Job Crafting among Airport Security: The Role of Organizational Support, Work Engagement and Social Courage

2.1 POS and JC

POS, considered a key factor in employee behavior, was first defined by Eisenberger et al. (1986) as the extent to which employees believe that the organization values their well-being and contributions. POS describes the relationship between how an organization treats its employees and how these employees feel about their work and the organization as a whole (Zagenczyk et al., 2010). This concept is rooted in Gouldner’s (1960) principle of reciprocity and Blau’s (2017) social exchange theory. According to Gouldner’s principle, employees who perceive their organization as valuing their efforts and welfare are more likely to demonstrate positive work behaviors and attitudes (Eisenberger et al., 2001; Rhoades & Eisenberger, 2002). Similarly, social exchange theory suggests that employees who perceive strong organizational support will reciprocate by displaying favorable job attitudes, exerting significant effort, and performing effectively (Sears et al., 2016). Consequently, when employees perceive high levels of organizational support, they not only feel a sense of loyalty toward their employers but also believe they should engage in behaviors that align with organizational goals, putting in additional effort to maintain a balanced exchange relationship. Specifically, high POS fulfills employees’ socio-emotional needs, leading to greater emotional attachment to the organization and increased engagement in their work (Pimenta et al., 2024; Wayne et al., 1997).

In this context, where employees and the organization hold mutual expectations, a psychological contract exists in addition to the formal employment contract established between employees and their organizations (Aselage & Eisenberger, 2003). Under such circumstances, employees are more inclined to take on extra responsibilities beyond their assigned tasks because they feel supported by the organization (De Clercq & Pereira, 2021; Moustafa et al., 2024). When employees perceive organizational support, they are more likely to adapt to their roles and reframe how they perceive the value and purpose of their work. Moreover, elevated levels of POS can enhance employee motivation (Eisenberger et al., 2001; Junça Silva & Pinto, 2024), leading to increased job performance (Kurtessis et al., 2017; Rhoades & Eisenberger, 2002) and job commitment (Eisenberger & Stinglhamber, 2011; Hngoi et al., 2023). Additionally, POS is a critical contextual variable that either supports or inhibits JC among employees. POS empowers employees to engage in JC behaviors by proactively modifying their job tasks and work relationships, redefining job boundaries and conditions, and reshaping the meaning of their work (Sethi et al., 2023; Thai et al., 2023).

JC behaviors refer to employees’ actions to implement desired organizational changes driven by their own initiatives (Petrou et al., 2012). Employees who engage in JC behaviors are motivated to make their jobs meaningful for themselves, independently of others (Wrzesniewski & Dutton, 2001). With this motivation, they autonomously modify their jobs by expanding the scope and requirements of their tasks based on their preferences and abilities (Berg et al., 2010). In this context, POS is evaluated as a variable that may either promote job crafting at different levels or inhibit job redesign, well-being, and career satisfaction (Berg et al., 2013).

When employees feel supported by their organization and recognize that they are valued and cared for, they are more likely to take the initiative to modify and enhance their work tasks and relationships, without needing external prompts (Demerouti & Bakker, 2014; Lyons, 2008; Peng, 2018). Such proactive behavior not only makes work more meaningful for employees but also indirectly contributes to overall organizational performance (Wrzesniewski & Dutton, 2001). Empirical studies have shown that individuals who perceive high levels of organizational support report higher levels of job-crafting behavior. POS and JC behavior are positively correlated with increased work engagement, subsequent performance, and employee satisfaction (Cheng & Yi, 2018; Geldenhuys et al., 2021, Tufan, 2023).

2.2 The Mediating Role of WE

The concept of WE was first introduced by Kahn (1990), who defined it as the extent to which individuals fully embrace their roles within the organization, becoming physically and mentally involved in their work while remaining emotionally connected to their tasks. WE is a multifaceted concept that goes beyond mere commitment and satisfaction, enabling employees to fully dedicate themselves to their jobs (Maslach et al., 2001). Unlike related concepts, such as organizational commitment, WE emphasizes the employee’s integration with and loyalty to the job itself (Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004).

