key: cord-0721819-b3g93j1y authors: Mihalache, Mashiho; Mihalache, Oli R. title: How workplace support for the COVID‐19 pandemic and personality traits affect changes in employees' affective commitment to the organization and job‐related well‐being date: 2021-07-20 journal: Hum Resour Manage DOI: 10.1002/hrm.22082 sha: 2b41d539a16ab256620afa613071487af951232f doc_id: 721819 cord_uid: b3g93j1y How do organizational responses to environmental disruptions affect employees' job‐related well‐being? As the COVID‐19 pandemic has led to new ways of working, increased health concerns, and added responsibilities, employees are facing important challenges in doing their work that can affect their job‐related well‐being. This study aims to understand how different types of work support (i.e., perceived organizational support and supervisor accessibility) in response to environmental disruption interact with personality traits (i.e., core self‐evaluations and future focus) to influence changes in employees' affective commitment to their organization and in their job‐related well‐being. We develop a moderated mediation model and test it on data collected from 295 individuals working in the United Kingdom. We find that work support for the COVID‐19 pandemic, both perceived organizational support and supervisor accessibility, is associated with more positive changes in employees' job‐related well‐being and that this effect is mediated by changes in employees' affective commitment to their organization. Furthermore, we find that personality traits moderate the relationships between these two types of support and changes in affective commitment to the organization, with those relationships being more positive for employees with low core self‐evaluations and for those with a high future focus. . Thus, with its many different stressors, the COVID-19 pandemic is an environmental disruption that, by overturning existing working arrangements (Kim, Vaiman, & Sanders, 2020) , poses a great threat to employees' job-related wellbeing. However, as organizations differ in how they respond to the crisis, there will be important differences in how employees experience the COVID-19 pandemic. The purpose of this study is to investigate how organizational responses to the COVID-19 pandemic affect changes in employees' job-related well-being, where job-related wellbeing refers to the extent to which individuals experience positive emotions in relation to work, such as feeling energetic, happy, enthusiastic, inspired, or satisfied (Ouweneel, Le Blanc, Schaufeli, & Van Wijhe, 2012; Van Katwyk, Fox, & Kelloway, 2000) . In other words, the central question asked in this study is, what forms of support can be used during the COVID-19 pandemic to improve employees' jobrelated well-being? Unfortunately, as yet we know very little regarding the types of support measures that organizations can put in place during environmental disruptions in order to help their employees. This is particularly important as crises situations tend to have negative consequences for the employees and, as Ererdi et al. (2020, p. 24) argue in a recent systematic literature review on human resource management in times of crisis, we need to develop a more nuanced understanding of what organizations can do to ensure employees' job-related well-being in such critical moments. This study makes several theoretical and practical contributions. First, we advance understanding of employees' job-related well-being during environmental disruptions by developing a moderated mediation model of organizational responses to the COVID-19 pandemic (depicted in Figure 1 ). We propose that different types of work support provided during the COVID-19 pandemic can trigger changes in employees' affective commitment to the organization and, ultimately, in their job-related well-being. Following previous research showing that there can be both organizational and managerial forms of support (Fazio, Gong, Sims, & Yurova, 2017; Stinglhamber & Vandenberghe, 2003) , we highlight perceived organizational support and supervisor accessibility to be different levers that can be used to influence employees' job-related well-being during environmental disruptions. Perceived organizational support refers to the extent to which employees feel that the organization values them and cares about their well-being (Eisenberger, Huntington, Hutchison, & Sowa, 1986) , and supervisor accessibility refers to the extent to which the supervisor is available for communication and interaction when needed (Atuahene- . By considering these different types of support at multiple organizational levels, we provide a clearer understanding of the different options that may be used to improve employees' job-related well-being during environmental disruptions such as the COVID-19 pandemic. Furthermore, by considering the mediating role of affective commitment to the organization, we also answer a call for research to understand the ramifications of affective commitment for employees themselves, rather than for organizations (Meyer & Maltin, 2010, p. 323) . Thus, through our focus on explaining employees' job-related well-being, our study develops an employee perspective of environmental disruption. Second, we advance understanding of organizational support theory (Eisenberger et al., 1986; by studying it in an extreme context: a global environmental disruption. As previous research suggests that the context needs to be taken in consideration in order to understand existing theories better (e.g., Brewster, Mayrhofer, & Smale, 2016; Cooke, Wood, Wang, & Veen, 2019) , we apply and test organizational support theory in the highly uncertain context of the COVID-19 pandemic (Caligiuri et al., 2020) . This will give us a better understanding of the theory's boundaries during environmental disruptions. Third, we further advance organizational support theory by considering the mechanisms through which work support affects employees well-being by showing that, during environmental disruptions, this effect works through changes in employees' affective commitment to the organization. Fourth, we develop a contingency perspective by considering personality traits as important factors that may affect how effective work support is in overcoming the pandemic's potentially negative effects on employees' affective commitment to the organization and, ultimately, their job-related well-being. While previous research generally considers that perceived organizational support enhances employees' affective commitment to the organization (for a meta-analysis, see Kurtessis et al., 2017) , the extent to which effect materializes depends on employees' characteristics (Lee & Jeung, 2018) . We advance this line of inquiry on the boundary conditions of work support by F I G U R E 1 A moderated mediation model of how work support for the COVID-19 pandemic relates to changes in employees' job-related well-being proposing that two personality traits-core self-evaluations (Judge, Erez, Bono, & Thoresen, 2003) and future focus (Shipp, Edwards, & Lambert, 2009 )-affect employees' reactions to supportive actions during the COVID-19 pandemic. The contingency perspective we advance in this study is particularly important during times of environmental disruption, when the effectiveness of support can be critical for employees' job-related well-being. In practical terms, our study on organizational responses during the COVID-19 pandemic has implications for understanding how organizations can stimulate their employees' job-related well-being during environmental disruptions. As organizations have limited resources, which may reduce further in times of disruption, they need to find the best ways of utilizing those resources to ensure that employees can perform their jobs without additional duress. Furthermore, as the pandemic has changed working arrangements, with many people now having to work from home instead of at the office, our study