India’s services and manufacturing sectors are at the heart of its growth model, making significant contributions to its economy and labor force.  While manufacturing provides a foundation for her economic ambitions, the services industry has made important contributions to urban employment, innovation, and global competitiveness.  Both industries, while essential, also struggle with some common problems, that are, maintaining high worker morale and reducing negative attitudes in the workplace, as well as employment indifference, which may hinder organizational creativity and productivity.

In these industries, workers frequently encounter blurred workplace experiences due to inconsistencies in organizational practices, employees’ failure to receive appropriate recognition for their contributions, and a lack of procedural transparency.  These problems become more significant in rapidly transforming sectors, where conventional workplace relationships are undergoing disruption.  Workers experiencing a misalignment in their efforts and organizational recognition may develop continuance commitment instead of affective or normative ties, which leads them to be reluctant toward exit from the organization without necessarily participating constructively in their work.

Although a substantial body of work has investigated organizational commitment and job satisfaction, minimal empirical research based in India has concurrently examined how fairness perceptions of procedures and perceived workplace values influence continuance commitment and job apathy.  Barely any research addresses the interrelationship of the constructs mentioned earlier in exerting influence over a key organizational predictor of retention and performance, namely, job satisfaction.  This failure of a comprehensive exploration constitutes a primary gap in the existing body of knowledge.

To bridge this gap, this research suggests a conceptual path model that examines the interrelationships between perceived work values (PWV), procedural fairness perceptions (PFP), job satisfaction (JS), continuance commitment (CC), and job apathy (JA).  The primary focus is on understanding how employees’ shared PWV and PFP at work influence their overall JS, and how these factors further affect their rationalized bond, that is, CC, and their job-related disengagement or JA.

By situating the research within the Indian manufacturing and service contexts, the paper contributes a culturally enriched voice to the organizational behavior corpus.  The findings are designed to provide strategic direction for human resource (HR) professionals and organizational leaders seeking more engaged, satisfied, and committed workforces in the face of shifting workplace environments.

Theoretical framework

The current study is based on a multidimensional theoretical framework that integrates key constructs of organizational behavior and industrial psychology to examine the interplay between PWV, PFP, JS, CC, and JA.  All the constructs are guided by well-developed theoretical underpinnings within the Indian manufacturing and services industries.

The Two-Factor Model of Value Congruence of Abbasi et al (2022) is the best account of PWV’s basis.  The model superimposes work, political, and cultural values, assuming that value congruence yields attraction and incongruence yields repulsion.   The two-factor channel has been found to essentially decide organizational outcomes such as JS, commitment, and performance.  In the Indian context, where organizational loyalty and collectivist culture prevail, adherence to workplace values is a central driver of employees’ attitudes and behaviors in hierarchy-ordered manufacturing industries and rapidly transforming service industries.

PFP is guided by the procedural justice literature, which has emphasized the importance of fair processes over fair outcomes (Colquitt & Zipay, 2015; Tyler & Blader, 2003).  Glowczewski and Burdziej (2023) extend this logic to the world of academia and organizations, showing that the perception of procedural justice has a large positive effect on organizational legitimacy, trust, and a reduction in burnout and increased engagement.  In the Indian organizational context, where the tradition of bureaucratic decision-making is strong, open and transparent processes reduce perceptions of arbitrariness most of all among knowledge workers in the services industry.

CC in this study has been theorized in the wake of the recent debate into the Three-Component Model (Meyer & Allen, 1997).  It is suggested that CC is highly overlapping with organizational entrenchment and that CC is a bond of necessity, rather than one of volition (Rodrigues et al., 2022).  Such demarcation is crucial in the Indian manufacturing scenario where job mobility is restricted due to skill specificity and socioeconomic compulsions, and where more continuance and not necessarily affective commitment is observed.

The JS-JA relationship is theorized using the Job Demand-Resources model (Demerouti et al., 2001) and the Conservation of Resources theory (Hobfoll, 2002).  Workplace relationships and autonomy are job resources that enhance flourishing (Rossouw & Rothmann, 2020), while work demands lead to languishing and, consequently, JA.  High emotional needs and a lack of job control are present in the majority of the Indian service employees and make them prone to psychological withdrawal and apathy.

From a social psychology perspective, workplace behavior of conforming is developed through perceived norms and the impulse for social acceptance.  With the workplace culture of India, where the workplace culture often holds in high regard the unity of the group and respect for authority, Patel (2023) describes the relationship of PWV with conforming workplace behavior, and where conforming without similarity of values would reduce JS and disengage the employee.

There is existing literature that discusses the role of emotional intelligence in managing workplace bullying and the associated emotional costs (Doughty et al., 2020).  Widespread emotional stress in frontline work, characteristic of the hospitality and similar industries, can dismantle JS and lead to apathy without the protection of the organization.

The manufacturing sector in India frequently struggles with value misalignment due to traditional power dynamics, ineffective communication, and limited participatory decision-making.  Conversely, the services segment, which is more developed in terms of HR strategies, suffers from a lack of clarity in procedures, high work demands, and value-driven dissonance due to the multicultural nature of the workforce.  Such a paradigm lends itself to a deeper understanding of the connection between structural and perceptual factors in shaping commitment and disengagement, as well as their resultant effects on performance and turnover.

The following section presents a literature review that proposes three interconnected ideas in terms of the central constructs and postulates relationships to be tested from them.  Across the entire span of the tract, interactive analyses of results on value congruence, perceptions of justice in terms of procedural fairness, and downstream attitudinal consequences appear.

PWV, PFP, and JS

PWV, the feeling that employees’ personal and organizational values are congruent, is reliably associated with more favorable work experiences and robust job attitudes (Karaca et al., 2023).  Shared employee-organization values are linked with higher eudaimonic workplace well-being (Zwetsloot, 2019).  Mechanistically, value congruence acts through perceptions of justice (Presbitero, 2016).  When employees feel value congruence, they report higher PFP at work, that is, a global feeling that organizational actions and systems are reliable (Newman et al., 2019).  This pathway is reinforced by results that shared values are a positive predictor of justice, a negative predictor of emotional exhaustion, and a positive predictor of well-being (Waterman, 1993).  These values to fairness processes map to organizational justice theory (Kolodinsky et al., 2008).  Accordingly, PFP are theorized as a form of justice in the systems that comprise an employee’s work environment and is a strong predictor of employee reactions and attitudes, similar to JS (Sharma et al., 2018).  When employees see their organization as an embodiment of values they share, social identity processes such as categorizing, identifying with, and comparing the in-group and other groups instill positive in-group assessments, which elevate overall fairness judgments (Morse et al., 2022).  This positivity bias predisposes employees to favorably interpret procedures and outcomes, thereby strengthening a JS pathway through a route of justice mediation (Teodorescu, 2017).

