Manag. 28 (4), 421–434. https://doi.org/10.2753/PSS0885-3134280406. Bagozzi, R.P., Yi, Y., Phillips, L.W., 1991. Assessing construct validity in organizational research. Adm. Sci. Q. 36 (3), 421–458. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393203. Baharom, M.N., Sharfuddin, M.D.K.B., Iqbal, J., 2017. A systematic review on the deviant workplace behavior. Rev. Public Adm. Manag. 5 (231). https://doi.org/10.4172/ 2315-7844.1000231. Baker, T.L., Tammy, G., Hunt, T.G., Andrews, M.C., 2006. Promoting ethical behavior and organizational citizenship behaviors: the influence of corporate ethical values. J. Bus. Res. 59 (7), 849–857. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2006.02.004. Becker, J.M., Kristina, K., Martin, W., 2012. Hierarchical latent variable models in PLSSEM: guidelines for using reflective-formative type models. Long Range Plann. 45, 359–394. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2012.10.001. Belwalkar, S., Vohra, V., Pandey, A., 2018. The relationship between workplace spirituality, job satisfaction and organizational citizenship behaviors-an empirical study. Soc. Responsib. J. 14 (2), 410–430. https://doi-org.proxy.lib.fsu.edu/10.1108/SRJ05-2016-0096. Bennett, R.J., Robinson, S.L., 2000. Development of a measure of workplace deviance. J. Appl. Psychol. 85 (3), 349–360. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.85.3.349. Bhawuk, D.P., 2011. Spirituality and Indian Psychology. Springer Science + Business Media, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-8110-3. Blau, P.M., 1964. Justice in social exchange. Sociol. Inq. 34 (2), 193–206. https://doi. org/10.1111/j.1475-682X.1964.tb00583.x. Browning, V., 2008. An exploratory study into deviant behaviour in the service encounter: how and why front-line employees engage in deviant behaviour. J. Manag. Organ. 14 (4), 451–471. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1833367200003205. Chakraborty, D., Chakraborty, S.K., 2006. The ‘nishkam karma’ principle: it’s relevance to effectiveness and ethics. IIMB Manag. Rev. (June), 115–125. Chawla, V., 2014. The effect of workplace spirituality on salespeople’s organizational deviant behaviours: research propositions and practical implications. J. Bus. Ind. Mark. 29 (3), 199–208. https://doi.org/10.1108/JBIM-08-2012-0134. Cropanzano, R., Byrne, Z.S., Bobocel, D.R., Rupp, D.R., 2001. Moral virtues, fairness heuristics, social entities, and other denizens of organizational justice. J. Vocat. Behav. 58, 164–209. https://doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.2001.1791. Daniel, J.L., 2010. The effect of workplace spirituality on team effectiveness. J. Manag. Dev. 29 (5), 442–456. https://doi-org.proxy.lib.fsu.edu/10.1108/ 02621711011039213. Dasgupta, S., 1991. A History of Indian Philosophy, vol. 2 Motilal Banarsidass, New Delhi. Deloitte, 2017. Meet the US Workforce of the Future: Older, More Diverse, and More Educated. Accessed from https://www2.deloitte.com/insights/us/en/deloittereview/issue-21/meet-the-us-workforce-of-the-future.html. (Accessed 23 August 2018). . Demir, M., 2011. Effects of organizational justice, trust and commitment on employees’ deviant behavior. Anatolia 22 (2), 204–221. https://doi.org/10.1080/13032917. 2011.597934. Desai, P., 2009. Spiritual psychology: a way to effective management. Afr. J. Mark. Manag. 1 (7), 165–171. Dik, B.J., Hill, P.C., 2012. Psychology of Religion and Workplace Spirituality. Information Age Publishing, Charlotte, N.C. Eisler, R., Montuori, A., 2003. The human side of spirituality. In: Giacalone, R.A., Jurkiewicz, C.L. (Eds.), Handbook of Workplace Spirituality and Organizational Performance. M. E. Sharp, Inc., New York, pp. 46–56. Fahr, J., Podsakoff, P.M., Organ, D.W., 1990. Accounting for organizational citizenship behavior: leader fairness and task scope versus satisfaction. J. Manag. 16, 705–722. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639001600404. Fornell, C., Larcker, D.F., 1981. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. J. Mark. Res. 18 (1), 39–50. https://doi.org/10. 