contributes to the understanding of how to maintain and potentially improve their employees' affective commitment to the organization. As the current pandemic has wide-ranging implications for how employees work, the study may also contribute to the broader understanding of how organizations can support their employees during future environmental disruptions. As the COVID-19 pandemic brings additional psychological, social, and work demands, employees can experience a change in how they feel about work. In particular, the pandemic has seen many employees having to adapt to new ways of working because of increased working from home. This shift requires employees not only to adapt to new ways of communicating and interacting with others but also to find new ways to balance work and family demands, since lockdowns in many countries have required people to home-school their children while also doing their jobs (Caligiuri et al., 2020) . In addition to these changes in working arrangements, employees also have to deal with added uncertainty regarding financial and health aspects (Ererdi et al., 2020) . Cumulatively, these changes brought about by the COVID-19 pandemic create additional work and out-of-work stressors that may erode employees' job-related well-being. The limited earlier research on the work-related consequences of epidemics and pandemics seems to point in this direction. For instance, research on the consequences of the HIV/AIDS global epidemic in Africa finds that organizations experience negative outcomes in terms of employees' well-being, such as lower work performance, increased levels of absenteeism, and lower morale (Rosen et al., 2003) . Gaining a better understanding of how organizations can navigate environmental disruptions such as the COVID-19 pandemic more effectively is important because job-related well-being has been shown to be associated with a wide range of positive work-related outcomes. These include greater commitment to work, less turnover, less absenteeism (Brief & Weiss, 2002) , and better organizational performance (Giorgi, Shoss, & Di Fabio, 2017) . It is also associated with various positive nonwork outcomes, such as increased prosocial behavior and better economic prospects (Krueger, Kahneman, Schkade, Schwarz, & Stone, 2013) and also better health and greater longevity (Diener & Chan, 2011) . We propose that, while environmental disruptions can affect employees' well-being, the extent and direction of the influence depend on how organizations respond while the disruptions are occurring. Specifically, we argue that the extent to which employees experience changes in their job-related well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic depends on the support they receive during the crisis. We consider two types of work support that can be particularly relevant during this pandemic: (a) perceived organizational support and (b) supervisor accessibility. We focus on these two types of support because earlier research argues that support can be provided at both the organizational and managerial levels (Fazio et al., 2017; Stinglhamber & Vandenberghe, 2003 of support, and people exposed to the same level of support may experience it differently (e.g., Swift & Virick, 2013; Yang, van Rijn, & Sanders, 2020) . In other words, we consider perceived organizational support. At the managerial level, we consider supervisor accessibility, which refers to the extent to which the supervisor is available to communicate with employees (Atuahene- . Including managerial-level support builds on Malik and Sanders' (2021, p. 12) argument based on a literature review that managers' actions are particularly important in human resources management during global crises. We focus specifically on supervisor accessibility because it is a form of support that supervisor can provide directly to their employees (Atuahene- . While communication per se does not always equate to support, during disruptive events such as the COVID-19 pandemic, the ability to communicate with the supervisor does represent a crucial form of support. As, by definition, environmental disruptions imply a displacement of existing work arrangements (Kim et al., 2020) , a key challenge employees are facing is a lack of understanding regarding how to work and what is expected of them in the new situation. Dirani et al. (2020, p. 383) argue that during the COVID-19 pandemic supervisory support should be a priority and state that "hearing regularly from team leaders, taking perspective, and ensuring the well-being of those impacted by the pandemic, is one of the core responsibilities of the leaders at a time of the pandemic and business lock down." Also, Carnevale and Hatak (2020, p. 184) argue that for dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic an important form of support is informational support to help employees adapt to the changing roles and job requirements. However, despite these pleas that supervisor's communication is a key form of support during environmental disruptions, we still lack a clear understanding of how and when such support is effective. By specifically considering supervisor accessibility we also answer a call to develop a better understanding of how communicating with managers can help employees deal with work demands during the COVID-19 pandemic (Caligiuri et al., 2020, p. 710) . Thus, by focusing on different types of support (i.e., organizational and managerial support) in response to environmental disruption, we can provide insights into different approaches that could be used to support employees. We propose that work support affects employees' job-related wellbeing and that affective commitment to the organization mediates this relationship. Affective commitment to the organization refers to employees' emotional bond to their organization . Employees' bonds to their organization are particularly in danger, as the increase in remote working means that the COVID-19 pandemic can diminish employees' identification with their organization. Research on virtual teams shows that when employees have fewer opportunities for physical, informal, and spontaneous interaction with colleagues, their connection to the organization can be eroded (Wiesenfeld, Raghuram, & Garud, 2001) . This may be especially problematic when the physical disconnect from the organization continues over a longer period of time, as has happened during the COVID-19 pandemic, because people start developing new identities (e.g., self-identity or professional identities) that replace the now less salient organizational identity (Ashforth, 2020) . The actions that organizations take during times of crisis can affect the importance of the organization as an entity to which employees develop emotional bonds. Next, we argue that during environmental disruptions work support can elicit positive changes in employees' affective commitment to their organization and we discuss how these changes in turn affect employees' job-related well-being. Perceived organizational support can enhance employees' affective commitment to the organization for two main reasons. First, it can enhance the employees' bond to their organization by creating feelings of reciprocity, as suggested by social exchange theory. Social exchange theory holds that to understand the behavior of parties in an exchange relationship, it is necessary to go beyond economic exchange and to consider social interactions in which there are certain expectations regarding repeated exchanges and fulfillment of obligations in the long term (Blau, 1964) . Environmental disruptions like the COVID-19 pandemic are "moral inflection points," because the severity of the disruption forces organizations to react, providing a moment of truth that can reveal their true core values (Ashforth, 2020 (Ashforth, , p. 1764 . That is, organizations' decisions on how to support their employees during the COVID-19 pandemic can have a major impact on how employees feel about