THE MEDIATING ROLE OF JOB SATISFACTION BETWEEN QUALITY IN WORK FACTORS AND WORK ENGAGEMENT

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this paper is to analyze the relationship between quality in work factors (QWF) and work engagement (WE) with a mediating role of job satisfaction (JS). A quantitative cross-sectional methodology was used. The sample consisted of 234 bank employees. Data were analyzed with technique structural equation modeling. Results revealed that JS is a total mediator between QWF and WE. The evidence indicates that QWF is an antecedent of WE in the banking sector, but engagement will be increased when banking employees as well are satisfied with their jobs. The overall level of JS and WE was high because bank employees perceive quality on responsibility, feedback, wage, and social support as work factors. This study presents a scope of results limited to the north-central region of Mexico.

Keywords:
quality in work factors; work engagement; job satisfaction; banking sector; mediation

RESUMEN

El propósito de este documento es analizar la relación entre la calidad en los factores del trabajo (CFT) y el compromiso laboral (CL) con un rol mediador de la satisfacción laboral (SL). Se utilizó una metodología cuantitativa transversal. La muestra estuvo conformada por 234 empleados bancarios. Los datos fueron analizados con la técnica de ecuaciones estructurales. Los resultados revelaron que la SL es un mediador total entre la CFT y el CL. La evidencia indica que la CFT es un antecedente del CL en el sector bancario, pero el compromiso aumentará cuando los empleados bancarios también estén satisfechos con su trabajo. El nivel general de SL y CL fue alto porque los empleados bancarios perciben calidad en la responsabilidad, retroalimentación, salario y apoyo social como factores del trabajo. Este estudio presenta un alcance de los resultados limitado a la región centro-norte de México.

Palabras clave:
calidad en los factores del trabajo; compromiso laboral; satisfacción laboral; sector bancario; mediación

RESUMO

O objetivo deste documento é analisar a relação entre os fatores de qualidade no trabalho (FQT) e o comprometimento do trabalho (CT) com um papel mediador da satisfação no trabalho (ST). Uma metodologia quantitativa transversal foi utilizada. A amostra foi composta por 234 funcionários de bancos. Os dados foram analisados com a técnica de equações estruturais. Os resultados revelaram que a ST é um mediador total entre os FQT e o CT. As evidências indicam que os FQT são um precedente para o CT no setor bancário, mas o comprometimento aumentará quando os bancários também estiverem satisfeitos com seu trabalho. O nível geral de ST e CT foi alto porque os funcionários do banco percebem a qualidade na responsabilidade, feedback, salário e apoio social como fatores de trabalho. Este estudo apresenta um escopo de resultados limitado à região centro-norte do México.

Palavras-chave:
qualidade no trabalho; fatores; compromisso no trabalho; satisfação no trabalho; setor bancário; mediação

INTRODUCTION

The banking sector in Mexico is a sector that has been little studied with respect to labor conditions, as a consequence of the policies established by financial groups. Particularly, banking plays a role of special interest within the services classification by being the driver of the economies of nations (Sarangal & Nargotra, 2017). It is noteworthy that globalization in the banking sector generated a new scenario for its employees, involving adaptation to constant processes of innovation, competitiveness and user demands (Sarangal & Nargotra, 2017) that go hand in hand with emerging labor adjustments that make the correct management of work engagement (WE) necessary (Hernández, 2013). For Mexico, studying the topic is relevant in two ways; first, because the transformations of the banking system led to the modification of labor policies adapting them to the needs of globalized banking (Gallardo, Ángeles, & Neme, 2011), and second, because no empirical evidence was found in the Mexican context to provide information that could serve as a guide to improve WE in banking.

This research is developed with a WE business case perspective that seeks to explain how employee well-being can contribute to the success of service organizations. In such organizations, WE is a key element for the achievement of their objectives (Nawrin, 2018), since employees, through their attitudes, reflect the organizational image, influencing customer decisions (Nguyen, Nguyen, Ngo, & Nguyen, 2019), and the attractiveness for future collaborators (Hinojosa & Cogco, 2020). Additionally, it is a topic of particular interest to organizations (Gheitani, Imani, Seyyedamiri, & Foroudi, 2019) because it contributes to financial success (Harunavamwe, Nel, & Zyl, 2020), decreases early intentions to leave a job (Karatepe, Ozturk, & Kim 2019), and has positive effects on job performance and customer loyalty (Nguyen et al., 2019; Salanova, Agut, & Peiro, 2005). Engaging with their jobs also generates benefits for employees, such as a sense of achievement and self-fulfillment, although research on this is limited (Lee & Ok, 2016).

Recently, employers have paid more attention to factors that are antecedent and consequence of WE because disengaged employees are costly to an organization (Rayton & Yalabik, 2014). Previous research found that a person’s commitment results from his or her perceptions about the benefits or security that the job can give him or her (Kahn, 1990), and that work motivation is favored by the psychological state that is generated as a consequence of the characteristics of the job (Hackman & Oldham, 1980). Therefore, this research believes that quality perceptions about work factors could be predictors of WE.

Recent literature argues that job satisfaction (JS) is a predictor of WE (Garg, Dar, & Mishra, 2018; Pieters, 2018; Sarangal & Nargotra, 2017). For example, Yalabik, Rayton, and Rapti (2017) indicate that JS influences WE through the employee’s emotional evaluation of the fulfillment of his or her work needs and, when the evaluation is positive, it becomes a stimulating motivator of commitment to work. According to the bifactor theory of Herzberg, Mausner, and Snyderman (1959), there are elements of work such as responsibility, feedback, salary, and social support that integrate the intrinsic and extrinsic motivation of the worker, which, when perceived as positive elements, allow a favorable interpretation of quality in work factors (QWF), favoring JS.

Considering the context of the Mexican labor market, the National Occupation and Employment Survey positions professions related to finance, banking and insurance as those with the best salaries (Observatorio Laboral, 2019) [Labor Observatory], so this research believes that banking employment in Mexico can be considered as a better provider of employment quality with respect to other jobs; however, the literature review mentions that to achieve a high WE it is necessary that the employee also be satisfied with his or her job (Radosevich, Radosevich, Riddle, & Hughes, 2008).