In supporting the above findings, PWV at a practical level verify that values- and ethics-driven leadership, open-ended approaches, responsibility, and cooperation create a healthy workplace climate that is associated with commitment and JS (Greenberg, 2011).  Value-driven approaches, such as integrity, fairness in commercial dealings, and fidelity to stakeholders, are proposed as part of an organization’s business approach, which helps retain employee morale and JS (Chao & Moon, 2005).

Furthermore, at the center of the relationship between values and satisfaction is PFP, which determines the way individuals experience the organization in their daily decision-making processes (Kim, 2022).  Leventhal’s paradigm identifies six fundamental standards of PFP: consistency, accuracy, moral rectitude, representativeness, suppression of bias, and correctability, which signify respect, fairness, and care in the decision-making processes (Leventhal, 1980).  When that occurs, they communicate to the employees that they are valuable players in the in-group, a judgment that powerfully forecasts favorable job attitudes, that is, JS (Piening, 2011).  When procedures are opaque, inconsistent, or unrepresentative, suspicion and satisfaction dwindle (Sun et al., 2014).

Together, there is evidence to back a consequential set of perceived work values underlying perceived overall justice that in turn enhances employees’ JS (Hafeez & Moosa, 2019).  Relevant statistics reveal a pivotal relationship between shared values and satisfaction, identifying employees’ fairness perceptions as a primary mediator (Mushtaq et al., 2017).

Thus, the following hypotheses are proposed.

Hypothesis 1 (H1).  There is a positive relationship between employees’ perceived work values and their procedural fairness perceptions.

Hypothesis 2 (H2).  Positive levels of procedural fairness perceptions are linked with higher levels of employees’ job satisfaction.

PFP, JS, CC, and JA

PFP are one of the most effective predictors of job attitude because it communicates to employees about the status, respect, and moral intent of the organization (Mani & Mishra, 2020).  Its impact is particularly pronounced under conditions of ambiguity or high stakes, where individuals rely especially strongly on process information to make overall fairness judgments and to determine whether to place their trust and effort in the organization (Qu & Daniel, 2021).  From field experiments, outcomes have shown that procedural unfairness can attenuate central job attitudes, which often include satisfaction with one’s job and organization (Battaglio & Condrey, 2009).

Continuing in that line of thought, JS is theoretically connected to organizational commitment; however, the specific form of commitment is relevant (Knapp et al., 2019).  Research on CC reveals that the costs of exit are a buffer against turnover under negative circumstances, but at the same time, it carries risks in the context of dissatisfaction (Kim & Mason, 2020).  In certain situations, abusive supervision increased job dissatisfaction and turnover intention, but the indirect effect was smaller where CC was higher (Passetti et al., 2021).  When employees had fewer options, they were less prone to quit in the face of dissatisfaction (Moin et al., 2022).  The dynamic highlights a double edge in the form of CC in that it minimizes exit, but where employees stick around because they feel they must do so, negative affect and retaliatory behaviors become a risk, particularly where dissatisfaction is a long-term condition (Wei & Si, 2013).

Together with these strands, fair processes emanate respect, thereby enhancing trust and satisfaction (Moin, 2018).  Accordingly, the contextual sensitivity of fairness effects is of relevance (Duffy et al., 2003).  The implication for this account is that PFP is more than a background condition.  Instead, it is a primary driver of job attitudes, whose presence or absence determines the form of commitment that subsequently develops (Li et al., 2007).  PFP maintain satisfaction and healthier attachments while unfair procedures risk begetting only continuance attachment that may maintain headcount but eat away at morale (Lopez Bohle & Mladinic Alonso, 2017).

JA, a state characterized by low energy, diminished interest, and indifference, can be understood as a downstream reaction to prolonged dissatisfaction, erosion of trust, and perceived unfairness (Alheet, 2019).  From a justice perspective, when procedures lack consistency, employees infer that their voices and interests are not respected, undermining meaning and engagement (Shima & Behzaad, 2016).  Justice theory emphasizes that fair processes communicate value and inclusion.  In contrast, unfair processes communicate the opposite, which over time can manifest as apathy rather than overt exit, especially when employees feel constrained by the costs of leaving (Gulsun & Gor, 2012).

As the literature shows, managers faced with procedurally unjust decision situations expressed significantly less trust and support, and the negative frame of layoffs served only to accentuate these outcomes under unjust procedures (Khan et al., 2019).  Indeed, less trust and less support are in line with the motivational context in which apathy arises, that is, when individuals experience processes as biased or insensitive, the motivation to put effort in wanes and yields to disengagement (Hobfoll et al., 2018).

The connection between values and justice fortifies this explanation.  The existing body of literature contends that when shared values are in a positive relationship with perceived overall justice, it correlates with a decrease in emotional exhaustion and increased well-being (Hancock et al., 2013).  In contrast, value incongruence decreases justice perceptions, resulting in increased strain and a reduction in JS, antecedents of apathy (Frieder et al., 2015).  Practice-informed evidence similarly identifies that the fortification of workplace values, such as moral leadership, fairness in exchange, integrity, and transparent and participatory organizational processes, enhances employee morale, loyalty, and satisfaction, and hence suggests that a lack of them cultivates a hotbed of apathetic reactions (Chen et al., 2021).

A parsimonious integrated explanation that arises is that perceived workplace values protect against apathy indirectly by bolstering the perception of justice and well-being, while value incongruence has the opposite effect and is more liable to lead to exhaustion and disengagement (Marathe et al., 2019).   PFP that meets the standards of Leventhal transmits respect and neutrality and maintains faith and JS (Xanthopoulou et al., 2013).   In turn, JS suppresses the antecedents that form apathy, cynicism, and emotional exhaustion.   Where fairness signal indicators fail, satisfaction is lost and apathy is more probable, and doubly so where exit is restricted (Rajguru et al., 2020).   While the CC has the ability to imprison dissatisfied employees when coupled with perceived unfairness and low satisfaction levels, apathy may arise and take the form of a coping attitude characterized by staying physically in the workplace but psychologically distant (Sridharan et al., 2018).

