The present study investigates how and when qualitative job insecurity influences subjective well-being (i.e., life satisfaction, positive affect, and negative affect). Specifically, this article examines the mediating role of work–family conflict and the moderating role of work centrality in the association between qualitative job insecurity and subjective well-being. Based on a sample of 500 Chinese employees, the mediating and moderating hypotheses were examined using path analyses and further tested with the bootstrapping method. The results indicated that qualitative job insecurity was negatively related to subjective well-being, and that work–family conflict partially mediated this link (except for positive affect). Surprisingly, the negative effect of qualitative job insecurity on subjective well-being was more pronounced for individuals with low (as opposed to high) work centrality. This study provides preliminary evidence for the spillover effect of qualitative job insecurity on work–family conflict and identifies a group of employees (i.e., those with low work centrality) who may be more vulnerable to the negative effects of qualitative job insecurity on well-being.

In accordance with social identity theory, a multi-level model is put forward to investigate how the "conjoint" associations between abusive supervision and abusive supervision climate exert influence on employee creativity through creative role identity. The data in this paper were from 357 supervisor-subordinate dyads in 77 working groups to test the proposed model. The results indicated that creative role identities mediated the relationship between abusive supervision and employee creativity, and group-level abusive supervision climate moderated the relationship between creativity and individual-level abusive supervision through the process of creative role identity, the mutual influence of abusive supervision climate and individual-level abusive supervision significantly predicated employee creativity. This paper also discusses related managerial and practical implications.

Purpose Despite a large body of literature on the negative consequences of job insecurity, one outcome – job creativity – has received relatively scant attention. While initial studies established a relationship between job insecurity and creativity, the explanatory mechanisms for this relationship have yet to be fully explored. The paper aims to discuss this issue. Design/methodology/approach Using threat-rigidity theory and broaden-and-build theory as a conceptual foundation, the authors implemented a two-country temporally lagged research design (the USA (n = 390); China (n = 346)) to test two potential mediating mechanisms – cognitive failures and positive job-related affect – as explanatory variables between quantitative and qualitative forms of job insecurity and self- and other-rated measures of creative performance. Findings Results from both countries suggest that job-related affective well-being and employee cognitive failures both explained the relationship between job insecurity and creative performance. However, affective well-being was a better explanatory variable for the relation between job insecurity and self-rated creative performance, whereas cognitive failures better accounted for the relationship between job insecurity and performance on an idea generation task. Research limitations/implications The authors discuss the implications of these findings from measurement, theoretical and practical perspectives. Originality/value The authors extend prior research on the relationship between job insecurity and creativity by: considering both quantitative and qualitative job insecurity, examining their relationships with both self- and other-rated assessments of creative job performance, and testing cognitive and affective mediating mechanisms explaining these relationships.

No abstract

No abstract