According to the above approach showing a link between QWF and JS, with WE, the following research questions are generated: Does QWF influence the WE of bank employees in Mexico? Can JS mediate the effects between QWF and WE? Based on these questions, this research aims to analyze the relationship between QWF and WE with the mediating role of JS.

This study begins with a literature review and presentation of previous research showing the relationships suggested in the model. Next, the methodological framework was described, including the technique, sample, and measurements. Lastly, the results were explained, followed by discussion and research conclusions.

LITERATURE REVIEW

This section describes the study variables and explains the role they play in the proposed theoretical model.

Work Engagement

WE is a work-related affective-cognitive state (Schaufeli, Bakker, & Salanova, 2006), involving a psychological connection of the employee to his or her task and the investment of physical, emotional, and cognitive resources resulting from work motivation (Christian, Garza, & Slaughter, 2011). WE allows the development of an emotional bond between the employee and the work context that incentivizes the effort to carry out their activities (Lu, Lu, Gursoy, & Neale, 2016). It is made up of determination (investing high energy and effort), dedication (higher than standard participation) and absorption (remaining fully concentrated) (Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004; Schaufeli et al., 2006). Recent studies in the banking context have found evidence that WE receives positive effects of self-leadership, job integration, and psychological resources (Harunavamwe et al., 2020); psychosocial safety (Tagoe & Amponsah-Tawiah, 2020); job cognition (Nguyen et al., 2019); high-performance work systems and resilience (Cooke, Cooper, Bartram, Wang & Mei, 2016); family support and self-efficacy (Karatepe et al., 2019); personal, work and organizational resources (Nawrin, 2018); and JS (Garg, Dar & Mishra, 2018). Additionally, it is argued that WE increases performance and decreases intentions to change jobs (Karatepe et al., 2019; Lathabhavan, Balasubramanian, & Natarajan, 2017). Other research suggests that perceptions of QWF positively influence WE, so the following section describes the findings identified.

Quality in Work Factors and Work Engagement

QWF happens when the employee perceives that his or her work needs have been met (Lee, Back, & Chan, 2015). According to Herzberg (1966), work is composed of motivational and hygiene factors; motivational factors are based on satisfying the employee’s psychological growth needs (Zhang, Yao, & Cheong, 2011), and hygiene factors seek to contribute to work-associated needs (Sledge, Miles, & Coppage, 2008).

Work motivational factors include responsibility (Herzberg, 1966) and feedback (Morris & Venkatesh, 2010). Responsibility is the degree to which an employee is charged with attending to an objective (Sledge et al., 2008). In frontline jobs, responsibility involves meeting customer requirements, which can create a challenge and motivate the employee to focus on the job (Karatepe, Beirami, Bouzari, & Safavi, 2014). Studies in the hospitality industry have found a positive effect of responsibility to WE in frontline employees (Karatepe et al., 2014). In another context, previous results showed that student responsibility is a predictor of the WE of academics (Capri, Gunduz, & Akbay, 2017). Conversely, evidence in health care employees did not support the effect between job responsibility and WE (Carlo, Corso, Falco, Girardi, & Piccirelli, 2016).

Feedback represents the amount of information provided to the employee regarding his or her job performance (Katsikea, Theodosiou, Perdikis, & Kehagias, 2011). When feedback is provided, the employee knows his or her degree of advancement in the organization and can work on his or her skills generating greater work effectiveness; similarly, when feedback comes with managerial support the employee’s WE is maintained (Sommer & Kulkarni, 2012). In this regard, previous research has reported that when employees have sufficient resources to receive feedback, greater WE is generated (Breevaart, Bakker, & Demerouti, 2014). Other results indicate that bank managers found in feedback a means to inform their employees of the strengths and weaknesses performed, creating a stimulus in the employee to make more effort and consequently improve WE (Ahmed, Kura, Umrani, & Pahi, 2020).

Furthermore, salary and social support are factors of hygiene at work (Herzberg, 1966). To analyze them, reference is made to the contributions of Chiang and Wu (2014), which indicate that employees are internal customers of the organization, who are offered an intra-organizational service characterized by the way in which the work is carried out, and when they perform a service positively, the employee perceives quality. In this sense, the literature shows that employees make comparisons between their salaries and those of reference groups (Kifle, 2014), either of co-workers, their own salaries from previous periods (Grund & Rubin, 2017), or of similar positions in the job market (Grund & Sliwka, 2007). In addition, Farndale and Murrer (2015) claim that in groups such as the Mexican population, financial rewards are important because they provide security. Likewise, previous research has found that an employee’s effort improves when he or she receives an efficient salary (Goldsmith, Veum, & Darity, 2000). A study conducted in a multinational financial services organization found that giving high financial rewards favors engagement and, specifically, the relationship was stronger in Mexican respondents (Farndale & Murrer, 2015). In this sense, in this research it is expected that through these comparisons, the employee will evaluate the quality of the internal service provided by the organization.

Finally, social support is a factor that can make work an interesting experience (Lambert, Minor, Wells, & Hogan, 2016). Working with friendly people enables the strengthening of good relationships among co-workers (Alegre, Mas-Machuca, & Berbegal-Mirabent, 2016), increasing participation (Lambert et al., 2016) through teamwork (Alegre et al., 2016). The relationship between social support and WE has recently been proven; for example, the results of Kiema-Junes et al. (2020) showed that social support received from supervisors, co-workers and family influenced WE. In particular, social support was the strongest predictor for employee dedication and determination. Similarly, Nasurdin, Ling, and Khan’s (2018) findings showed that perceptions of supervisor support were the strongest predictor of WE, and support received from co-workers and the organization were also important determinants of WE.

As the above evidence suggests, when employees perceive QWF they show higher WE, thus:

• H1: Perceived quality in work factors is a positive predictor of work engagement.