In short, PFP plays a keystone role in the structure of positive job attitudes.  By embedding and broadcasting positive views regarding work values, organisations not only enhance JS but also engender a commitment that grows and avert JA drift.

Hence, the following hypotheses are proposed.

• Hypothesis 3 (H3). Highly satisfied employees are more likely to possess continuance commitment.
• Hypothesis 4 (H4). Workers with higher job satisfaction will be less prone to job apathy.
• PFP and JS in Mediation Roles

PFP maintains the level to which people feel organizational processes and interpersonal treatment to be fair, transparent, and interactive (Oakley III & Lynch, 2000).   Perceptions of PFP in HR process scenarios are associated with systemic elements and interpersonal treatment (Aslan & Atesoglu, 2021).   Individual attributes form expectations of fairness that in turn moderate their experience of PFP thus creating a cognitive connection between the things people value and the level of fair that they think procedures to be (Judge et al., 2017).

PFP is a strong predictor of relevant attitudes and relational outcomes at the heart of systems of commitment like organizational attractiveness, acceptance/ recommendation intention of job, and even future performance (Dinc et al., 2018).  When therefore, employees see that workplace procedures and values work well together, they assimilate the value cues into fairness perceptions in the day-to-day and hence playing the role of a proximal mediator between PV and future states like satisfaction, commitment, and disengagement (Tjahjono et al., 2015).

Related public-service evidence illustrates that fair procedure is a strong predictor of trusting and cooperative attitudes towards authorities that are linked with increased satisfaction and attachment that shed light on the strength of attitudinal support for fair procedure (Melkamu & Teshome, 2023).

JS is a “delightful and optimistic” evaluative condition that is a reaction to job design/experience and process quality and forecasts motivation and performance.  Empirically, job feature variations like rotation and enrichment are framed in a positive context of JS (Alias et al., 2018), emphasizing that where valued processes are applied equitably and understandably by the organization, satisfaction improves.

On the other hand, unclear, contradictory, or overloaded roles dampen JS, the very affective and cognitive fabric that nourishes apathy in the form of sluggish energy, lack of interest, and retreat (Otoo & Rather, 2024).  Stress-prone, recurring, or poorly managed work also produces lower satisfaction and burnout/fatigue, situations that phenomenologically approach JA, such as low involvement and distancing (Ozel & Hacioglu, 2021).  Evidence from literature demonstrates that stress and fatigue diminish JS, representing the erosion of the affect that culminates in apathy for work tasks (Isfianadewi & Noordyani, 2020).

Under the three-component commitment model, CC that is, remaining because of restrictions acts differently in comparison with affective commitment (Kalina, 2024).  Accordingly, PV that are weakly enacted with low perceived fairness might direct employees towards continuance-dominant ties, that through weaker satisfaction raise apathy and departure cognitions (Hacioglu and Sevgilioglu, 2019).

Weaving these threads together, a double-mediation is advanced.  When employees feel that organizational values center on respect, open communication, and merit, they anticipate and feel fair procedures that sustain JS (Pujol-Cols, 2019).  Greater satisfaction suppresses job lethargy and the corresponding fatigue route to disengagement and diminishing dependence on continuance-predominant causes of staying (Díaz-Lauzurica & Moreno-Salinas, 2019).

From the above discussion, the below hypotheses are set up.

• Hypothesis 5(A) (H5(A)). Procedural fairness perceptions of employees will mediate the relationship between workplace value perceived by employees and employees’ job satisfaction.
• Hypothesis 5(B) (H5(B)). Employees’ job satisfaction will intervene between their perceived procedural fairness and continuance commitment and job lethargy.

All the above hypotheses are integrated in the form of a conceptual latent variable model (LVM) of future empirical testing and displayed in Figure I.

Figure I. The conceptual latent variable model

Sample and Data Collection Procedure

This study used a random survey approach to gather information from different organizations in India.  With exact data unavailable for the workforce population, the sample size was approximated using the method when the population was infinite (Liu, 2014).  Accordingly, the recommended sample size was 748. 

To collect the data, 37 organizations were randomly selected from the Indian business directory, “Yellow Pages”.  They were contacted through their HR departments for permission to conduct the survey and 11 gave consent.  Among them, six were from the manufacturing sector.  Included in this sector were automobiles, power transmission, agricultural tools, sheet cutting, metal fabrication, and iron/steel products.  Of the rest, five came from the service sector, including life insurance, banking, hospitality, IT-enabled services, and print media.

Participating subjects for the survey were based on their willingness to complete the questionnaires, which were distributed with a cover letter detailing the objectives of the study, background about the researcher, guarantees of anonymity, and that the information sought would only be used in academic contexts.  Out of the 1,900 questionnaires that were distributed, 837 completed and usable ones were returned for analysis, denoting a response rate of 44.05%. 

All the respondents were permanent and full-time managers of their organizations.  They had, on average, an age of 36.75 years and working experience of 13.71 years.  The sample comprised 618 respondents from manufacturing organizations and 219 from service organizations.  There were 548 males while 289 respondents were females.  Among the respondents, 129 belonged to senior management, 406 to middle management, and 302 to junior management.

MEASURES

The present study used a five-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) for measuring the main constructs.

PWV.  PWV was measured in this research by 12 adapted items as developed and reported by Van Dyne et al. (1994).  An example survey item was ‘Reputation for quality surpasses major competitors.  The Cronbach’s alpha for this measure was .85.

PFP.  This variable was measured by adapting four items reported by Daly and Geyer (1994).  An example of the adapted survey items was ‘The organization was fair to me in the way that it made decisions.  Two out of the four items had to be reverse-scored.  The Cronbach’s alpha for this measure was .79.

JS of employees was measured with three factors of the 11-item scale reported by Schnake (1983). A sample item of the measure was ‘I am satisfied by the way I am treated by the people I work with’.  The Cronbach’s alpha reliability for this measure was .86.