their relationship with the organization. Organizational actions perceived as supportive by employees strengthen their commitment to the organization because they feel an obligation to reciprocate and to give back to the organization (Eisenberger, Armeli, Rexwinkel, Lynch, & Rhoades, 2001; Rhoades et al., 2001) . Also, perceived organizational support is associated with positive expectations that the organization will fulfill its obligations and may even reduce the extent to which employees monitor the exchange (Coyle-Shapiro & Conway, 2005) , strengthening the bond they feel they have to the organization. Second, organizational support may also increase affective commitment to the organization by reinforcing employees' affiliation to the organization. As a shared stressful experience can help in forming an emotional bond, organizational support can create a feeling of unity between the employee and the organization as they work together to try and defeat a common enemy: the COVID-19 pandemic (Caligiuri et al., 2020) . In other words, the organizational support helps develop a shared sense of identity (i.e., us versus the pandemic) while people are working together to overcome the challenges associated with the environmental disruption. Supervisor accessibility, the second type of work support for the COVID-19 pandemic, can improve employees' affective commitment to the organization in two main ways. First, by making themselves available to talk to employees, supervisors can help reduce employees' work uncertainty during the pandemic. Christianson and Barton (2021) argue that a central challenge of this pandemic is one of sensemaking, as individuals need to pick up on cues in their environment, make sense of them, and take action within a transformed environment. A central factor that people need to make sense of is their work role during the upheaval caused by the pandemic. Communicating with their supervisor can help employees to better understand their role in the organization during the environmental disruption. This is particularly important because the disruption to previous working arrangements and the general uncertainty surrounding the pandemic may make employees feel increasingly disconnected from the organization (Ashforth, 2020) . Having more communication with the supervisor helps to strengthen employees' affective commitment to the organization as they may be able to gain a clearer understanding of their work roles during the pandemic. Second, supervisor accessibility can make employees feel a stronger bond to the organization because it increases their trust in the relationship they have with the organization (Atuahene- DeConinck, 2010) , since the supervisor is a representative of the organization (Levinson, 1965) . As more frequent communication allows for greater clarity on supervisor's expectations, the supervisors' accessibility can help reduce employees' uncertainty about how they are expected to perform (Oliver & Anderson, 1994) . This is especially important during environmental disruptions such as the COVID-19 crisis when people are working in a reduced bandwidth state because they have additional concerns (Caligiuri et al., 2020) . Furthermore, supervisor accessibility can enhance affective commitment to the organization because frequent communication with the supervisor increases the salience of the organization for employees as a reference entity at a time when many employees find themselves physically distanced from the organization due to the sudden move to remote working. Thus, albeit through different mechanisms, both perceived organizational support and supervisor accessibility can enhance employees' affective commitment to the organization. In turn, positive changes in employees' affective commitment to the organization during the COVID-19 pandemic are associated with increased job-related well-being. This is because feeling part of the organization satisfies socio-emotional needs such as the need for affiliation, esteem, or emotional support (Armeli, Eisenberger, Fasolo, & Lynch, 1998) . Also, affective commitment can enhance job-related well-being as it is associated with greater job motivation, which results from satisfying needs for relatedness (Meyer & Maltin, 2010) . In line with these ideas, previous research shows that affective commitment to the organization is related to reduced intention to leave (e.g., Vandenberghe, Bentein, & Panaccio, 2017) and to an increase in citizenship behavior (e.g., Devece, Palacios-Marqués, & Alguacil, 2016) . Employees with greater affective commitment to the organization are likely to experience greater job-related well-being because their stronger bond with the organization can help them cope better with the stress of handling a high level of job demands (Rivkin, Diestel, & Schmidt, 2018) ; this may be especially important during environmental disruption when employees are working in a changed and uncertain work environment. Also, particularly relevant for the COVID-19 pandemic, when many employees have found themselves asked to work from home at the same time as looking after their children, is that previous research finds that affective commitment to the organization can reduce stress and work/life conflict (Meyer, Stanley, Herscovitch, & Topolnytsky, 2002) . That is, during environmental disruptions such as the COVID-19 pandemic feelings of belonging to the organization may be particularly important for alleviating the higher than normal levels of work-related uncertainty and stress. To summarize, we argue that perceived organizational support and supervisor accessibility during the COVID-19 pandemic can improve employees' affective commitment to the organization, and this is in turn related to higher employee job-related well-being. So far, we have proposed that perceived organizational support and supervisor accessibility influence changes in employees' affective commitment to the organization and ultimately their job-related wellbeing. However, since individual differences make employees inter- interacts with perceived organizational support to influence wellbeing outcomes (i.e., thriving). In this study, we focus on the contingency roles of two personality traits: employees' core self-evaluations and future focus. Core selfevaluation is a higher-order construct which brings together various elements that are part of an individual's self-concept based on selfesteem, self-efficacy, internal locus of control, and emotional stability (Judge et al., 2003) . Core self-evaluations are the basic conclusions that one draws about oneself (Judge & Bono, 2001 ); individuals with higher core self-evaluations have a more positive opinion of themselves, believe in their abilities, are more emotionally stable, and consider themselves to be more in control of their lives. Because core self-evaluation is one of the main constructs for considering individual differences (Chang, Ferris, Johnson, Rosen, & Tan, 2012) , it can help provide a clearer understanding of how organizational support in response to environmental disruptions affects changes in employees' affective commitment to the organization and, ultimately, job-related well-being. The second personality trait that we consider a key factor in how work support for the COVID-19 pandemic affects an employee's affective commitment to the organization is future focus, a type of temporal focus. Temporal focus refers to an individual's subjective experience of the past, present, or future (Shipp et al., 2009) . The disposition to think about the past, present, or future impacts behavior and decision-making (Bandura, 2001; Bluedorn & Standifer, 2006; Fried & Slowik, 2004) . Since the temporal focus of an individual directs attention to events in the past, present or future, it can influence how that individual interprets work support during environmental disruption. Past focus refers to anchoring to the past and using past experiences for decision-making, present