WE is a positive and gratifying mental state associated with work (Schaufeli et al., 2002), characterized by a sense of pride in one’s work and a positive approach to tasks (Maslach et al., 2001). In the literature, WE is considered the antithesis of burnout; employees who are highly engaged are distinguished by their energy and enthusiasm, in contrast to those experiencing burnout (Bakker et al., 2008). Engaged employees form an emotional connection with their jobs, viewing their work as enjoyable rather than stressful and demanding (Schaufeli & Bakker, 2010). From an organizational perspective, engaged employees align their personal development with organizational growth and integrate their own interests with those of the organization to achieve tasks in line with their sense of identification (Ashforth et al., 2008).

Studies indicate that employees with strong WE demonstrate proactive behavior, take initiative (Sonnentag, 2003), and experience higher job satisfaction than their counterparts (Demerouti et al., 2001). Positive feelings about work also enhance employee performance (Bakker et al., 2008). High levels of WE enable employees to invest more energy into their work and cultivate greater self-awareness, which is associated with the realization of innovative behavior (Kim & Koo, 2017). Engaged employees exhibit job-crafting behaviors by modifying their jobs and work environments when necessary (Tims et al., 2013). They take on different tasks to make their work more meaningful and ensure that it aligns with their skills and requirements. Additionally, they generate new business ideas and exert extra effort to make their jobs more meaningful and better suited to their individual needs and abilities (Bakker et al., 2012; Nielsen et al., 2017; Tims et al., 2013). At the same time, employees with a high degree of WE are more proactive in finding ways to solve existing problems and overcome challenges in their work (Bakker et al., 2020). Studies have shown that engaged employees are more likely to exhibit JC behaviors in response to job resources and demands, thereby creating a more suitable and challenging work environment (Bakker et al.,2012; Ghadi, 2023; Jaleel & Sarmad, 2024; Laguía et al., 2024). Furthermore, individuals with high levels of engagement tend to display optimism, passion, and enthusiasm in their work (Den Hartog & Belschak, 2012). These positive emotions are likely to enhance their cognitive abilities, leading to greater creativity and an increased capacity for personal growth and meaningful performance (Bindl et al., 2019). Additionally, WE has been found to positively impact overall life satisfaction (Gupta & Singh, 2021).

2.3 The Moderating Role of SC

In the literature, early definitions of courage are associated with emotional strengths that involve the exercise of will to achieve goals despite external forces or internal resistance (Peterson & Seligman, 2004). Due to criticisms regarding their lack of clarity, these definitions evolved to conceptualize courage as a process. A frequently cited definition, Rate et al. (2007) identifies courage through the dimensions of intention, deliberation, risk, and noble purpose. Focusing on the risk from these dimensions, three types of courage have been identified: physical, moral, and social (Howard et al., 2016). Unlike other dimensions, SC is a prosocial behavior where the risks involved pertain to the actor’s esteem in the eyes of others or involve taking risks in pursuit of socially valued goals (Larsen & Giles, 1976). SC is the capacity to articulate one’s viewpoints and choices freely, even in the face of potential social criticism or repercussions, without conforming to the expectations, viewpoints, or choices of others (Schilpzand et al., 2015). Additionally, SC is considered a form of brave behavior because it entails the risk of damaging relationships, careers, or an individual’s social image in the perception of others (Howard et al., 2017; Schilpzand et al., 2015).

In organizational structures, courage is a virtue that plays a significant role. Beyond being an essential element in the organizational context, courage has also emerged as a moderator variable in recent studies (Namal et al., 2023; Namal et al., 2024). Managers are expected to demonstrate courage in their decision-making processes to ensure effective management, while employees are encouraged to act courageously when confronted with unjust situations (Detert & Bruno, 2017; Detert & Burris, 2007). Within this context, different forms of courage can be exhibited: SC is displayed when ethical norms are violated, physical courage is required in situations that may cause harm, and SC arises when actions benefit the organization but may damage relationships (Howard & Holmes, 2020; Woodard & Pury, 2007).