Mediating role of Job Satisfaction

JS is the positive result of an employee’s evaluation of the elements involved in the job based on his or her work experience (Locke, 1969). When the employee perceives that their expectations about job characteristics have been met, they experience satisfaction with their job (Knapp, Smith, & Sprinkle, 2017). Previous research regarding the relationship between quality and JS has analyzed various job factors, for example, in private banking QWF was found to influence perceptions of JS (Dhamija, Gupta, & Bag, 2019). Other authors found that empowering decision-making and receiving social support were job characteristics that were positively associated with the JS of bank employees (Cambre, Kippers, Veldhoven, & Witte, 2012). Moreover, having a higher salary increase than the reference group improves JS (Diriwaechter & Shvartsman, 2018); conversely, previous evidence indicates that woman financial services managers in banking and insurance institutions were dissatisfied with receiving lower salaries than their male co-workers in similar positions (Tlaiss, 2013). Finally, feedback is another work factor that has shown positive effects on JS by mitigating the negative effects originating from role ambiguity (Jong, 2016).

There is currently a discussion in the literature regarding the causal order between JS and WE (Yalabik, Popaitoon, Chowne, & Rayton, 2013). On the one hand, some studies show that highly engaged employees are characterized by being more immersed and dedicated to their work as a consequence of how challenging and inspiring it is, thus triggering higher JS (Karanika-Murray, Duncan, Pontes, & Griffiths, 2015; Lu et al., 2016); and on the other, previous evidence also indicates that WE is an active state that is strongly influenced by employees’ JS (Butakor, Guo, & Adebanji, 2021; Vokić & Hernaus, 2015). In this sense, this research suggests JS as a predictor of WE by considering that engagement arises as a consequence of the emotional evaluation made by the employee about the satisfaction of their work needs (Yalabik et al., 2017). Following this trend, evidence indicates that satisfied employees are more committed to their work, with intrinsic satisfaction (e.g., responsibility and feedback) generating the highest motivation in WE (Garg et al., 2018). Other researchers reviewed the predictive ability of intrinsic and extrinsic JS with the determination and dedication dimensions of WE, finding that intrinsic satisfaction is a predictor of determination and dedication, while extrinsic JS (e.g., salary and social support) only showed significant effects for dedication (Pieters, 2018).

In general, previous evidence points out that when the employee perceives that his or her work expectations have been met (quality), on the one hand, the employee could develop higher WE, and, on the other hand, could experience positive feelings towards work (JS) which, in turn, can incentivize WE. In this sense, JS could exert a mediating role between QWF perceptions and WE (Figure 1).

Given these arguments, this research proposes the following:

• H2: Perceived quality in work factors is a positive predictor of job satisfaction.

• H3: Job satisfaction is a positive predictor of work engagement.

• H4: Job satisfaction is a mediator in the relationship between quality in work factors and work engagement.

Figure 1
Theoretical model of mediation

METHODOLOGY

Sample and Procedure

The participants were bank employees from nine financial groups belonging to the commercial banking sector located in north-central Mexico. The sample consisted of employees with direct contact with customers and with at least one year of seniority. These characteristics were chosen because the most engaged employees are those who have frequent contact with customers (Karatepe, Yavas, Babakus, & Deitz, 2018) and because, according to the approaches of this research, a bank employee needs to have had the opportunity to assess perceptions of quality from his or her experience on the job. The data were collected by two researchers using a paper questionnaire; the procedure consisted of obtaining the authorization of the branch manager and then explaining the structure of the instrument to each participant in their personal workspaces, the approximate response time being 15 minutes. The branches and employees were selected through stratified random sampling with proportional allocation, obtaining a requirement of 295 observations. The stratification was based on records from the National Statistical Directory of Economic Units. This type of sampling was used because the only public information available on the employment of bank personnel in Mexico is the classification of strata by number of personnel employed in each bank branch; personal data was not included, so they were assigned an identification number. The questionnaires were distributed in 106 bank branches; 245 questionnaires were complete, but only 234 met the Mahalanobis criterion with which the presence of outliers was identified (Hair, Hult, Ringle, & Sarstedt, 2014), representing a response rate of 79.32%. Table I presents the demographic characteristics of the sample.

Table 1
Personal and professional characteristics

Item	N (234)	%
Age
Less than 30	132	56.4
30-40	83	35.5
41 or more	19	8.1
Gender
Male	106	45.3
Female	128	54.7
Work Position
Cashier	82	35
Cash boss	16	6.8
Executive	100	42.7
Digital / Multichannel Advisor	13	5.6
Other	23	9.9
Job Tenure
1-5 years	166	70.9
6-10 years	39	87.6
More than 10 years	29	100

Source: elaborated by the author

Measures

The questionnaire had a section to collect demographic information on the sample, requesting details on age, sex, position, and length of service. The following sections corresponded to the QWF, JS and WE variables. A 10-point scale was used to measure the three variables; according to Dawes (2008), 5-, 7-, and 10-point scales have statistically comparable use for data processing in confirmatory factor analysis and structural equation modeling. The coefficient used to verify the internal consistency of the scales was Cronbach’s alpha, providing a coefficient of 0.921 for the total of the instrument, a result that according to Nunnally (1978) is considered adequate since it presents values above 0.70.

Quality in Work Factors

To measure perceptions of QWF, responsibility, feedback, salary, and social support were considered, and the items were adapted from Herzberg (1966) by first implementing the criteria of expert researchers and then a pilot test. A sample item is “Considering my experience at the bank, to what extent do I consider that I receive a competitive salary compared to that offered by other banks for a similar position?” Cronbach’s alpha coefficient for QWF was 0.873.

Job Satisfaction

JS was measured using a general satisfaction scale, adapting six items from previous satisfaction studies in the Mexican context (Martinez, Cogco, & Perez, 2016; Perez, Martinez, & Cogco, 2017; Rodriguez, Cogco, & Perez, 2014). A sample item is “To what extent is my job what I expected it to be before joining the bank?” Two items were eliminated because they did not meet the reliability criteria. Cronbach’s alpha coefficient for JS was 0.878.