2307/3151312. Golestanipour, M., 2016. Simple and multiple relationships between ethical leadership,transformational leadership and ethical climate and organizational spirituality among the employees of the Iran national steel industrial. Rev. Eur. Stud. 8 (2), 355–363. https://doi.org/10.5539/res.v8n2p183. Gomam, G.M., Vem, L.J., Panshak, R.G., 2017. Tetrad effect of perceived justice dimension on normative commitment, psychological ownership and organizational deviant behaviour: a conceptual framework. Int. J. Adv. Sci. Res. Dev. 4 (4), 69–84. Gupta, M., 2015. Gender equality policies in Indian hotel industry: a study of selected hotels. International Tourism and Hospitality in the Digital Age. Ringgold Inc., Beaverton, pp. 234–258. Hair Jr, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J., Anderson, R.E., 2010. Multivariate Data Analysis: A Global Perspective, 7th edition. Pearson Prentice Hall, New Jersey. Harris, L.C., Ogbonna, E., 2012. Motives for service sabotage: an empirical study of frontline workers. Serv. Ind. J. 32 (13), 2027–2046. https://doi.org/10.1080/02642069. 2011.582496. James, M.S.L., Miles, A.K., Mullins, T., 2011. The interactive effects of spirituality and trait cynicism on citizenship and counterproductive work behaviors, Journal of Management. Altern. Spiritual. Relig. Rev. 8 (2), 165–182. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 14766086.2011.581814.

7. Limitations, future research and conclusion This study is geographically limited to Coimbatore, India; the results may not be generalized. Secondly, the study is cross sectional in nature. Scholars can carry out further longitudinal research to establish causal relationships. Also, the authors conducted the study in India with Indian subjects, and Indians are conditioned by several spiritual traditions that might affect their workplace spirituality. This limitation calls for further examination to test the prepositions in different cultural settings since cultural settings play a significant role in understanding human behavior. Additional studies can test how personality factors and individual spirituality affect workplace spirituality. Additionally, future research can collect data from multiple sources to reduce CMV. To conclude, this study advances the underexplored relationship between workplace spirituality and its antecedents and its few consequences. It stresses the importance of workplace spirituality, ethical climate, and justice because of their positive organizational outcomes. Hospitality HR should realize the benefits of implementing workplace spirituality programs and attempt to engage the whole person at work. Through this study, an attempt has been taken towards understanding how workplace spirituality, ethical climate and organizational justice can assist in the development and amelioration of hotel firms in an era where abusive leadership, interpersonal conflicts, and dysfunctional and fraudulent behaviors have become a common phenomenon. The authors hope that this research will serve as a springboard to remind the hospitality industry that work is no longer separate from the individual. A person’s work is an extension of the individual; therefore, the job must enhance both the personal and spiritual aspect of a person. Acknowledgement This research was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 41671146). Appendix A. Supplementary data Supplementary data associated with this article can be found, in the online version, at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2019.102372. References Adams, J., 1963. Towards an understanding of inequity. J. Abnorm. Soc. Psychol. 67 (5), 422–436. Adebayo, O.D., Akanmode, J.A., Udegbe, B.I., 2007. The importance of spirituality in the relationship between psychological contract violation and cynicism in the Nigeria police. Police J. 80 (2), 141–166. https://doi.org/10.1350/pojo.2007.80.2.141. Ahmad, A., Omar, Z., 2014. Reducing deviant behavior through workplace spirituality and job satisfaction. Asian Soc. Sci. 10 (19), 107–112. Andreev, P., Heart, T., Maoz, H., Pliskin, N., 2009. Validating formative partial least squares (PLS) models: methodological review and empirical illustration. Thirtieth International Conference on Information Systems. Phoenix, Arizona, ICIS 2009 Proceedings. Aquino, K., Lewis, M.U., Bradfield, M., 1999. Justice constructs, negative affectivity, and employee deviance: a proposed model and empirical test. J. Organ. Behav. 20, 1073–1091. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1379(199912)20:7<1073::AIDOB943>3.0.CO;2-7. Aryati, A.S., Sudiro, A., Hadiwidjaja, D., Noermijati, N., 2018. The influence of ethical

10

International Journal of Hospitality Management xxx (xxxx) xxxx