focus refers to paying attention to what is happening right now and making spontaneous decisions based on the current situation, and future focus refers to thinking about the future and possible future events (Bluedorn, 2002; Clark & Collins, 1993; Shipp et al., 2009) . In this study, we use future focus rather than the other two types of temporal focus, 1 because it is uncertain how long the COVID-19 pandemic will last and we want to understand how employees experience this uncertainty. In doing so, we are following previous studies that also used a single time focus (Kooij, Kanfer, Betts, & Rudolph, 2018) . In addition, as future focus is associated with more positive behaviors such as considering the future consequences of one's actions and planning for them carefully (Aspinwall, 2005; Shipp et al., 2009) , we consider it to be more informative than past or present focus in interpreting the work support employees receive in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. We focus on employees' core self-evaluations and future focus as key contingencies because we draw on social-exchange theory (Blau, 1964) to explain how perceived support affects employees' jobrelated well-being and these two personality traits affect how employees experience the exchange relationship with the organization they work for (Usman et al., 2020; Yang, Lin, Fang, & Huang, 2019) ; that is, they affect how employees interpret workrelated events to form reciprocity norms (Gamache & McNamara, 2019; Nübold, Muck, & Maier, 2013) . We also focus particularly on core self-evaluations and future temporal focus because Zacher (2014) finds that both of these personality traits are important predictors of change in career adaptability. As environmental disruptions such as the COVID-19 pandemic imply displacement of current work arrangements (Kim et al., 2020) , these two personality traits might be particularly relevant to interpret the exchange relationships during such periods of upheaval. Next, we detail how employees' core self-evaluations and future temporal focus affect how effective work support is in stimulating positive changes in their affective commitment to the organization and, ultimately, in improving their job-related well-being. We argue that for individuals with high core self-evaluations, the influence of work support during the COVID-19 pandemic will be less effective in stimulating positive changes in affective commitment to their organizations than for those with low core self-evaluations. First, employees with high core self-evaluations may perceive organizational support and supervisor accessibility during the COVID-19 pandemic to be unnecessary. Because high core self-evaluations act as a shield against stressful situations (Baumeister, Smart, & Boden, 1996) , such employees may not benefit from additional support. This is consistent with leadership substitution theory (Childers, Dubinsky, & Skinner, 1990; Kerr & Jermier, 1978) , which holds that there are situational factors that can substitute or neutralize leadership behavior. Supporting this idea, Nübold et al. (2013) find that high core selfevaluations are a substitute for transformational leadership with respect to its effect on work motivation and performance. For instance, employees who have great confidence in their abilities may not see the benefit in having increased access to their supervisor because they may require less explanation about how to work and relate to the organization during the COVID-19 pandemic. Second, receiving support in the form of either organizational support or supervisor accessibility during the COVID-19 pandemic can be less effective for employees with high core self-evaluations because it is not congruent with their positive self-concept. According with self-verification theory, individuals want others to see them in the same way as they see themselves; they prefer there to be a match between their own self-image (either low or high in core self-evaluations) and the type of evaluation they receive from others (Swann, 2012) . Employees with a high core self-evaluation may perceive support (e.g., the supervisor having more frequent interactions) as being an indication that others see them as needing help and potentially threatening their self-perception. For instance, Deelstra et al. (2003) find that social support is not always welcome because it can be interpreted as a threat to one's self-esteem. Thus, perceived organizational support and supervisor accessibility may be less effective for employees with a high core self-evaluation because they have more belief in their own abilities and may not consider themselves to be in need of the support. Therefore, we hypothesize We hypothesize that the relationship between perceived support (i.e., organizational support and supervisor accessibility) and employees' affective commitment to the organization will be stronger for individuals with a higher future focus. Drawing on social-exchange theory (Blau, 1964) , there are several ways in which employees' future focus affects how they interpret organizational actions to form reciprocity feelings. First, because future focus directs attention to the future (Shipp et al., 2009 ), employees with a strong future focus are more likely to regard the work support they receive during the pandemic as representative of how the organization will fulfill its duties to them also in the future. This type of extrapolation might be particularly important in strengthening the link between perceived organizational support and affective commitment to the organization. As this link is based on expectations of reciprocity Rhoades et al., 2001) , receiving support at a critical time such as during the COVID-19 pandemic might be particularly important in stimulating affective commitment for employees who may see support as something that will continue to be important to them in the future. This effect might work in similar way to enhance the importance of supervisor accessibility as employees with a strong future focus might extrapolate in a similar way regarding the trust associated with higher levels of communication, while those with less of a future focus will not do this to the same extent. Second, due to the uncertainty of the COVID-19 pandemic, a strong future focus may be particularly important for the effectiveness of work support because it can help employees recognize the value of that support; thus, enhancing the reciprocity feeling or felt obligation toward the organization since they perceive the support to be more valuable. Employees with a strong future focus can direct their attention to relevant aspects of what work might involve in the future because they are more proactive and can act with more thought to the future (Bandura, 1986; Ferrari & Diaz-Morales, 2007; Kooij et al., 2018) . Also, as future focus promotes goal-setting, motivation, and striving for achievement (Bandura, 1986 (Bandura, , 2001 Fried & Slowik, 2004) , it can help individuals understand how the support they receive can help them achieve their work objectives. Whether it comes in the form of perceived organizational support (e.g., access to communication technology or more flexibility in the scheduling) or supervisor accessibility (e.g., more frequent communication), the support may be appreciated more by employees with a strong future focus, because they are able to assess its value in terms of how it helps them to achieve the future they anticipate (Shipp & Jansen, 2011 3 | METHOD We collected data using an online questionnaire administered through the Prolific platform. The use of this type of platform to collect data for publications in top-tier academic journals has increased dramatically in recent years (Carlson, Thompson, & Kacmar, 2018; Chen et al., 2019; Sherf & Morrison, 2020) . The advantages of the Prolific platform are that it allows rapid data collection, which is particularly well suited to the urgency of the COVID-19-related