Work Engagement

From the contributions of Schaufeli et al. (2006), six items were used to assess the engagement of bank employees. A sample item is “Considering my experience at the bank, to what extent do I find that in the mornings I look forward to going to work?” In order to improve the statistical properties of the scale, three items were eliminated; according to García, Gil and Rodriguez (2000), three items are the minimum amount necessary to evaluate a variable. Cronbach’s alpha coefficient for the WE was 0.853.

RESULTS

To evaluate the theoretical mediation model, the structural equation modeling (SEM) technique was used. According to Hair, Black, Babin and Anderson (2010), SEM is the appropriate technique when analyzing variables that cannot be observed directly. Data were processed in AMOS statistical software (version 24). Overall, the results obtained support QWF as a positive predictor of JS and WE, and JS as a mediator between QWF and WE.

Measurement model

The implementation of SEM requires the prior performance of confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to corroborate the convergent and discriminant validity of the constructs (Fornell & Larcker, 1981). To carry out the CFA, the standardized estimators (Hox & Bechger, 1998) were reviewed; in general, the items obtained statistical weights above the optimal criterion of 0.708, and only one item was below this level, although it was above the minimum threshold of 0.40 (Hair et al., 2014).

Table II shows that the results of the measurement model conform to the criteria established by Hair et al. (2010). Construct reliability was verified following the criteria of Hair et al. (2014), concluding that Cronbach’s alpha and the composite reliability coefficient (CR) are satisfactory with values above 0.7. For the reliability of the measurement scale, the average variance extracted (AVE) criterion was verified to be greater than 0.50 (Fornell & Larcker, 1981). AVE provides construct validity because the result indicates that latent variables share more than 50% of the variance with their items, decreasing the shared variance with measurement error (Hair et al., 2014). These results provide convergent validity for the measurement instrument used. Following Fornell and Larcker (1981), satisfactory discriminant validity was determined, with the results reporting that the square root of the AVE was greater than the correlations between the variables in the model.

Structural model

The results obtained from the structural model satisfy the absolute, incremental and parsimony fit criteria (Hu & Bentler, 1999). In this study, the absolute fit indicators show GFI = 0.936; RMSEA = 0.072; SRMR = 0.050. Incremental fit measures include CFI = 0.970; AGFI = 0.898; NFI = 0.947; PClose = 0.035. In addition, the normalized chi-square results present an acceptable parsimony fit CMIN/DF = 2.216.

Table 2
Results of Measurement Model

Latent Variable / Items		SFL	α	CR	AVE	$$\sqrt{\mathit{\text{AVE}}}$$
Quality in Work Factors			0.878	0.875	0.636	0.797
	Considering my experience at the bank, to what extent do I consider that...
QWF1	I am trusted in order to be assigned responsibilities?	0.746
QWF2	I get feedback that helps me improve my performance?	0.819
QWF3	I receive a competitive salary compared to that offered by other banks for a similar position?	0.797
QWF4	my supervisors guide and support me in developing my work?	0.826
Job Satisfaction			0.853	0.887	0.665	0.815
JS1	Considering my experience at the bank, what evaluation best describes it?	0.812
JS2	Overall, how satisfied am I with my job?	0.91
JS3	To what extent does my job allow me to improve my living conditions?	0.714
JS6	To what extent is my job what I expected it to be before joining the bank?	0.814
Work Engagement			0.873	0.864	0.684	0.827
	Considering my experience at the bank, to what extent do I consider that...
WE1	in the mornings I look forward to going to work?	0.874
WE3	my job is challenging?	0.924
WE5	time passes very quickly when I am working?	0.658

Source: elaborated by the authorNotes: SFL, standard factor load; α, Cronbach’s alpha; CR: construct reliability; AVE, average variance extracted

Direct effects hypothesis testing

Figure 2 shows the results of the standardized estimators that support all the hypothesized effects. The R2 statistic was used to evaluate the predictive capacity of the model (Chin, 1998) and the result indicated that the variables included in the model explain 52% of WE variance. In accordance with the proposed theoretical approaches, the results provided support for H1 and H2 because perceptions about QWF had a positive and significant effect on WE (β = 0.211, p < 0.05) and JS (β = 0.777, p < 0.001). The result obtained for H3 was also supported, as JS presented a positive and significant path coefficient towards WE (β = 0.544, p < 0.001).

Figure 2
Hypotheses test results

Testing mediation effect

The mediating effect of JS between perceptions of QWF and WE was evaluated. To conduct the H4 test, we first reviewed the direct effects of QWF on WE without the intervention of the mediating variable, producing statistically significant results (β = 0.633, p < 0.001). JS (mediator) was then introduced, and Bootstrap was run in AMOS (5,000 samples, 95% confidence level). Bootstrap is an appropriate method for mediation analyses in which the normality condition of the data is not necessary (Pinheiro, Silva, Dias, Lages, & Preto, 2020). The results showed that the indirect effect of QWF perceptions on WE through JS was significant (β = 0.423, p < 0.001), while the direct effect was non-significant (β = 0.211, p > 0.05). Following the contributions of Zhao, Lynch and Chen (2010), these results indicate total mediation (Table III). Therefore, the mediation effect of H4 was supported.

Table 3
Results of mediation hypothesis

Mediation hypothesis: Variables (Independent - Mediator - Dependent)	Standardized direct coefficient +	Direct path coefficient++	Indirect path coefficient++	Observed mediation
Quality in Work Factors - Job Satisfaction - Work Engagement	.633***	.211(ns)	.423***	Total

Source: elaborated by the authorNotes: + Path coefficient between the independent and dependent variable without the mediating variable. ++ Path coefficients including the mediating variable.
• ^***
  p < 0.001

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

This research examined the role that perceptions of well-being at work play in the level of employees’ WE in Mexican banks. In general, the results suggest that when employees receive QWF, in terms of responsibility, feedback, salary and social support, they are perceived to be more satisfied and, consequently, the possibility of generating higher WE increases.