K. Haldorai, et al.

exploratory examination of theoretical links. In: Giacalone, R.A., Jurkiewicz, C.L. (Eds.), Handbook of Workplace Spirituality. M.E. Sharpe, Armonk, NY, pp. 137–151. Pawar, B.S., 2009. Some of the recent organizational behavior concepts as precursors to workplace spirituality. J. Bus. Ethics 88, 245–261. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551008-9961-3. Petchsawang, P., Duchon, D., 2009. Measuring workplace spirituality in an Asian context. Hum. Resour. Dev. Int. 12 (4), 459–468. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 13678860903135912. Petchsawang, P., McLean, G.N., 2017. Workplace spirituality, mindfulness meditation,and work engagement. J. Manag. Spiritual. Relig. 14 (3), 216–244. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/14766086.2017.1291360. Peterson, D.K., 2002. Deviant workplace behavior and the organization’s ethical climate. J. Bus. Psychol. 17 (1), 47–61. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016296116093. Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Lee, J.Y., Podsakoff, N.P., 2003. Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. J. Appl. Psychol. 88 (5), 879–903. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88. 5.879. Prasanna, V., Madhavaiah, C., 2017. Effects of workplace spirituality towards counterproductive behavior in automobile manufacturing sector with reference to Tamilnadu district. Int. J. Acad. Res. Dev. 2 (6), 375–379. Radhakrishnan, S., 1970. The Bhagavad Gita. George Allen and Unwin, London. Rego, A., Ribeiro, N., Cunha, M.P., 2010. Perceptions of organizational virtuousness and happiness as predictors of organizational citizenship behaviors. J. Bus. Ethics 93 (2), 215–235. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-009-0197-7. Reza, Y.H., Reza, K., M. R, Reza, S.G., 2010. The mediating role of spirituality in relationship between organizational justice and spirituality consequences. J. Bus. Manag. Perspect. (Manag. Perspect.) 3 (36), 115–133. Rezapouraghdam, H., Alipour, H., Darvishmotevali, M., 2018. Employee workplace spirituality and pro-environmental behavior in the hotel industry. J. Sustain. Tour. 26 (5), 740–758. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2017.1409229. Ringle, C., Wende, S., Will, A., 2005. SmartPLS 2.0 (Beta). Hamburg. www.smartpls.de. Rosenblatt, Z., Peled, D., 2002. School ethical climate and parental involvement. J. Educ. Adm. 40 (4), 349–367. https://doi.org/10.1108/09578230210433427. Sadaghiani, J., Beikzad, J., Jafary, S., Maleki, S., 2012. Spirituality at the workplace and its role on organizational justice. Manag. Sci. Lett. 2 (1), 391–396. Sims, R.L., 2010. A study of deviance as a retaliatory response to organizational power. J. Bus. Ethics 92 (4), 553–563. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-009-0172-3. Shin, Y., 2012. CEO ethical leadership, ethical climate, climate strength, and collective organizational citizenship behavior. J. Bus. Ethics 108 (3), 299–312. http://www. jstor.org/stable/41476296. Sulaiman, M., Bhatti, O.K., 2013. Workplace deviance and spirituality in muslim organizations. Asian Soc. Sci. 9 (10), 237–246. https://doi.org/10.5539/ass.v9n10p237. Tepper, B.J., 2003. Organizational citizenship behavior and the spiritual employee. In: Giacalone, R., Jurkiewics, C. (Eds.), Handbook of Workplace Spirituality and Organizational Performance. M.E. Sharpe, New York, pp. 181–192. Tepper, B.J., Henle, C., 2011. A case for recognizing distinctions among constructs that capture interpersonal mistreatment in work organizations. J. Organ. Behav. 32 (3), 487–498. http://www.jstor.org/stable/41415680. Thornton, M.A., Rupp, D.E., 2016. The joint effects of justice climate, group moral identity, and corporate social responsibility on the prosocial and deviant behaviors of groups. J. Bus. Ethics 13 (7), 677–697. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2748-4. Turnipseed, D.L., 2002. Are good soldiers good?: exploring the link between organization citizenship behavior and personal ethics. J. Bus. Res. 55 (1), 1–15. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/S0148-2963(01)00217-X. Tuzun, I.K., Kalemci, R.A., 2018. Workplace deviance and human resource management relations: a case study of Turkish hotel employees. J. Hum. Resour. Hosp. Tour. 17 (2), 137–153. https://doi.org/10.1080/15332845.2017.1340740. Vardi, Y., 2001. The effects of organizational and ethical climates on misconduct at work. J. Bus. Ethics 29 (4), 325–337. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010710022834. Vasconcelos, A.F., 2018. Workplace spirituality: empirical evidence revisited. Manag. Res. Rev. 41 (7), 789–821. https://doi.org/10.1108/MRR-07-2017-0232. Victor, B., Cullen, J.B., 1987. A theory and measure of ethical climates in organizations. Res. Corp. Soc. Perform. Policy 9, 51–71. Victor, B., Cullen, J.B., 1988. The organizational bases of ethical work climates. Adm. Sci. Q. 33 (1), 101–125. https://doi.org/10.2307/2392857. Weitz, E., Vardi, Y., Setter, O., 2012. Spirituality and organizational misbehaviour. J. Manag. Spiritual. Relig. 9 (3), 255–281. https://doi.org/10.1080/14766086.2012. 730782. Wimbush, J.C., Shepard, J.M., 1994. Toward an understanding of ethical climate: its relationship to ethical behavior and supervisory influence. J. Bus. Ethics 13 (8), 637–647. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00871811. Zhao, H., Peng, Z., Sheard, G., 2013. Workplace ostracism and hospitality employees’ counterproductive work behaviors: the joint moderating effects of proactive personality and political skill. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 33, 219–227. https://doi.org/10. 1016/j.ijhm.2012.08.006.

Jiang, H., Chen, Y., Sun, P., Yang, J., 2017. The relationship between authoritarian leadership and employees’ deviant workplace behaviors: the mediating effects of psychological contract violation and organizational cynicism. Front. Psychol. 8, 732. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00732. Judge, T.A., Colquitt, J.A., 2004. Organizational justice and stress: the mediating role of work-family conflict. J. Appl. Psychol. 89 (3), 395–404. https://doi.org/10.1037/ 0021-9010.89.3.395. Jurkiewicz, C.L., Giacalone, R.A., 2004. A values framework for measuring the impact of workplace spirituality on organizational performance. J. Bus. Ethics 49 (2), 129–142. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:BUSI.0000015843.22195.b9. Karriker, J.H., Williams, M.L., Williams, L.J., 2017. Direct and indirect assessments of organizational justice: homogeneity or harmony? J. Organ. Psychol. 17 (3), 52–68. Accessed from. https://login.proxy.lib.fsu.edu/login?url=https://search-proquestcom.proxy.lib.fsu.edu/docview/1967313177?accountid=4840. Kazemipour, F., Amin, M.S., 2012. The impact of workplace spirituality dimensions on organisational citizenship behaviour among nurses with the mediating effect of affective organisational commitment. J. Nurs. Manag. 20 (8), 1039–1048. https://doi. org/10.1111/jonm.12025. Epub 2012 Nov 6. Kutcher, E., Bragger, J., Rodriguez-Srednicki, O., Masco, J., 2010. The role of religiosity in stress, job attitudes, and organizational citizenship behavior. J. Bus. Ethics 95 (2), 319–337. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40785089. Lee, K., Allen, N.J., 2002. Organizational citizenship behavior and workplace deviance: the role of affect and cognitions. J. Appl. Psychol. 