research, and also that it makes it easy to contact respondents for multiple waves of data collection, which can lead to high response rates. Furthermore, the platform allows one to select respondents on the basis of demographic variables. We chose to invite research participants between the ages of 22 and 65 who were working in the United Kingdom. We We collected data in two waves, with a 1-week lag in-between to allow a temporal separation between the data collection for the independent (Wave 1) and the dependent (Wave 2) variables. Temporal separation can help reduce the likelihood of common method bias because it makes it less likely that respondents can predict the overall research model (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Lee, & Podsakoff, 2003 We took several steps to avoid potential common method bias. First, we temporally separated the data collection by 1 week for the independent and the dependent variables (Podsakoff et al., 2003) . Second, we made the surveys anonymous and confidential, and ensured that the questions asked were not presented in an order similar to the conceptual model in this article (Podsakoff et al., 2003) . Third, common method bias is less likely in our study because we have hypotheses that include mediation and interaction effects and respondents are less likely to have an underlying theory that would systematically bias their responses (Aiken & West, 1991; Harrison, McLaughlin, & Coalter, 1996) . Fourth, we ran a Harman's single-factor test to verify the extent to which our data suffer from common method bias (Podsakoff et al., 2003) and the results show this is unlikely to be the case (% variance = 22.27). We measured all constructs using established scales, although we modified several of the scales to better capture the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, since it was the focus of this study. All response scales ranged from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree) unless otherwise noted. We present the scales that were adjusted for the COVID-19 crisis in the Appendix. Change in job-related well-being was measured using an adjusted version of the positive emotion items from the Job-Related Affective Well-Being Scale (Van Katwyk et al., 2000; shortened by Schaufeli & Van Rhenen, 2006) . This is a subjective measure that aims to capture how respondents experience the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. We asked respondents to assess their job-related well-being by thinking back to the period before the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic and then to assess their job-related well-being after the onset of (i.e., during) the pandemic by thinking about the current situation; we calculated the change by subtracting the before scores from the after the onset scores for each item and calculating the average. That means that the respondents had to recall how they felt about their job before the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic; however, the magnitude and recency of the COVID-19 pandemic should make respondents able to remember how they used to feel about their jobs before the pandemic started. A similar retrospective measurement approach to capture the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on individuals is used in a variety of disciplines such as psychology, medicine or tourism research (e.g., Bettinsoli et al., 2020; Brand, Timme, & Nosrat, 2020; Kocevska, Blanken, Van Someren, & Rösler, 2020; Wong, Kim, Kim, & Han, 2021) . The Cronbach's alpha for the change in job-related well-being was .92. The possible range of scores for changes in job-related well-being is between À6 and + 6. Change in affective commitment to the organization was measured using three items from Allen and Meyer's (1990) affective commitment scale. We constructed this measure in a similar way to the measure for change in job-related well-being. Again, we asked the respondents to assess their affective commitment twice: thinking first about the period before the onset of the pandemic, then about the period after (i.e., during the pandemic). We calculated the change by subtracting the first score from the second for each item and then calculate the mean. The Cronbach's alpha for the change in employees' affective commitment to the organization was .94. The possible range of scores for changes in affective commitment to the organization is between À6 and + 6. (Hofstede, Hofstede, & Minkov, 2010) . In addition, we controlled for financial insecurity, measured using the scale devised by Abeyta, Routledge, Kersten, and Cox (2017) . A sample question is "How concerned are you about your financial future?" (1 = not at all concerned to 7 = very concerned). The Cronbach's alpha for this control variable was .78. Lastly, we asked how many days per week respondents used to work at home on average before the COVID-19 crisis and how many they worked after it started, and we calculated the change by subtracting the before score from the after score. Before testing the hypotheses, we first checked the discriminant In Table 2 Table 3 shows the results from our moderated mediation model results with supervisor accessibility as the predictor. The interaction term between supervisor accessibility and core self-evaluations was negative and statistically significant (B = À.09, SE = .04, p < .05). However, the interaction term between supervisor accessibility and future focus was not statistically significant (B = .10, SE = 0.05, p > .05). Therefore, results support the relationship proposed in Hypothesis 2b, but Hypothesis 3b is rejected. To gain further insights into how the moderated mediation effects work, we used the PROCESS macro version 3.5.2 Model 7 (Hayes, 2013) to generate estimates of indirect effects for the perceived organizational support and supervisor accessibility at different values of the moderators. We used a bootstrapping procedure to quantify the indirect effects at low (À1 SD), mean, and high (+1 SD) levels of both core self-evaluations and future focus (Preacher, Rucker, & Hayes, 2007) . Table 4 shows the conditional indirect effect of X (perceived organizational support) on Y (change in job-related well-being) via M (change in affective commitment to the organization) at low, mean, and high levels of future focus and core self-evaluations. We see from the results of the conditional effect of the independent variable on the mediator that all the combinations are statistically significant (p < .05), as the confidence intervals do not contain zero. Table 5 shows the conditional indirect effect of X (supervisor accessibility) on Y (change in job-related well-being) via M (change in affective commitment to the organization) at low, mean, and high levels of future focus and core self-evaluations. The results show that all the conditional indirect effects are significant, except when core self-evaluation is high (+1 SD) and when future focus is low (À1 SD). In Figures 2-4 , we plotted simple slopes for interaction effects for low (À1 SD) and high (+1 SD) values of the moderators, following previous studies (e.g., Ma, Ganegoda, Chen, Jiang, & Dong, 2020) . From Figure 2 we can see that, in line with the expectations from Hypothesis 2a, the positive relationship between perceived organizational support and changes in employees' affective commitment to the organization is stronger for employees with low core-self evaluations than for those with high core-self evaluations. The influence of perceived organizational support for COVID-19 on changes in employees' affective commitment to the organization is positive and significant when core self-evaluations were low (B = .40, t = 6.6, p < .001) and also when core self-evaluations were high (B = .18, t = 2.85, p < .01). Furthermore, from Figure 3 , we see that, in line with Hypothesis 3a, the positive relationship between perceived Note: X = perceived organizational support, M = change in affective commitment to the