To obtain these inferences, the causal relationships were first analyzed independently to corroborate the direct effects between the study variables. The results indicated that the QWF perceived by bank employees influences WE (H1). These results suggest that Mexican bank employees perceive high QWF as a direct driver of employee engagement. Previous studies support the results of the current research (Capri et al., 2017; Farndale & Murrer, 2015; Kiema-Junes et al., 2020; Sommer & Kulkarni, 2012). For example, Karatepe et al. (2014) found that employee responsibility with direct customer contact is a challenging factor that drives engagement. The findings of Ahmed et al. (2020) highlighted that positive feedback boosted bank employees’ effort and contributed to WE. In addition, Kifle (2014) states that employees make comparisons between their salaries and those of a reference group; in this context, considering that Observatorio Laboral (2019) reported that banking-related jobs in Mexico report the best salaries in the country, it can be inferred that bank employees perceive salary quality when compared to salaries of jobs in other sectors. The results indicated that social support was the strongest predictor of QWF, and this outcome is in line with the contributions of Nasurdin et al. (2018).

At the same time, this research validated the proposed positive link from QWF to JS (H2). This result is similar to others that have reported that perceiving QWF increases employee satisfaction (Cambre et al., 2012; Diriwaechter & Shvartsman, 2018; Knapp et al., 2017). This finding is also validated in the private banking industry (Dhamija et al., 2019). In this research, QWF perceptions were a strong predictor of JS, which could indicate that bank workers design expectations regarding what they expect to receive from job factors and, as expectations were met, their QWF perceptions increased and, at the same time, incentivized JS.

Likewise, in this research JS was also a significant predictor of WE (H3), which is consistent with previous studies (Garg et al., 2018; Pieters, 2018; Yalabik et al., 2017). The results on JS indicated that in general the experience of working in a bank is rewarding and meets the expectations about the benefits of banking employment, so, as the evaluation of JS was positive, it generated WE in bank employees, which is a result consistent with that presented by Yalabik et al. (2013) in the banking industry.

In addition, this research suggested JS as a mediator in the relationship between QWF and WE (H4). This mediation model found support in the results. QWF showed a direct and significant influence on WE, but, when JS was incorporated as a mediator, QWF had no direct influence; on the contrary, indirectly, through JS, it had a significant impact on WE. According to Zhao et al. (2010), these results indicate total mediation, offering support for the suggested mediation of JS in the QWF-WE relationship.

IMPLICATIONS, LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE LINES OF RESEARCH

The research findings may have several implications for bank human resource managers. Particularly noteworthy is the role of QWF perceptions, which, although they are an important element in generating the involvement of bank employees in their activities, evidence was found to infer that the higher the quality perceived by the employee, the better his or her satisfaction with the job, and this will ultimately lead to an increase in WE. Having committed employees is a valuable factor for the banking industry, since employees working in direct contact with customers represent the main image that users take away from the organization. Furthermore, there is empirical evidence that argues that employees who are dissatisfied with their work environment not only decrease their WE, but also express their intention to change jobs; in this context, bank employees manage a portfolio of clients that they could take with them should they decide to change firms.

Future research could focus on addressing some of the limitations identified. The data were collected only in the north-central region of Mexico, so the spectrum could be extended to other regions in the country to strengthen the results, since satisfaction also depends on the work context (Rodríguez et al., 2012) and there are metropolitan areas with different work dynamics in aspects such as the daily influx of customers, competitiveness among co-workers, or even the salary level, all of which are factors that could modify perceptions of satisfaction. In this sense, the scope of the results is limited to the aforementioned region, since it takes into account a very specific sample. Finally, it is recommended that the work factors be segmented into intrinsic and extrinsic factors to determine those with the greatest influence on WE in banking, since this information could help to improve management with respect to QWF.