Respondents’ CC was assessed by eight of the 24 items of the organizational commitment inventory developed by Meyer and Allen (1997). A sample item of this inventory was ‘It would be very hard for me to leave my organization right now, even if I wanted to’.  Two of the eight items had to be reverse-scored one of which was ‘It wouldn’t be too costly for me to leave my organization now’.  The Cronbach’s alpha measure of internal consistency for this measure was .91.

From Schmidt et al.’s (2017) scale of job apathy, two factors namely, apathetic cognition and apathetic action comprising five items each were used to measure employees’ job apathy. A sample item each from the two factors were ‘It is difficult to become motivated in my job’ and ‘I refrain from volunteering to take on assignments’, respectively.  The Cronbach’s alpha was .71.

Control Variables.  This study controlled several respondent characteristics, including age, work experience, sector of the organization, gender, and managerial level that predict their behavior and attitudes.  Age and work experience were treated as continuous variables, while organizational sector (manufacturing was coded as 1 and services as 2) and gender (male was coded as 1 and female as 2) were treated as dichotomous categorical variables.  Level of management (LoM) was coded as a categorical variable that included senior, middle, and junior management, coded as 1, 2, and 3 respectively.  Similar categorizations were used in previous studies (Kim et al., 2020).

Common Method Bias

A single latent factor approach was used to test common method bias (CMB) as given by Siemsen et al. (2010).  A common latent variable model (CLVM) was built by connecting all the indicators of the study variables and then compared with the conceptual LVM.  The fit indices for the CLVM were .64 for the CFI as well as for the IFI, while the corresponding indices for the conceptual LVM were both .92.  Based on these results, the CLVM was rejected, and consequently, CMB was not a significant issue in the proposed model.

Measurement Model Evaluation

In this study, guidelines were followed to evaluate the measurement model for reliability and validity (Ramayah et al., 2011).  Construct reliability was confirmed with composite reliability values ranging from .72 to .87.  Convergent validity was established by average variance extracted (AVE) values, which were found to range from .55 to .66.  As per the results denoted in Table I, the squares of the intercorrelations between the study variables were less than the AVE values which provided substantiation of discriminant validity (Koufteros, 1999).  In addition, the heterotrait-monotrait (HTMT) ratio was applied (Henseler et al., 2016).  As per Table I, these ranged from .03 to .75, also evidencing discriminant validity.  These results are presented in Table I.

Table I. Evaluation of the measurement model

Note. n = 837; C.R. is ‘Composite reliability’; The diagonal values of the matrix represent the average variance extracted while the off-diagonal values are the squares of the inter-correlations between the study variables; Off-diagonal values in parentheses are results of the heterotrait-monotrait (HTMT) analysis; ‘PWV’ is ‘Perceived workplace values’, ‘PFP’ is ‘Procedural fairness perceptions’, ‘JS’ is ‘Job satisfaction’, ‘CC’ is ‘Continuance commitment’ and ‘JA’ is ‘Job apathy’.

Configural Invariance Testing

Before proceeding with further analysis, configural invariance was proven between the groups, namely, sector, gender, and LoM.  The results indicate that the measures carried out for this study were invariant across sector (Dc2df = 306.6340, p = .90), gender (Dc2df = 318.2340, p = .79), and LoM (Dc2df = 406380, p = .17), hence justifying the generalizability of results across all groups.

Descriptive Statistics, Correlations, and Reliability

Table II reports the descriptive statistics, correlations, and Cronbach’s alpha for all variables involved in the study.  As conjectured, significant positive correlations were found between PWV and PJP, r = .53, p ≤ .01, and between PFP and JS, r = .47, p ≤ .01.  A significant positive correlation was also found between JS and CC, r = .38, p ≤ .01, though a significant negative correlation was found between JS and JA with r = –.21 and p ≤ .01.

Table II. Descriptive statistics, inter-correlations, and alpha reliability indices

Note. n = 837; * p ≤ .05, **p ≤ .01; SD, Standard Deviation. Cronbach’s Alpha reliability indices are reported in parentheses on the diagonal.

Path Analysis for the Tested Model

The relationship among the study variables was analyzed through the application of AMOS version 24.0 (Arbuckle and Wothke, 1999) in carrying out the path analyses.  It was found that PWV positively and significantly predicted PFP with standardized β = .60, p ≤ .01, for H1.  Similarly, JS significantly regressed on PFP with standardized β = .58, p ≤ .01, for H2.  Moreover, JS positively predicted CC (standardized β = .38, p ≤ .01), thereby confirming H3, whereas JA was negatively associated with JS (standardized β = –.14, p ≤ .01), thereby supporting H4.  The results as well as the hypothesized relations are presented in Table III.

Table III. Regression analyses result for the conceptual LVM¨

Note. n = 837; short-forms are as mentioned in the previous table(s) and in text; ¨’LVM’ is ‘Latent Variable Model’; †C.R. is ‘Critical Ratios’, a recommended basis for testing the statistical significance of SEM components. C.R.≥±1.96 indicates significance at the 95% level and C.R.≥±2.58 indicates significance at the 99% level.

Mediation Analysis through Competing LVMs

The influence of mediation in the proposed conceptual model (see Figure I) was examined by adopting a sequential mediation approach.  For this purpose, three competing LVMs were assessed using three absolute and four comparative fit indices.  The absolute fit indices comprised the normed χ2, the goodness-of-fit index (GFI), and the root-mean-square-error-of-approximation (RMSEA).  The comparative fit indices included the comparative-fit-index (CFI), the incremental-fit-index (IFI), the normed-fit-index (NFI), and the relative-fit-index (RFI).  As per the literature, the suggested cutoffs for RMSEA ≤ .06, 1.00 ≤  normed χ2 ≤ 3.00, and for all the fit-indices that is, GFI, CFI, IFI, NFI, and RFI ≥ .90 (Byrne, 2001).  Following these suggested cut-offs, a model could be accepted for further analyses only if it met these minimum acceptable threshold values.

As stated, three competing LVMs were tested through structural equation modeling (SEM) procedures to explore mediation effects using respective fit indices.  The first was LVM1 with PWV as an exogenous latent variable and CC and JA as endogenous variables, without mediators.  The next was LVM2, representing quasi-mediation with PFP and JS as mediators between PWV and the outcome variables that were, CC and JA and with direct paths linking PWV, CC, and JA.  The final model was LVM3 where no direct linkages were considered between PWV and the outcome variables and which included PFP as the first-order and JS as the second-order mediators, thus, representing full­-mediation.