organization, Y = change in job-related well-being. LLCI = lower limit confidence interval; ULCI = upper limit confidence interval. Coefficients are centered in all models. For the conditional indirect effects, we used 95% confidence intervals (CIs) calculated using 5,000 bootstrap samples. Conditional effects that are statistically significant at the p < .05 level are in bold. N = 295. Note: X = perceived supervisor accessibility, M = change in affective commitment to the organization, Y = change in job-related well-being. LLCI = lower limit confidence interval; ULCI = upper limit confidence interval. Coefficients are centered in all models. For the conditional indirect effects, we used 95% confidence intervals (CIs) calculated using 5,000 bootstrap samples. Conditional effects that are statistically significant at the p < .05 level are in bold. N = 295. organizational support for COVID-19 and employees' changes in affective commitment to the organization is stronger for employees with a high future focus than for those with a low future focus. Also, the relationship between perceived organizational support for COVID-19 and changes in employee's affective commitment to the organization is positive and significant for both employees with a low future focus (B = .24, t = 3.85, p < .001) and for those with a high future focus (B = .36, t = 5.94, p < .001). Lastly, Figure 4 shows that, as proposed in Hypothesis 2b, the relationship between supervisor accessibility and changes in employees' affective commitment to the organizations was positive and significant when core self-evaluations were low (B = .18, t = 3.16, p < .01); this relationship was F I G U R E 2 Moderating effects of employees' core selfevaluations on the relationship between perceived organizational support and the change in employees' affective commitment to the organization during the COVID-19 pandemic F I G U R E 3 Moderating effects of employees' future focus on the relationship between perceived organizational support and the change in employees' affective commitment to the organization during the COVID-19 pandemic nonsignificant when core self-evaluations were high (B = .03, t = 0.56, p = .58). That is, supervisor accessibility as a support measure for COVID-19 does not seem to relate to changes in employees' affective commitment to the organization. In the study, we hypothesized only about the moderating role of employees' future focus because we believed this to be the most rele- The COVID-19 pandemic has focused attention to the importance of understanding human resource management theories in the context of environmental disruption (Kim et al., 2020 (Caligiuri et al., 2020) . Our findings on the influence of organizational support on employees' well-being during the COVID-19 crisis, can provide more general insights into the role of human resource practices for employees during environmental disruptions (Kim et al., 2020) . This study provides a better understanding of employees' wellbeing during environmental disruptions and of what organizations can do to ensure their well-being does not suffer. This is important not only for the employees themselves but also for the organizations that employ them, since previous research shows that employee well-being is linked to a variety of organizational outcomes, including lower turnover, absenteeism (Brief & Weiss, 2002) , and overall better organizational performance (Giorgi et al., 2017) . By examining employees' well-being during environmental disruptions, we are responding to previous calls for this to be a priority in crisis research (Ererdi et al., 2020, p. 24 ) and complement previous research showing the negative impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on people's general well-being (Sibley et al., 2020) . Specifically, the findings of our study make several important contributions. First, our employee perspective of the COVID-19 pandemic advances the understanding of the implications of environmental disruptions as we find that employees, on average, feel that their jobrelated well-being has decreased during the COVID-19 pandemic. While this is not surprising, given the severity of the environmental disruption, it is nevertheless a vital finding because it highlights the importance of gaining a better understanding of how organizations can support their employees during such critical periods. Our finding is in line with earlier research showing drops in job-related well-being during the 2008-2009 financial crisis, which also came with work reorganization for some (Green, Felstead, Gallie, & Inanc, 2016 Second, our findings help advance understanding of how organizational support theory (Eisenberger et al., 1986) applies in periods of environmental disruptions. Our findings suggest that organizations can respond to environmental disruptions by devising different support measures at both the organizational and managerial levels (Fazio et al., 2017; Stinglhamber & Vandenberghe, 2003) . Specifically, we find positive relationships between both perceived organizational support and supervisor accessibility for the COVID-19 pandemic and positive changes in employees' job-related well-being and that these relationships work through positive changes in employees' affective commitment to the organization. In this way, we contribute to research on perceived organizational support (Eisenberger et al., 1986; Rhoades et al., 2001) , as we show how important such support is in the context of extreme environmental disruption. We also find that supervisor accessibility is another important individual characteristics such as self-construal (Yang et al., 2020) or status in the organization (Lee & Jeung, 2018) . Specifically, we find that the effectiveness of perceived organizational support depends on employees' core self-evaluations and future focus and is associated with more pronounced positive changes in affective commitment to the organization for those with lower core self-evaluations and for those with a higher future focus. Also, we find that supervisor accessibility can elicit positive changes in affective commitment to the organization for employees with low core self-evaluations. Thus, we show that during environmental disruptions, the effectiveness of support is not universal and depends on employees' personality traits. Understanding these boundary conditions might be particularly important during environmental disruptions like the COVID-19 pandemic, since changes to employees' job-related well-being can occur more suddenly and organizations may need to intervene more quickly than in normal circumstances. In addition, our findings advance social exchange theory (Blau, 1964) by showing its applicability in the extreme context of environmental disruptions. Specifically, our empirical findings support previous theoretical assertions environmental disruptions might be key moments in which employees judge the actions of their organizations due to the criticality of the situation (Ashforth, 2020) . Furthermore, our empirical findings regarding the contingency role of personality traits broaden leadership substitution theory (Childers et al., 1990; Kerr & Jermier, 1978) . Particularly, we provide additional support to previous research that core self-evaluations can substitute for leadership actions (Nübold et al., 2013) and extend existing knowledge by finding temporal focus of employees as a new personality trait that conditions the extent to which individuals respond to their leader's actions. Thus, our findings provide validation of how important work support is during times of environmental disruption and indicate that personality traits (i.e., core self-evaluations and future temporal focus) act as important contextual differences in how employees react to support. give them the space for this type of interactions such as by temporarily reducing other work expectations (e.g., reduce administrative meetings or shift nonessential goals to a later