REFERENCIAS

• Ahmed, U., Kura, K. M., Umrani, W. A., & Pahi, M. H. (2020), Modelling the link between developmental human resource practices and work engagement: The moderation role of service climate. Global Business Review, 21(1), 31-53. doi: 10.1177/0972150919837813
  » https://doi.org/10.1177/0972150919837813
• Alegre, I., Mas-Machuca, M., & Berbegal-Mirabent, J. (2016). Antecedents of employee job satisfaction: Do they matter? Journal of Business Research, 69(4), 1390-1395. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.10.113
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.10.113
• Breevaart, K., Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2014). Daily self-management and employee work engagement. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 84(1), 31-38. doi: 10.1016/j.jvb.2013.11.002
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2013.11.002
• Butakor, P. K., Guo, Q., & Adebanji, A. O. (2021). Using structural equation modeling to examine the relationship between Ghanaian teachers’ emotional intelligence, job satisfaction, professional identity, and work engagement. Psychology in the Schools, 58(3), 534-552. doi: 10.1002/pits.22462
  » https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.22462
• Cambre, B., Kippers, E., Veldhoven, M. van, & Witte, H. De. (2012). Jobs and organisations explaining group level differences in job satisfaction in the banking sector. Personnel Review, 41(2), 200-215. doi: 10.1108/00483481211200033
  » https://doi.org/10.1108/00483481211200033
• Capri, B., Gunduz, B., & Akbay, S. E. (2017). Utrecht Work Engagement Scale-Student Forms’ (UWES-SF) adaptation to Turkish, validity and reliability studies, and the mediator role of work engagement between academic procrastination and academic responsibility. Educational Sciences-Theory & Practice, 17(2), 411-435. doi: 10.12738/estp.2017.2.0518
  » https://doi.org/10.12738/estp.2017.2.0518
• Carlo, N. A. De, Corso, L. Dal, Falco, A., Girardi, D., & Piccirelli, A. (2016). To be, rather than to seem: The impact of supervisor’s and personal responsibility on work engagement, job performance, and job satisfaction in a positive healthcare organization. Tpm-Testing Psychometrics Methodology in Applied Psychology, 23(4), 561-580. doi: 10.4473/TPM23.4.9
  » https://doi.org/10.4473/TPM23.4.9
• Chiang, C.-F., & Wu, K.-P. (2014). The influences of internal service quality and job standardization on job satisfaction with supports as mediators: Flight attendants at branch workplace. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 25(19), 2644-2666. doi: 10.1080/09585192.2014.884616
  » https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2014.884616
• Chin, W. W. (1998). The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling. In G. A. Marcoulides (Ed.), Modern methods for business research (pp. 295-336). Mahwah, USA: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• Christian, M. S., Garza, A. S., & Slaughter, J. E. (2011). Work engagement: A quantitative review and test of its relations with task and contextual performance. Personnel Psychology, 64(1), 89-136. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-6570.2010.01203.x
  » https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2010.01203.x
• Cooke, F. L., Cooper, B., Bartram, T., Wang, J., & Mei, H. (2016). Mapping the relationships between high-performance work systems, employee resilience and engagement: A study of the banking industry in China. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 30(8), 1239-1260. doi: 10.1080/09585192.2015.1137618
  » https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2015.1137618
• Dawes, J. (2008). Do data characteristics change according to the number of scale points used? An experiment using 5-point, 7-point and 10-point scales. International Journal of Market Research, 50(1), 61-104. doi: 10.1177/147078530805000106
  » https://doi.org/10.1177/147078530805000106
• Dhamija, P., Gupta, S., & Bag, S. (2019). Measuring of job satisfaction: The use of quality of work life factors. Benchmarking-an International Journal, 26(3), 871-892. doi: 10.1108/BIJ-06-2018-0155
  » https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ-06-2018-0155
• Diriwaechter, P., & Shvartsman, E. (2018). The anticipation and adaptation effects of intra- and interpersonal wage changes on job satisfaction. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 146, 116-140. doi: 10.1016/j.jebo.2017.12.010
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2017.12.010
• Farndale, E., & Murrer, I. (2015). Job resources and employee engagement: A cross-national study. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 30(5), 610-626. doi: 10.1108/JMP-09-2013-0318
  » https://doi.org/10.1108/JMP-09-2013-0318
• Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50. doi: 10.1177/002224378101800104
  » https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800104
• Gallardo, A., Ángeles, G., & Neme, O. (2011). Desregulación económica y flexibilización laboral: Una forma de reducir el costo laboral en México (2000-2008). Economía y Sociedad, 17(27), 65-83.
• García, E., Gil, J., & Rodríguez, G. (2000). Análisis factorial. Madrid, España: La Muralla.
• Garg, K., Dar, I. A., & Mishra, M. (2018). Job satisfaction and work engagement: A study using private sector bank managers. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 20(1), 58-71. doi: 10.1177/1523422317742987
  » https://doi.org/10.1177/1523422317742987
• Gheitani, A., Imani, S., Seyyedamiri, N., & Foroudi, P. (2019). Mediating effect of intrinsic motivation on the relationship between Islamic work ethic, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment in banking sector. International Journal of Islamic and Middle Eastern Finance and Management, 12(1), 76-95. doi: 10.1108/IMEFM-01-2018-0029
  » https://doi.org/10.1108/IMEFM-01-2018-0029
• Goldsmith, A. H., Veum, J. R., & Darity, W., Jr. (2000). Working hard for the money? Efficiency wages and worker effort. Journal of Economic Psychology, 21(4), 351-385. doi: 10.1016/S0167-4870(00)00008-8
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-4870(00)00008-8
• Grund, C., & Rubin, M. (2017). Social comparisons of wage increases and job satisfaction. Applied Economics, 49(14), 1345-1350. doi: 10.1080/00036846.2016.1217311
  » https://doi.org/10.1080/00036846.2016.1217311
• Grund, C., & Sliwka, D. (2007). Reference-dependent preferences and the impact of wage increases on job satisfaction: Theory and evidence. Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics JITE, 163(2), 313-335. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/40752645
  » https://www.jstor.org/stable/40752645
• Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1980). Work redesign. Reading, USA: Addison-Wesley.
• Hair, J., Black, W., Babin, B., & Anderson, R. (2010). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). New Jersey, USA: Pearson.
• Hair, J., Hult, G., Ringle, C., & Sarstedt, M. (2014). A primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM). Thousand Oaks, USA: SAGE Publications.