87 (1), 131–142. https://doi.org/ 10.1037/0021-9010.87.1.131. Leung, A.S.M., 2008. Matching ethical work climate to in-role and extra-role behaviors in a collectivist work setting. J. Bus. Ethics 79 (1–2), 43–55. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s10551-007-9392-6. Li, S., Chen, Y., 2018. The relationship between psychological contract breach and employees’ counterproductive work behaviors: the mediating effect of organizational cynicism and work alienation. Front. Psychol. 9, 1273. https://doi.org/10.3389/ fpsyg.2018.01273. Majeed, N., Mustamil, N.M., Nazri, M., 2018. Which spirituality at the workplace? Is corporate spirituality the answer. Arab J. Bus. Manag. Rev. 7 (1), 49–61. https://doi. org/10.12816/0043950. Malik, P., Lenka, U., 2018. Integrating antecedents of workplace deviance: utilizing AHP approach. J. Indian Bus. Res. 10 (1), 101–122. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIBR-092017-0148. Martin, K.D., Cullen, J.B., 2006. Continuities and extensions of ethical climate theory:a meta-analytic review. J. Bus. Ethics 69 (2), 175–194. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s10551-006-9084-7. Milliman, J., Czaplewski, A.J., Ferguson, J., 2003. Workplace spirituality and employee work attitudes: an exploratory empirical assessment. J. Organ. Chang. Manag. 16 (4), 426–447. https://doi.org/10.1108/09534810310484172. Milliman, J., Gatling, A., Kim, J.S., 2018. The effect of workplace spirituality on hospitality employee engagement, intention to stay, and service delivery. J. Hosp. Tour. Manag. 35, 56–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhtm.2018.03.002. Minon, C., 2017. Workplace spirituality, work ethics, and organizational justice as related to job performance among state university educators. J. Teach. Educ. 7 (1), 407–418 ISSN: 2165-6266. Mitchell, M.S., Ambrose, M.L., 2007. Abusive supervision and workplace deviance andthe moderating effects of negative reciprocity beliefs. J. Appl. Psychol. 92 (4), 1159–1168. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.4.1159. Mohammad, J., Quoquab, F., 2016. Inculcating Ethics and Citizenship Behaviour in Islamic Financial Institutions: the Issues and Consequences. Partridge Publishing Singapore. Moorman, R.H., 1991. Relationship between organizational justice and organizational citizenship behaviors: Do fairness perceptions influence employee citizenship? J. Appl. Psychol. 76 (6), 845–855. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.76.6.845. National Informatics Center, 2018. Coimbatore city. Accessed from https://coimbatore. nic.in/ on September 18, 2018. Niehoff, B.P., Moorman, R.H., 1993. Justice as a mediator of the relationship between methods of monitoring and organizational citizenship behavior. Acad. Manag. J. 36 (3), 527–556. https://doi.org/10.2307/256591. Novalien, L.C., 2017. The antecedents of deviant workplace behaviours on the employees of regional apparatus organization (ODP) in maluku province, Indonesia. Russ. J. Agric. Socio-Econ. Sci. 6 (66), 165–174. https://doi.org/10.18551/rjoas.2017-06.19. Nunnally, J.C., 1978. Psychometric Theory. McGraw-Hill, New York, NY. Otaye-Ebede, L., Shaffakat, S., Foster, S., 2019. A multilevel model examining the relationships between workplace spirituality, ethical climate and outcomes: a social cognitive theory perspective. J. Bus. Ethics 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551019-04133-8. Pandey, A., Navare, A.V., 2018. Paths of yoga: perspective for workplace spirituality. In: Dhiman, S., Roberts, G., Crossman, J. (Eds.), The Palgrave Handbook of Workplace Spirituality and Fulfilment. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/ 978-3-319-61929-3_4-1. Parboteeah, K.P., Cullen, J.B., 2003. Ethical climates and workplace spirituality: an

11