The best among these models was LVM3, that is, the model with quasi-mediation, with the values for normed χ² = 2.98, GFI = .92, RMSEA = .05, CFI = .91, IFI = .91, NFI = .91, and RFI = .90.  In keeping with these results which conformed to the recommendations of Chin et al. (2003) and as all fit indices were above the threshold value, LVM3 was used for further analysis.  The fit indices are shown in Table IV.

Table IV. Analysis of competing LVMs

Note. n = 837; short-forms are as mentioned in the previous table(s) and in text; Minimum acceptable values of the fit indices are as mentioned in the text.

Additional Mediation Analysis

For robustness of mediation effects, additional tests were carried out which comprised Sobel’s (1982) test, Aorian’s (1944) test, and Goodman’s (1960) test suggested by MacKinnon et al. (2002).  These tests confirmed the absence of Type I error.  The indirect-to-total effect ratios were calculated and presented as percentages of mediation.  In addition, indirect effects were addressed by using the AMOS 24.0 plugin (Gaskin and Lim, 2018) and proved to be significant in all paths within LVM3, which caused the verification of H5(A) and H5(B).  These results are depicted in Tables V and VI.

Table V. Additional Analysis of Mediation vis-à-vis LVM4

Note. n = 837; **p ≤ .01; short-forms are as mentioned in the previous table(s) and in text.

Table VI. Specific indirect effects for LVM4 based on the AMOS 24.0 plugin

Note. n = 837; * p ≤ .05, **p ≤ .01, ***p ≤ .001; short-forms are as mentioned in the previous table(s) and in text.

The test supported all of the hypotheses and hence the conceptual model.  The written implications of the results are discussed in the subsection that follows.

Theoretical Implications

The results of the present study hold a range of valuable theoretical implications.   Firstly, the results support the function of PFP as a unifying explanatory framework in organizational behavior scholarship.  Consistent with Krawczyk’s (2009) framework of procedural and distributive fairness, employees’ perceptions are informed not only by distributive outcomes but also by the PFP and openness of processes.  By emphasizing the mediational role of PFP between PWV and job-related outcomes, the study extends the coverage of fairness theory by demonstrating that fairness directly influences job satisfaction and indirectly determines the level of JA and CC.  This contributes to knowledge of fairness by embedding it in the dynamic environment of the Indian manufacturing and services sectors, in which procedure departures are frequently highlighted.

Second, the study supports the rationale for the incorporation of PWV and psychological ownership in models of commitment and satisfaction.  Aslan and Atesoglu (2021) demonstrated that innovation and participation in workplace values have a considerable direct effect on job satisfaction through the mediational role of psychological ownership.  The current results follow this rationale by showing that perceived workplace values, when supported through fair procedure, can fortify employees’ attachment to the organization while alleviating disengagement and apathy.  Theoretically, this unifies the value congruence model and the job attitude models by showing that value congruence must be channeled through procedure transparency in order to take hold in sustainable organizational commitment.

Finally, the paper contributes to the scholarship on commitment by refining the understanding of continuance commitment in terms of job satisfaction and apathy.  Mendoza (2019) found that job involvement mediates the linkage between job satisfaction and organizational commitment, and involvement-driven mechanisms keep employees psychologically committed.  By placing CC in the vicinity of fairness and satisfaction, our study adds nuance to the long-standing discussion of whether the ties of CC are motivational or binding in nature.  Moreover, empirical support from Alsadaan and Alqahtani (2024) on toxic leadership reveals that poisonous climates weaken normative and affective but reinforce CC.  All in all, the current study theoretically contributes to the scholarship on commitment by illustrating that PFP and JS can neutralize the disengaging force of CC and suppress the growth of JA.

Practical Implications

The usefulness of this study lies in providing HR managers and leaders in the Indian manufacturing and services sectors with guidance on creating a more committed and resilient workplace.  Commitment studies in stressful industries reveal that excessive workloads, low autonomy, and role vagueness decrease affective commitment and reinforce continuance attachment.  In the case of Indian manufacturing companies with typical pyramidal structures and stringent processes, leaders must introduce transparent and consultative systems that minimize procedural vagueness and bolster intrinsic motivation among employees.  In services industries like information technology and hotel management, human resource development (HRD) interventions that reinforce learning, pro-career growth, and employee involvement are found to enhance affective commitment and minimize attrition risk.  Managers in both industries can therefore employ proactive HRD interventions like structured mentoring, skill-building exercises, and employee appreciation schemes to transform continuance ties into more substantial affective and normative attachments.

Furthermore, the study emphasizes the importance of decreasing JA, which has design and culture implications of a critical kind for the workplace.  Research evidence suggests that social loafing, in the form of apathy and disengagement, reduces the quality of work in teams where task responsibility is low.  Managers in Indian business companies, where teamwork and projects are the norm, should design performance management systems that strike a balance between personal responsibility and team-level recognition.  In repetitive task situations in manufacturing where disengagement results from repetition, workplace design, including job rotation, skill development, and autonomy-building practices, has the ability to neutralize apathy.  Programs such as infusing workplace spirituality and developing a purpose and shared-meaning culture have the potential to reduce stress and improve satisfaction and may prove helpful in India, where industries are labor-intensive in nature.

Finally, the findings highlight the importance of aligning organizational strategies with the evolving expectations of the workforce.  For example, Generation-Y employees in India, much like their global counterparts, prioritize recognition, career growth, and value congruence in their work environments.  Failure to provide these leads to high turnover and a prevalence of continuance commitment rather than genuine engagement.  By focusing on perceived fairness, transparent processes, and meaningful work, Indian organizations can not only retain talent but also enhance productivity and innovation.  This integrative approach positions the findings of this study as highly relevant to practitioners seeking to balance competitive pressures with employee well-being across both manufacturing and service domains.

Limitations of the Study

Despite the contributions of this study, it has some weaknesses that should be acknowledged.  The study is based on cross-sectional survey data and, therefore, cannot allow for a test of causality between the studied constructs.  Although statistically the relationships between PWV, PFP, JS, CC, and JA are evidenced, the dynamic pattern of these relationships across time would be better reflected with the aid of longitudinal study designs.