• Harunavamwe, M., Nel, P., & Zyl, E. Van. (2020). The influence of self-leadership strategies, psychological resources, and job embeddedness on work engagement in the banking industry. South African Journal of Psychology, 50(4), 507-519. Retrieved from https://hdl.handle.net/10520/ejc-sapsyc-v50-n4-a7
  » https://hdl.handle.net/10520/ejc-sapsyc-v50-n4-a7
• Hernández, M. I. S. (2013). Compromiso laboral y estrés en los empleados de bancos y cajas. Revista de la Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Empresariales, Universidad de León, 16/17, 85-100. doi: 10.18002/pec.v0i16/17.1336
  » https://doi.org/10.18002/pec.v0i16/17.1336
• Herzberg, F., Mausner, B., & Snyderman, B. B. (1959). The motivation to work. New York, USA: John Wiley & Sons.
• Herzberg, F. I. (1966). Work and the nature of man. Cleveland, USA: World Publishing Co.
• Hinojosa, J. I., & Cogco, A. R. (2020). Atractivo organizacional: Influencia de la imagen y la responsabilidad social corporativa. Revista de Psicología y Ciencias del Comportamiento de la Unidad Académica de Ciencias Jurídicas y Sociales, 11(1), 112-125. doi: 10.29059/rpcc.20200617-106
  » https://doi.org/10.29059/rpcc.20200617-106
• Hox, J. J., & Bechger, T. M. (1998). An introduction to structural equation modeling. Family Science Review, 11, 354-373. doi: 10.1080/10705510903008345
  » https://doi.org/10.1080/10705510903008345
• Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1-55. doi: 10.1080/10705519909540118
  » https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
• Jong, J. (2016). The role of performance feedback and job autonomy in mitigating the negative effect of role ambiguity on employee satisfaction. Public Performance & Management Review, 39(4), 814-834. doi: 10.1080/15309576.2015.1137771
  » https://doi.org/10.1080/15309576.2015.1137771
• Kahn, W. A. (1990). Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at work. Academy of Management Journal, 33(4), 692-724. doi: 10.5465/256287
  » https://doi.org/10.5465/256287
• Karanika-Murray, M., Duncan, N., Pontes, H. M., & Griffiths, M. D. (2015). Organizational identification, work engagement, and job satisfaction. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 30(8), 1019-1033. doi: 10.1108/JMP-11-2013-0359
  » https://doi.org/10.1108/JMP-11-2013-0359
• Karatepe, O. M., Beirami, E., Bouzari, M., & Safavi, H. P. (2014). Does work engagement mediate the effects of challenge stressors on job outcomes? Evidence from the hotel industry. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 36, 14-22. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhm.2013.08.003
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2013.08.003
• Karatepe, O. M., Ozturk, A., & Kim, T. T. (2019). The effects of nonwork and personal resources on frontline bank employees’ work engagement and critical job outcomes. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 37(3), 858-879. doi: 10.1108/IJBM-05-2018-0133
  » https://doi.org/10.1108/IJBM-05-2018-0133
• Karatepe, O. M., Yavas, U., Babakus, E., & Deitz, G. D. (2018). The effects of organizational and personal resources on stress, engagement, and job outcomes. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 74, 147-161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2018.04.005
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2018.04.005
• Katsikea, E., Theodosiou, M., Perdikis, N., & Kehagias, J. (2011). The effects of organizational structure and job characteristics on export sales managers’ job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Journal of World Business, 46(2), 221-233. doi: 10.1016/j.jwb.2010.11.003
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2010.11.003
• Kiema-Junes, H., Saarinen, A., Muukkonen, H., Vayrynen, S., Ala-Mursula, L., & Hintsanen, M. (2020). Dimensions of social support in the experience of work engagement in middle age: A Northern Finland Birth Cohort 1966 Study. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 61(5), 679-689. doi: 10.1111/sjop.12640
  » https://doi.org/10.1111/sjop.12640
• Kifle, T. (2014). Do comparison wages play a major role in determining overall job satisfaction? Evidence from Australia. Journal of Happiness Studies, 15(3), 613-638. doi: 10.1007/s10902-013-9439-6
  » https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-013-9439-6
• Knapp, J. R., Smith, B. R., & Sprinkle, T. A. (2017). Is it the job or the support? Examining structural and relational predictors of job satisfaction and turnover intention for nonprofit employees. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 46(3), 652-671. doi: 10.1177/0899764016685859
  » https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764016685859
• Lambert, E. G., Minor, K. I., Wells, J. B., & Hogan, N. L. (2016). Social support’s relationship to correctional staff job stress, job involvement, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment. Social Science Journal, 53(1), 22-32. doi: 10.1016/j.soscij.2015.10.001
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soscij.2015.10.001
• Lathabhavan, R., Balasubramanian, S. A., & Natarajan, T. (2017). A psychometric analysis of the Utrecht work engagement scale in Indian banking sector. Industrial and Commercial Training, 49(6), 296-302. doi: 10.1108/ICT-04-2017-0031
  » https://doi.org/10.1108/ICT-04-2017-0031
• Lee, J., & Ok, C. M. (2016). Hotel employee work engagement and its consequences. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 25(2), 133-166. doi: 10.1080/19368623.2014.994154
  » https://doi.org/10.1080/19368623.2014.994154
• Lee, J.-S., Back, K.-J., & Chan, E. S. W. (2015). Quality of work life and job satisfaction among frontline hotel employees: A self-determination and need satisfaction theory approach. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 27(5), 768-789. doi: 10.1108/IJCHM-11-2013-0530
  » https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-11-2013-0530
• Locke, E. A. (1969). What is job satisfaction? Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 4(4), 309-336. doi: 10.1016/0030-5073(69)90013-0
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/0030-5073(69)90013-0
• Lu, L., Lu, A. C. C., Gursoy, D., & Neale, N. R. (2016). Work engagement, job satisfaction, and turnover intentions: A comparison between supervisors and line-level employees. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 28(4), 737-761. doi: 10.1108/IJCHM-07-2014-0360
  » https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-07-2014-0360
• Martínez, Ó. A., Cogco, A., & Pérez, J. (2016). Satisfacción de los beneficiarios del Programa de Estancias Infantiles: Evaluación de la política social del gobierno federal mexicano. In E. Valencia, & G. Ordoñez (Eds.), Nueva ronda de reformas estructurales en México, ¿nuevas políticas sociales? (pp. 481-498). Baja California, México: El Colegio de la Frontera Norte.
• Morris, M. G., & Venkatesh, V. (2010). Job characteristics and job satisfaction: Understanding the role of enterprise resource planning system implementation. Mis Quarterly, 34(1), 143-161. doi: 10.2307/20721418