date). In addition, our findings caution that "one-size fits all" solutions may fall short of providing the desired effects since work support is not equally effective for all types of employees in terms of enhancing their affective commitment and job-related well-being. Importantly, our findings regarding the moderating roles of personality traits suggest that organizations need to design their support mechanisms very carefully as not all employees will see them as equally helpful. Particularly, our findings suggest that, during environmental disruptions, work support should be developed around principles of customization. While support cannot be tailor-made for each employee, organizations could give the employees the ability to choose from an array of support measures. This ability to choose from an array of support measures could be particularly important during environmental disruptions when the employees not only have different personalities but also face different challenges. For example, those employees with young children faced more difficulty in following regular work hours compared to those who live on their own due to the sudden need for homeschooling. In this case, those employees needed to adjust the work hours to be more flexible so that they can redistribute the work hours to perhaps to later in the day or to weekends. This principle of customization and opting-in for support can also apply to supervisor accessibility. For instance, instead of scheduling additional meetings for all employees to increase communication, supervisors could provide opportunities for additional communication for those employees who need this extra support. Thus, our findings during the COVID-19 pandemic suggest that work support is important as it can help change how employees relate to the organization and their job-related well-being. Furthermore, our findings suggest that to alleviate the effects of environmental disruptions, organizations should design support solutions at different organizational levels and try to allow for employees customization rather than providing one-size-fits-all solutions. Our study makes several important findings, but these need to be considered in the light of the study's limitations. Also, there are several important avenues for future research. First, although we made a temporal separation when collecting data relating to the independent and dependent variables, this study could be improved by employing a longitudinal design. As Bliese et al. (2017, p. 399 ) recommend, since theories of stress are inherently causal, it is preferable to use methodologies that allow stronger causal links to be made. Second, future research could also consider the relationship between organizational support and job-related well-being at various stages of the COVID-19 pandemic. Building on this idea, future research on environmental disruptions could seek to understand whether different types of support are more important for job-related well-being at different stages during the disruption. This might be particularly interesting during environmental disruptions like the COVID-19 pandemic that with an unclear and long time horizon. Third, while core self-evaluations and future focus are important personality traits, other traits are potentially also important in terms of how support affects job-related well-being. Research has, for instance, found that the interplay between perceived organizational support and proactive personality matters for individual outcomes during the pandemic (Yi-Feng Chen et al., 2021) . Future research could explore additional personality traits that are likely to affect how employees experience organizational and managerial support. Since leadership style has different effects for introverted versus extroverted employees (Guay & Choi, 2015) , the degree of introversion is also likely to condition how employees respond to work support. Fourth, while we focused on the personality traits of employees as key contingencies, future research could try to understand contingencies associated with the organization or with the leaders providing the support. At the organizational level, important contingencies could be factors such as the organizations' resource stock or the degree to which they were affected by the environmental disruption because such factors can affect how employees perceive the exchange relationship with the organization as well as their expectations. At the managerial level, factors such as gender or leadership style might be relevant as Sergent and Stajkovic (2020) find that female leaders are more effective than their male counterparts at managing during crises. Fifth, we have used respondents residing in the United Kingdom at the time of the survey and, although we controlled for their country of birth, future studies could expand this line of research to other countries. Specifically, future research could try to understand the relationship between work support and employees job-related wellbeing in different institutional and cultural contexts as previous research shows that the effectiveness of human resource practices vary between countries due to differences in how employees relate to their organizations and supervisors (Cogin, Sanders, & Williamson, 2018; Ollier-Malaterre, Valcour, Dulk, & Kossek, 2013) . Our study finds that organizations can alleviate the negative effects of the COVID-19 pandemic by providing support to employees and may even be able to improve their affective commitment to the organization and their job-related well-being. However, the effectiveness of such support depends on individual personality traits. We hope that these findings will stimulate organizations to develop appropriate support structures for their employees during environmental disruptions. 1 In this study, we theorize only about future focus because it is the temporal focus that we consider most relevant during an environmental disruption with no clear end date, like the COVID-19 pandemic. However, we perform post hoc analyses using the other two temporal orientationspast focus and present focus-and discuss those results as well. The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request. https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6385-2751 Oli R. Mihalache https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9178-5928 The existential cost of economic insecurity: Threatened financial security undercuts meaning Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance and normative commitment to the organisation Perceived organizational support and police performance: The moderating influence of socioemotional needs Identity and identification during and after the pandemic: How might COVID-19 change the research questions we ask The psychology of future-oriented thinking: From achievement to proactive coping, adaptation, and aging When does trust matter? Antecedents and contingent effects of supervisee trust on performance in selling new products in China and the United States Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective Relation of threatened egotism to violence and aggression: The dark side of high self-esteem Mental health conditions of Italian healthcare professionals during the COVID-19 disease outbreak Exchange and power in social life Stress and well-being at work: A century of empirical trends reflecting theoretical and societal influences The human organization of time: Temporal realities and experience Time and the temporal imagination When pandemic hits: Exercise frequency and subjective well-being during COVID-19 pandemic Crossing the streams: HRM in multinational enterprises and comparative HRM Organizational behavior: Affect in the workplace International HRM insights for navigating the COVID-19 pandemic: Implications for future research and practice Double crossed: The spillover and crossover effects of work demands on work outcomes through the family Employee adjustment and well-being in