In addition, the reliance on self-reported instruments introduces the potential for common method variance and social desirability bias.  The answers from the respondents may not accurately represent their actual attitudes and behaviors, potentially distorting the outcomes.   These shortcomings should be taken into account when interpreting the results, particularly in applying them to organizational contexts in the Indian manufacturing and service industries.

Future Research Direction

Future studies can further develop this research in several valuable respects.  Longitudinal and experimental study designs can yield more substantial evidence of causal relationships between the constructs under study, particularly in clarifying the development of perceptions of fairness and value congruence in relation to job satisfaction and apathy.  Comparative between-industry studies in the Indian manufacturing and services industries could yield richer information on how contextual factors, such as organizational culture or leadership styles, intervene in the relationships between them.  Further studies can also expand the conceptual model by introducing other pertinent constructs, such as perceived organizational support, leadership styles, or workplace spirituality, which hold promise for the development of greater job satisfaction and reduced disengagement.  Investigations into the moderating effects of demographic variables, such as generational differences or gender, can also yield valuable insights for designing HR strategies tailored to different groups with varying needs and aspirations.  With the increasing diversity and aspirational shifts in the Indian workforce, such studies are well-timed and urgently needed.

This study advances knowledge of the effects of PWV and PFP on central job attitudes, including satisfaction, CC, and apathy, in the manufacturing and service industries of India.  The results shed light upon the vital differentiating role of fair processes between shared values in the workplace and employee outcomes.  By demonstrating that fairness and satisfaction possess the capacity to prevent disengagement and employees from becoming dependent upon only the continuance ties that bind them in the workplace, the study contributes theoretically and also provides management with guidance.

In short, the study suggests that work engagement and commitment in Indian workplaces cannot be sustained solely by economic rewards or structural demands.  Instead, transparent procedures, value consistency, and facilitative organizational processes are the keys to stimulating genuine commitment and reducing job lethargy.  Through the completion of this study, it not only fills the gaps in existing prominent theoretical frameworks in organizational behavior but also provides practitioner-friendly findings pertinent to the optimization of performance and retention in competitive business environments.

