Linking proactive personality to proactive customer-service performance: a moderated parallel mediation model

The study investigates whether and how frontline employees’ proactive personality drives proactive customer-service performance (PCSP) and under what conditions this linkage is strengthened or weakened. Grounded in the Job Demands–Resources (JD-R) model and positive psychology, the authors argue that proactive personality functions as a personal resource that promotes PCSP through two positive psychological states: work engagement (affective–motivational) and perceived meaningful work (emotional-experience motivational). The work addresses gaps in the service literature by: (1) positioning PCSP as a key outcome in the proactive personality nomological network; (2) explicating the mechanisms (work engagement and meaningful work) linking proactive personality to PCSP; and (3) testing the boundary condition of service-failure recovery climate (SFRC) as a moderator that may compensate for low personal resources, potentially weakening the positive effects of proactive personality on these states.

The theoretical framework integrates JD-R theory with the broaden-and-build perspective of positive emotions. Proactive personality reflects a tendency to identify opportunities, enact change, and persist toward goals; prior research links it to performance and citizenship behaviors. PCSP is defined as self-starting, persistent, future-oriented service behavior beyond scripts and job descriptions. The authors hypothesize: H1, proactive personality positively relates to PCSP; H2, work engagement mediates the proactive personality–PCSP relation; H3, perceived meaningful work mediates the proactive personality–PCSP relation. Drawing on the notion of complementary versus compensatory resources and the information-ceiling effect, SFRC (a psychological climate providing training, empowerment, resources, and rewards for service recovery) is posited to weaken the positive relations between proactive personality and (a) work engagement and (b) meaningful work (H4a, H4b). Consequently, the indirect effects of proactive personality on PCSP via engagement and meaningful work should be weaker under high SFRC (H5a, H5b).

Design and sample: Cross-sectional, multi-source survey of frontline employees and their branch managers from 62 branches of three major Taiwanese appliance and 3C (computers, communications, consumer electronics) retail chains. Data from 62 managers and 358 frontline employees were collected (3–8 participants per branch; M=5.78). With an average of 10 employees per branch, the response rate was 67.7% ([358+62]/[62×10]). Demographics: Employees were ~60% male (3:2 male–female), 78.5% held college/university degrees; age distribution: 20–29 (36.3%), 30–39 (37.9%), 40–49 (21.1%), 50+ (4.7%). Employee job tenure M=6.5 years (SD=4.43). Managers were 73.8% male, average age 35 (SD=5.94), job tenure M=7.3 years (SD=4.45). Measures (7-point Likert, 1=strongly disagree, 7=strongly agree): - Proactive personality: 6-item scale (Parker, 1998); α=0.94 (sample item: “I excel at identifying opportunities”). - Work engagement: UWES-9 (Schaufeli et al., 2006) measuring vigor, dedication, absorption; α=0.94. - Meaningful work perceptions: 5 items (May et al., 2004); α=0.90. - Service-failure recovery climate (SFRC): 6 items (Menguc et al., 2017); α=0.92. - Proactive customer-service performance (PCSP): 6 manager-rated items adapted from Rank et al. (2007) via Jauhari et al. (2017); α=0.87. Controls: Employee age, gender, education, job tenure. Procedure to mitigate CMV: Multi-source ratings (managers rated PCSP; employees self-reported predictors/mediators). Statistical test for CMV via Harman’s single-factor test indicated the largest factor explained 19.5% variance (<50% threshold), suggesting CMV was not a severe concern. Validity and reliability: CFA indicated acceptable convergent validity (all factor loadings and AVE >0.50) and composite reliability >0.60; discriminant validity supported as sqrt(AVE) exceeded inter-construct correlations. Analytic strategy: Two-phase approach using IBM SPSS 25. Phase 1: CFA and reliability checks. Phase 2: OLS regressions and PROCESS macro (Hayes, 2013) Models 1, 4, and 7 to test moderation, mediation, and moderated mediation. Bootstrapping used to estimate indirect effects and moderated mediation indices.

- H1 supported: Proactive personality positively related to manager-rated PCSP (b=0.42, p<0.01; Table 3 M3 step 1). - Mediation (H2, H3) supported: Proactive personality positively related to meaningful work (b=0.48, p<0.01; M1 step 1) and to work engagement (b=0.44, p<0.01; M2 step 1). Both mediators partially mediated the proactive personality–PCSP relation. - Indirect via work engagement: 0.182, 95% CI [0.13, 0.23], p<0.01. - Indirect via meaningful work: 0.178, 95% CI [0.12, 0.34], p<0.01. - Moderation (H4a, H4b) supported: SFRC weakened the positive relationships between proactive personality and: - Work engagement: β=−0.17 (step 2 of M2, p<0.01). - Meaningful work: β=−0.16 (step 2 of M1, p<0.01). Simple-slope analyses showed weaker positive slopes at high SFRC (±1 SD split). - Moderated mediation (H5a, H5b) supported: - Via work engagement: Index of moderated mediation = −0.054, 95% CI [−0.093, −0.021]; indirect effect stronger at low SFRC (0.18, 95% CI [0.118, 0.248]) than at high SFRC (0.069, 95% CI [0.025, 0.115]). - Via meaningful work: Index = −0.036, 95% CI [−0.066, −0.013]; indirect effect stronger at low SFRC (0.131, 95% CI [0.067, 0.204]) than at high SFRC (0.058, 95% CI [0.021, 0.104]). - Measurement quality checks: Harman’s single-factor (largest factor 19.5%) indicated low CMV risk; AVE >0.50 and composite reliabilities acceptable; correlations positive and significant among focal variables (except moderator).

Findings demonstrate that proactive personality acts as a personal resource promoting proactive customer-service performance and operates through two positive psychological pathways: heightened work engagement and stronger perceptions of meaningful work. This aligns with JD-R’s motivational process and the broaden-and-build perspective, showing that personal resources expand positive states that translate into proactive service behaviors. The moderating role of SFRC indicates a compensatory dynamic: in high SFRC contexts, organizational provisions (training, tools, empowerment for recovery) diminish the marginal benefit of employees’ proactive personality on engagement and meaningfulness (information-ceiling effect). Conversely, low SFRC accentuates the reliance on personal resources, strengthening the indirect effects on PCSP. These results extend JD-R by incorporating dual mediators and a boundary condition that clarifies when proactivity is most consequential for PCSP, and they emphasize the complementary vs. compensatory nature of resource interactions.

This paper advances understanding of proactive personality in service settings by: (1) establishing proactive personality as an antecedent of PCSP; (2) identifying parallel mediating mechanisms via work engagement and meaningful work; and (3) demonstrating SFRC as a boundary condition that weakens these indirect effects when high. The study extends JD-R to include meaningful work alongside engagement as key mediators and clarifies when organizational climates compensate for or complement personal resources. Future research should employ longitudinal and/or mixed-method designs to infer causality, examine additional climate or contextual moderators (e.g., concern climate, performance-focused climate), and integrate personality with job/social characteristics to elucidate unique and shared pathways to meaningfulness, engagement, and PCSP.

- Cross-sectional design limits causal inference; longitudinal or mixed-method designs are recommended. - Although CMV was mitigated (multi-source ratings) and tested (Harman’s test), self-report for predictors may still pose CMV risk. - Focus on SFRC as the contextual moderator; other climates (e.g., concern or performance-focused climate) and uncertainty in organizational climate warrant exploration. - The study centered on personality–performance pathways, not on mechanisms via job/task and social characteristics; future integrated frameworks should test multiple concurrent mechanisms. - Generalizability is bounded by the industry and national context (Taiwanese retail appliance/3C chains).