the era of COVID-19: Implications for human resource management Core self-evaluations: A review and evaluation of the literature Multiple team membership and empowerment spillover effects: Can empowerment processes cross team boundaries Leadership substitutes as moderators of sales supervisory behavior Sensemaking in the time of COVID-19 Remembering old frames: How the past affects assessments of the present Work-life support practices and customer satisfaction: The role of TMT composition and country culture Interactive effects of personality and perceptions of the work situation on workplace deviance How far has international HRM travelled? A systematic review of literature on multinational corporations Exchange relationships: Examining psychological contracts and perceived organizational support The effect of organizational justice, perceived organizational support, and perceived supervisor support on marketing employees' level of trust Receiving instrumental support at work: When help is not welcome Organizational commitment and its effects on organizational citizenship behavior in a high-unemployment environment Happy people live longer: Subjective wellbeing contributes to health and longevity Leadership competencies and the essential role of human resource development in times of crisis: A response to Covid-19 pandemic Reciprocation of perceived organizational support Perceived organizational support International HRM in the context of uncertainty and crisis: A systematic review of literature The role of affective commitment in the relationship between social support and turnover intention Procrastination: Different time orientations reflect different motives Enriching goal-setting theory with time: An integrated approach Responding to bad press: How CEO temporal focus influences the sensitivity to negative media coverage of acquisitions Editorial: From organizational welfare to business success: Higher performance in healthy organizational environments Job-related well-being through the great recession To whom does transformational leadership matter more? An examination of neurotic and introverted followers and their organizational citizenship behavior Context, cognition, and common method variance: Psychometric and verbal protocol evidence An introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind. Revised and expanded 3rd edn Relationship of core self-evaluations traits-Self-esteem, generalized self-efficacy, locus of control, and emotional stability-With job satisfaction and job performance: A meta-analysis The Core Self-Evaluations Scale (CSES): Development of a measure Substitutes for leadership: Their meaning and measurement Call for papers: Strategic human resource management in the era of environmental disruptions. Special Issue of Human Resource Management Sleep quality during the COVID-19 pandemic: Not one size fits all Future time perspective: A systematic review and meta-analysis National time accounting: The currency of life. In In measuring the subjective well-being of nations: National accounts of time use and well-being Perceived organizational support: A meta-analytic evaluation of organizational support theory Employee status and the consequences of perceived organizational support Reciprocation: The relationship between man and organization Effects of perceived overqualification on career distress and career planning: Mediating role of career identity and moderating role of leader humility Managing human resources during a global crisis: A multilevel perspective Conducting behavioral research on Amazon's mechanical Turk Employee commitment and well-being: A critical review, theoretical framework and research agenda Affective, continuance, and normative commitment to the organization: A meta-analysis of antecedents, correlates, and consequences Bridging yesterday, today, and tomorrow: CEO temporal focus, environmental dynamism, and rate of new product introduction A new substitute for leadership? Followers' state core self-evaluations An empirical test of the consequences of behavior-and outcome-based sales control systems Theorizing national context to develop comparative work-life research: A review and research agenda Good morning, good day: A diary study on positive emotions, hope, and work engagement Beyond the Turk: Alternative platforms for crowdsourcing behavioral research Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies Assessing moderated mediation hypotheses: Theory, methods, and prescriptions. Multivariate Behavioral Research Affective commitment to the organization: The contribution of perceived organizational support Which daily experiences can foster well-being at work? A diary study on the interplay between flow experiences, affective commitment, and self-control demands AIDS is your business Unraveling the what and how of organizational communication to employees during COVID-19 pandemic: Adopting an attributional lens Women's leadership is associated with fewer deaths during the COVID-19 crisis: Quantitative and qualitative analyses of United States governors Over de rol van positieve en negatieve emoties bij het welbevinden van managers I do not need feedback! Or do I? Self-efficacy, perspective taking, and feedback seeking Conceptualization and measurement of temporal focus: The subjective experience of the past, present, and future Reinterpreting time in fit theory: Crafting and recrafting narratives of fit in medias res Effects of the COVID-19 pandemic and nationwide lockdown on trust, attitudes toward government, and well-being Organizations and supervisors as sources of support and targets of commitment: A longitudinal study The future starts today, not tomorrow: How future focus promotes organizational citizenship behaviors Self-verification theory Perceived support, knowledge tacitness, and provider knowledge sharing. Group & Organization Management The cost of being ignored: Emotional exhaustion in the work and family domains Enabling the engine of workplace thriving through servant leadership: The moderating role of core self-evaluations Using the Job-related Affective Wellbeing Scale (JAWS) to investigate affective responses to work stressors Affective commitment to organizations and supervisors and turnover: A role theory perspective Organizational identification among virtual workers: The role of need for affiliation and perceived work-based social support How the COVID-19 pandemic affected hotel employee stress: Employee perceptions of occupational stressors and their consequences Perceived organizational support and knowledge sharing: Employees' self-construal matters An uncertainty management theory on the effects of abusive supervision. Management Decision When there is a will there is a way: The role of proactive personality in combating COVID-19 Individual difference predictors of change in career adaptability over time Mihalache is an assistant professor of International Business at Amsterdam Business School. She received her PhD in International Strategy from Rotterdam School of Management in the Netherlands He received his PhD from Erasmus University in the Netherlands. His research on how organizations transform themselves has been published in journals such as Strategic Management Journal Measures adjusted for the COVID-19 pandemic Perceived organizational support for the COVID-19 pandemic (inspired by Eisenberger et al., 1986) Considering the situation after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic My company provides satisfactory measures for supporting communication withcolleagues working at different locations My personal needs were taken into consideration when changing working arrangements My company cares about my well-being My company appreciated extra effort and contributions from me Considering the situation after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic When needed, I can ask my manager to work with me My manager is available for feedback or guidance when needed