1. Abbasi, Z., Billsberry, J., & Todres, M. (2022). An integrative conceptual two-factor model of workplace value congruence and incongruence. Management Research Review, 45(7), 897–912.
2. Alheet, A. F. (2019). The impact of organizational silence causal factors on self-efficacy of health center employees in the Jordanian capital city (Amman). Academy of Strategic Management Journal, 18(3), 1–15.
3. Alias, N. E., Othman, R., Hamid, L. A., Salwey, N. S., Romaiha, N. R., Samad, K. A., & Masdek, N. R. N. M. (2018). Managing job design: The roles of job rotation, job enlargement and job enrichment on job satisfaction. Journal of Economic and Management Perspectives, 12(1), 397–401.
4. Alsadaan, N., & Alqahtani, M. (2024). Toxic leadership in emergency nurses: Assessing abusive supervision and its team-level impacts on conflict management and organizational commitment. Journal of Nursing Management, 2024(1), 1–11.
5. Aorian, L. A. (1944). The probability function of the product of two normally distributed variables. Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 18(2), 265-271.
6. Arbuckle, J., & Wothke, W. (1999). AMOS 4.0 user’s guide. Chicago, IL: SPSS Inc. and Smallwaters Corporation.
7. Aslan, M., & Atesoglu, H. (2021). The effect of innovation and participation as workplace values on job satisfaction and the mediating effect of psychological ownership. SAGE Open, 11(4), 1–13.
8. Aslan, M., & Atesoglu, H. (2021). The effect of innovation and participation as workplace values on job satisfaction and the mediating effect of psychological ownership. SAGE Open, 11(4), 1–13.
9. Battaglio, R. P., & Condrey, S. E. (2009). Reforming public management: Analyzing the impact of public service reform on organizational and managerial trust. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 19(4), 689–707.
10. Byrne, B. M. (2001). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum and Associates Publishers.
11. Chao, G. T., & Moon, H. (2005). The cultural mosaic: A metatheory for understanding the complexity of culture. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(6), 1128–1140.
12. Chen, C., Qin, X., Johnson, R. E., Huang, M., Yang, M., & Liu, S. (2021). Entering an upward spiral: Investigating how and when supervisors’ talking about abuse leads to subsequent abusive supervision. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 42(3), 407–428.
13. Chin, W. W., Marcolin, B. L., & Newsted, P. R. (2003). A partial least squares latent variable modeling approach for maximum interaction effects: Results from a Monte Carlo simulation study and an electronic-mail emotion/adoption model. Information Systems Research, 14(2), 189-217.
14. Colquitt, J. A., & Zipay, K. P. (2015). Justice, fairness, and employee reactions. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 2, 75–99.
15. Daly, J. P., & Geyer, P. D. (1994). The role of fairness in implementing large-scale change: Employee evaluations of process and outcome in seven facility relocation. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 15(7), 623–638.
16. Demerouti, E., Bakker, A. B., Nachreiner, F., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2001). The job demands-resources model of burnout. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(3), 499–512.
17. Díaz-Lauzurica, B., & Moreno-Salinas, D. (2019). Computational thinking and robotics: A teaching experience in compulsory secondary education with students with high degree of apathy and demotivation. Sustainability, 11(18), 5109.
18. Dinc, M. S., Kuzey, C., & Steta, N. (2018). Nurses’ job satisfaction as a mediator of the relationship between organizational commitment components and job performance. Journal of Workplace Behavioral Health, 33(2), 75–95.
19. Doughty, L., Moreo, A., & Kitterlin, M. (2020). Bullying: A dish best removed from the menu. International Hospitality Review, 34(1), 1–4.
20. Duffy, R., Fearne, A., & Hornibrook, S. (2003). Measuring distributive and procedural justice: An exploratory of the fairness of the retailer-supplier relationship in the UK food industry. British Food Journal, 105(10), 682–694.
21. Frieder, R. E., Hochwarter, W. A., & DeOrtentiis, P. S. (2015). Attenuating the negative effects of abusive supervision: The role of proactive voice behavior and resource management ability. The Leadership Quarterly, 26(5), 821–837.
22. Gaskin, J., & Lim, J. (2018). Indirect effects, AMOS plugin. Gaskination’s Statwiki. Retrieved July 22, 2025, from http://statwiki.kolobkreations.com/index.php?title=Main_Page
23. Glowczewski, M., & Burdziej, S. (2023). (In)justice in academia: Procedural fairness, students’ academic identification, and perceived legitimacy of university authorities. Higher Education, 86, 163–184.
24. Goodman, L. A. (1960). On the exact variance of products. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 55(292), 708-713.
25. Greenberg, J. (2011). Organizational justice: The dynamics of fairness in the workplace. In S. Zedeck (Ed.), APA handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (Vol. 3, pp. 271–327).
26. Gulsun, E., & Gor, I. (2012). The causes and effects of organizational silence: On which issues the nurses remain silent? Journal of Management Economics and Business, 10(22), 131–151.
27. Hacioglu, U., & Sevgilioglu, G. (2019). The evolving role of automated systems and its cyber-security issue for global business operations in Industry 4.0. International Journal of Business Ecosystem & Strategy, 1(1), 1–11.
28. Hafeez, I., & Moosa, M. (2019). Influence of thriving and job satisfaction on turnover intention: Mediating role of job satisfaction. International Journal of Information, Business and Management, 11(3), 1–8.
29. Hancock, J. I., Allen, D. G., Bosco, F. A., McDaniel, K. R., & Pierce, C. A. (2013). Meta-analytic review of employee turnover as a predictor of firm performance. Journal of Management, 39(3), 573–603.
30. Henseler, J., Hubona, G., & Ray, P.A. (2016)., Using PLS path modeling in new technology research: updated guidelines. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 116(1), 2-20.
31. Hobfoll, S. E. (2002). Social and psychological resources and adaptation. Review of General Psychology, 6(4), 307–31.
32. Hobfoll, S. E., Halbesleben, J., Neveu, J.-P., & Westman, M. (2018). Conservation of resources in the organizational context: The reality of resources and their consequences. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 5(1), 103–128.
33. Isfianadewi, D., & Noordyani, A. (2020). Implementation of coping strategy in work-family conflict on job stress and job satisfaction: Social support as moderation variable. Review of Integrative Business and Economics Research, 9(2), 223–231.
34. Judge, T. A., Weiss, H. M., Kammeyer-Mueller, J. D., & Hulin, C. L. (2017). Job attitudes, job satisfaction, and job affect: A century of continuity and of change. Journal of Applied Psychology, 102(3), 356–374.
35. Khan, A. N., Ali, A., Khan, N. A., & Jehan, N. (2019a). A study of relationship between transformational leadership and task performance: The role of social media and affective organisational commitment. International Journal of Business Information Systems, 31(4), 499–516.
36. Kim, J., Lee, S., & Byun, G. (2020). Building a thriving organization: The antecedents of job engagement and their impact on voice behavior. Sustainability, 12(18), 1-17.
37. Kim, M., & Mason, D. P. (2020). Are you ready: Financial management, operating reserves, and the immediate impact of COVID-19 on nonprofits. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 49(6), 1191–1209.
38. Kim, M.-H. (2022). Framing effects, procedural fairness, and the nonprofit managers’ reactions to job layoffs in response to the economic shock of the COVID-19 crisis. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 33(5), 1035–1050.
39. Knapp, J. R., Sprinkle, T. A., Urick, M. J., & Delaney-Klinger, K. A. (2019). The belonging model of trust. Nonprofit Management & Leadership, 30(1), 133–153.
40. Kolodinsky, R. W., Giacalone, R. A., & Jurkiewicz, C. L. (2008). Workplace values and outcomes: Exploring personal, organizational, and interactive workplace spirituality. Journal of Business Ethics, 81(2), 465–480.
41. Koufteros, X.A. (1999). Testing a model of pull production: a paradigm for manufacturing research using structural equation modeling. Journal of Operations Management, 17(4), 467-488.
42. Krawczyk, M. W. (2009). A model of procedural and distributive fairness. Theory and Decision, 70(1), 111–128.
43. Leventhal, G. S. (1980). What should be done with equity theory? In K. J. Gergen, M. S. Greenberg, & R. H. Willis (Eds.), Social exchange: Advances in theory and research (pp. 27–55). Springer.