  » https://doi.org/10.2307/20721418
• Nasurdin, A. M., Ling, T. C., & Khan, S. N. (2018). Linking social support, work engagement and job performance in nursing. International Journal of Business and Society, 19(2), 363-386. Recuperado de https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/linking-social-support%2c-work-engagement-and-job-in-nasurdin/e904dc6eab60279ac0ad357eb61d626842142d70
  » https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/linking-social-support%2c-work-engagement-and-job-in-nasurdin/e904dc6eab60279ac0ad357eb61d626842142d70
• Nawrin, R. (2018). Mediating role of meaningful work between resources and work engagement in Bangladesh’s private banks. Management & Marketing-Challenges for the Knowledge Society, 13(1), 777-795. doi: 10.2478/mmcks-2018-0005
  » https://doi.org/10.2478/mmcks-2018-0005
• Nguyen, H. M., Nguyen, C., Ngo, T. T., & Nguyen, L. V. (2019). The effects of job crafting on work engagement and work performance: A study of Vietnamese commercial banks. Journal of Asian Finance Economics and Business, 6(2), 189-201. doi: 10.13106/jafeb.2019.vol6.no2.189
  » https://doi.org/10.13106/jafeb.2019.vol6.no2.189
• Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York, USA: McGraw-Hill.
• Observatorio Laboral. (2019). Carreras mejor pagadas. Información estadística para el futuro académico y laboral en México. Recuperado de https://www.observatoriolaboral.gob.mx/#/carreras-mejor-pagadas
  » https://www.observatoriolaboral.gob.mx/#/carreras-mejor-pagadas
• Pérez, J., Martínez, O., & Cogco, A. (2017). ¿Satisfacción con programas de fomento a la artesanía en México? El caso del FONART. Investigación Administrativa, 46(120), 1-22.
• Pieters, W. R. (2018). Assessing organisational justice as a predictor of job satisfaction and employee engagement in Windhoek. Sa Journal of Human Resource Management, 16, 1-11. doi: 10.4102/sajhrm.v16i0.928
  » https://doi.org/10.4102/sajhrm.v16i0.928
• Pinheiro, J., Silva, G. M., Dias, A. L., Lages, L. F., & Preto, M. T. (2020). Fostering knowledge creation to improve performance: The mediation role of manufacturing flexibility. Business Process Management Journal, 26(7), 1871-1892. doi: 10.1108/BPMJ-10-2019-0413
  » https://doi.org/10.1108/BPMJ-10-2019-0413
• Rayton, B. A., & Yalabik, Z. Y. (2014). Work engagement, psychological contract breach and job satisfaction. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 25(17), 2382-2400. doi: 10.1080/09585192.2013.876440
  » https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2013.876440
• Radosevich, D. J., Radosevich, D. M., Riddle, M. R., & Hughes, P. A. (2008). Goal orientation as a predictor of cognitive engagement, performance, and satisfaction. Journal of the Academy of Business & Economics, 8(3), 46-55.
• Rodríguez, M., Cogco, A., & Pérez, J. (2014, Diciembre). Evaluación de la satisfacción de los beneficiarios del programa para el desarrollo de zonas prioritarias (PDZP) 2014 [Working Paper S/N]. Universidad Autónoma de Tamaulipas, Tamaulipas, México.
• Rodríguez, M., Cogco, A., Islas, A., Herrera, J. M., Martínez, O., Pérez, J., ... López, I. (2012). Índice mexicano de satisfacción de los beneficiarios de programas sociales implementados por la SEDESOL en México. Tamaulipas, México: Universidad Autónoma de Tamaulipas.
• Salanova, M., Agut, S., & Peiro, J. M. (2005). Linking organizational resources and work engagement to employee performance and customer loyalty: The mediation of service climate. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(6), 1217-1227. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.90.6.1217
  » https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.90.6.1217
• Sarangal, R. K., & Nargotra, M. (2017). Internal marketing, employee job satisfaction and employee engagement: A case of J&K Bank. Pacific Business Review International, 10(4), 80-89.
• Schaufeli, W. B., & Bakker, A. B. (2004). Job demands, job resources, and their relationship with burnout and engagement: A multi-sample study. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25(3), 293-315. doi: 10.1002/job.248
  » https://doi.org/10.1002/job.248
• Schaufeli, W. B., Bakker, A. B., & Salanova, M. (2006). The measurement of work engagement with a short questionnaire: A cross-national study. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66(4), 701-716. doi: 10.1177/0013164405282471
  » https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164405282471
• Sledge, S., Miles, A. K., & Coppage, S. (2008). What role does culture play? A look at motivation and job satisfaction among hotel workers in Brazil. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 19(9), 1667-1682. doi: 10.1080/09585190802295157
  » https://doi.org/10.1080/09585190802295157
• Sommer, K. L., & Kulkarni, M. (2012). Does constructive performance feedback improve citizenship intentions and job satisfaction? The roles of perceived opportunities for advancement, respect, and mood. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 23(2), 177-201. doi: 10.1002/hrdq.21132
  » https://doi.org/10.1002/hrdq.21132
• Tagoe, T., & Amponsah-Tawiah, K. (2020). Psychosocial hazards and work engagement in the Ghanaian banking sector: The moderating role of psychosocial safety climate. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 38(2), 310-331. doi: 10.1108/IJBM-04-2019-0136
  » https://doi.org/10.1108/IJBM-04-2019-0136
• Tlaiss, H. A. (2013). Determinants of job satisfaction in the banking sector: The case of Lebanese managers. Employee Relations, 35(4), 377-395. doi: 10.1108/ER-10-2011-0064
  » https://doi.org/10.1108/ER-10-2011-0064
• Vokić, N. P., & Hernaus, T. (2015). The triad of job satisfaction, work engagement and employee loyalty: The interplay among the concepts [Working Paper Series 07]. EFZG.
• Yalabik, Z. Y., Popaitoon, P., Chowne, J. A., & Rayton, B. A. (2013). Work engagement as a mediator between employee attitudes and outcomes. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 24(14), 2799-2823. doi: 10.1080/09585192.2013.763844
  » https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2013.763844
• Yalabik, Z. Y., Rayton, B. A., & Rapti, A. (2017). Facets of job satisfaction and work engagement. Evidence-Based Hrm-a Global Forum for Empirical Scholarship, 5(3), 248-265. doi: 10.1108/EBHRM-08-2015-0036
  » https://doi.org/10.1108/EBHRM-08-2015-0036
• Zhang, Y., Yao, X., & Cheong, J. O. (2011). City managers’ job satisfaction and frustration: Factors and implications. The American Review of Public Administration, 41(6), 670-685. doi: 10.1177/0275074010392212
  » https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074010392212
• Zhao, X., Lynch, J. G., & Chen, Q. (2010). Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: Myths and truths about mediation analysis. Journal of Consumer Research, 37(2), 197-206. doi: 10.1086/651257
  » https://doi.org/10.1086/651257

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  27 June 2022
• Date of issue
  2022

History

• Received
  23 Feb 2021
• Accepted
  22 Nov 2021