44. Li, H., Bingham, J. B., & Umphress, E. E. (2007). Fairness from the top: Perceived procedural justice and collaborative problem solving in new product development. Organization Science, 18(2), 200–216.
45. Liu, X.S. (2014), Statistical Power Analysis for the Social and Behavioral Sciences: Basic and Advanced Techniques, Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group, New York, NY.
46. Lopez Bohle, S. A., & Mladinic Alonso, A. R. (2017). The effect of procedural fairness and supervisor support in the relationship between job insecurity and organizational citizenship behavior. Review of Business Management, 19(65), 337–357.
47. MacKinnon, D. P., Lockwood, C. M., Hoffman, J. M., West, S. G., & Sheets, V. (2002). A comparison to test mediation and other intervening variable effects. Psychological Methods, 7(1), 83-104.
48. Mani, S., & Mishra, M. (2020). Non-monetary levers to enhance employee engagement in organizations: “GREAT” model of motivation during the COVID-19 crisis. Strategic HR Review, 19(4), 171–175.
49. Marathe, G. M., Balasubramanian, G., & Chalil, G. (2019). Conceptualising the psychological work states: Extending the JD-R model. Management Research Review, 42(10), 1187–1200.
50. Melkamu, M. T., & Teshome, W. (2023). Public trust in the police: Investigating the influence of police performance, procedural fairness, and police-community relations in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Cogent Social Sciences, 9(1), 1–20 .
51. Mendoza, E. C. (2019). The mediating role of job involvement between job satisfaction and organizational commitment in a small and medium sized business enterprise. International Review of Management and Marketing, 9(5), 74–81.
52. Meyer, J. P., & Allen, N. J. (1997). Commitment in the workplace: Theory, research, and application. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
53. Moin, M. F. (2018). The link between perceptions of leader emotion regulation and followers’ organizational commitment. Journal of Management Development, 37(2), 178–187.
54. Moin, M. F., Wei, F., Khan, A. N., Ali, A., & Chang, S. C. (2022). Abusive supervision and job outcomes: A moderated mediation model. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 35(3), 430–440.
55. Morse, L., Teodorescu, M. H. M., Awwad, Y., & Kane, G. C. (2022). Do the ends justify the means? Variation in the distributive and procedural fairness of machine learning algorithms. Journal of Business Ethics, 181(4), 1083–1095.
56. Mushtaq, M., Abid, G., Sarwar, K., & Ahmed, S. (2017). Forging ahead: How to thrive at the modern workplace. Iranian Journal of Management Studies, 10(4), 783–818.
57. Newman, T. J., Okamoto, K., Kimiecik, C., Sohns, E., Burns, M., & Magier, E. (2019). The role of social workers in sport: Shared values, interprofessional collaborations, and unique contributions. Journal of Sport Psychology in Action, 10(3), 160–173.
58. Oakley III, E. F., & Lynch, P. (2000). Promise-keeping: A low priority in a hierarchy of workplace values. Journal of Business Ethics, 27, 377–392.
59. Otoo, F. N. K., & Rather, N. A. (2024). Human resource development practices and employee engagement: The mediating role of organizational commitment. Rajagiri Management Journal, 18(3), 202–232.
60. Ozel, E., & Hacıoglu, U. (2021). Examining the relationship between burnout and job satisfaction of flight crew: An analysis on the critical fatigue risk factors in the aviation industry. International Journal of Business Ecosystem & Strategy, 3(1), 1–20.
61. Passetti, E., Battaglia, M., Bianchi, L., & Annesi, N. (2021). Coping with the COVID-19 pandemic: The technical, moral, and facilitating role of management control. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 34(6), 1430–1444.
62. Patel, A. (2023). Workplace conformity and workplace values: A comparative study of TCS and Infosys. Journal of Management & Public Policy, 14(2), 49–63.
63. Piening, E. P. (2011). Insights into the process dynamics of innovation implementation. Public Management Review, 13(1), 127–157.
64. Presbitero, A., Roxas, B., & Chadee, D. (2016). Looking beyond HRM practices in enhancing employee retention in BPOs: Focus on employee–organisation value fit. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 27(6), 635–652.
65. Pujol-Cols, L. (2019). Core self-evaluations, perceived job characteristics and job satisfaction: Evidence from two independent samples of highly skilled Argentinian workers. Revista Colombiana de Psicología, 28(1), 131–146.
66. Qu, H., & Daniel, J. L. (2021). Is “overhead” a tainted word? A survey experiment exploring framing effects of nonprofit overhead on donor decision. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 50(2), 397–419.
67. Rajaguru, R., Narendran, R., & Rajesh, G. (2020). Social loafing in group-based learning: Student-created and instructor-created group perspectives. Education + Training, 62(4), 483–501.
68. Ramayah, T., Lee, J.W.C., & In, J.B.C. (2011). Network collaboration and performance in the tourism sector. Service Business, 5(4), 411-428.
69. Rodrigues, A. C. A., Bastos, A. V. B., Moscon, D. C. B., & Queiroz, G. C. (2022). Commitment or entrenchment? Convergent and discriminant validation of affective and continuance dimensions of the three-component model. Revista de Gestao, 29(1), 17–38.
70. Rossouw, E., & Rothmann, S. (2020). Job demands and job resources and well-being of judges in South Africa. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology, 46, 1–13.
71. Schmidt, G. B., Park, G., Keeney, J., & Ghumman, S. (2017). Job apathy: Scale development and initial validation. Journal of Career Assessment, 25(3), 484–501.
72. Schnake, M. E. (1983). An empirical assessment of the effects of affective response in the measurement of organizational climate. Personnel Psychology, 36(4), 791–807.
73. Sharma, A., Khandelwal, U., & Agrawal, R. (2018). Addressing workplace values in the organization: Learning from different perspectives. International Journal of Business Ethics in Developing Economies, 7(2), 9–12.
74. Shima, S., & Behzad, S. (2016). The impact of organizational culture on organizational silence and voice of faculty members of Islamic Azad University in Tehran. Iranian Journal of Management Studies, 10(1), 113–142.
75. Siemsen, E., Roth, A., & Oliveira, P. (2010). Common method bias in regression model with linear, quadratic, and interaction effects. Organizational Research Methods, 13(3), 456-476.
76. Sobel, M. E. (1982). Asymptotic interval for indirect effects in structural equation models. In S. Leinhardt (Ed.). Sociological Methodology, pp. 290-312. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
77. Sridharan, B., Tai, J., & Boud, D. (2018). Does the use of summative peer assessment in collaborative group work inhibit good judgement? Higher Education, 76, 643–661.
78. Sun, I. Y., Jou, S., Hou, C. C., & Chang, Y.-C. (2014). Public trust in the police in Taiwan: A test of instrumental and expressive models. Australian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 47(1), 123–140.
79. Teodorescu, M. H. M. (2017). Machine learning methods for strategy research. Harvard Business School Research Paper Series, 18(011), 1–47.
80. Tjahjono, H. K., Palupi, M., & Dirgahayu, P. (2015). Career perception at the Republic Indonesian Police organization: Impact of distributive fairness, procedural fairness and career satisfaction on affective commitment. Bisnis & Birokrasi: Jurnal Ilmu Administrasi dan Organisasi, 22(2), 131–140.
81. Tyler, T. R., & Blader, S. L. (2003). The group engagement model: Procedural justice, social identity, and cooperative behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 7(4), 349–361.
82. Van Dyne, L., Graham, J. W., & Dienesch, R. M. (1994). Organizational citizenship behavior: Construct redefinition, measurement, and validation. Academy of Management Journal, 37(4), 765–802.
83. Waterman, A. S. (1993). Two conceptions of happiness: Contrasts of personal expressiveness (eudaimonia) and hedonic enjoyment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64(4), 678–691.
84. Wei, F., & Si, S. (2013). Tit for tat? Abusive supervision and counterproductive work behaviors: The moderating effects of locus of control and perceived mobility. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 30(1), 281–296.
85. Xanthopoulou, D., Bakker, A. B., & Fischbach, A. (2013). Work engagement among employees facing emotional demands: The role of personal resources. Journal of Personnel Psychology, 12(2), 74–84.
86. Zwetsloot, G. I. (2019). Shared values for health, safety and well-being at work. In A. Jain, R. Leka, & G. I. Zwetsloot (Eds.), Creating psychologically healthy workplaces (pp. 121–138). Edward Elgar Publishing.