SC involves fearlessly expressing one’s thoughts to those in positions of authority, despite the potential drawbacks, such as losing social relationships, damaging friendships, and sacrificing material benefits for the sake of the organization (Detert & Burris, 2007; Greitemeyer et al., 2006). SC is regarded as a form of organizational citizenship behavior and is considered crucial for optimal organizational functioning (Howard et al., 2017; Howard, 2021). Studies consistently suggest that individuals who demonstrate SC at work are more likely to voice their opinions (Howard & Holmes, 2020; Howard, 2019), exhibit higher job performance (Howard, 2019; Magnano et al., 2022), positively influence workplace outcomes (Howard et al., 2017), lead others effectively (Bashir et al., 2011) and show lower levels of counterproductive behaviors. Considering these positive relationships, SC can be regarded as a robust predictor of desirable workplace behaviors (Howard, 2019).

Employees who exhibit high levels of SC are known for their willingness to take risks and confront challenges despite their fears. When faced with difficult situations, these employees express their opinions and prioritize actions that align with their values, without focusing on potential benefits or costs (Howard & Holmes, 2020). Additionally, they may be inclined to modify their job roles, tasks, or work environments to enhance performance, improve unit efficiency, and positively impact the overall organizational climate (Howard et al., 2016), ultimately seeking a more fulfilling work experience. Employees with SC are also more likely to take the initiative and engage in job creation activities. SC at work encourages relational job crafting, which enhances social resources and fosters a positive attachment to the workplace (Kaltiainen et al., 2024). Additionally, individuals with high levels of courage are more likely to be motivated to achieve their goals and exhibit behaviors that lead to positive work outcomes (Howard et al., 2017; Magnano et al., 2019). The relationship between WE and JC may be strengthened by SC, as courageous employees are inclined to seek ways to improve their workplace and take calculated risks to achieve their objectives. Conversely, employees who lack SC may be less inclined to take initiative, even if they are highly committed to their jobs.

The strength of the indirect correlation between JC and POS may have been affected by the SC behavior of employees during the assessment of Hypotheses 2 and 3. In other words, the indirect effect of POS on JC through WE was more pronounced for employees with high levels of SC. SC can amplify the impact of POS on JC behaviors. When employees demonstrate SC, they are more likely to leverage the organization’s resources and support system to take initiative and tailor their roles to fit their needs and preferences. Consequently, employees with SC are likely to exhibit a stronger mediating relationship between JC, WE, and POS compared to those without SC. In light of these findings, we propose the following moderated mediation hypothesis:

3.1 Aim and Sample of the Study

The purpose of this research is to examine the moderating influence of workplace SC on the relationship between WE and JC, as well as the mediating role of WE in the relationship between POS and JC. Additionally, the study aims to determine whether employees’ SC moderates the strength of the mediation relationship between POS and JC through WE. Data were gathered at Antalya airport between January 2022 and December 2022 through a survey using a simple random sampling method. The study population consists of aviation security officers. This cross-sectional survey was conducted in Antalya City, a city in South Türkiye. Due to its strategic location, Turkey connects the continents of Asia and Europe, serving as a bridge between Eastern and Western civilizations (Yanık, 2023). The ongoing war between Ukraine and Russia in the north, occasional conflicts between Azerbaijan and Armenia in the east, conflicts in Iraq and Syria in the south, and the war between Israel and Palestine highlight the unstable environment that threatens Turkey’s security. From another perspective, Turkey is a major attraction for tourism, known for its unique natural beauty and magnificent facilities along the Mediterranean, Aegean, and Black Sea coasts (Gül et al., 2020). Each year, millions of tourists from various countries safely enjoy their holidays in Turkish facilities, with the majority opting for air travel (Albayrak et al., 2020). According to the human resources department, approximately 650 aviation security officers are employed at Antalya airport. Prior to the study, a G*power analysis was conducted to determine the required sample size, with a type 1 error rate (ɑ) of 0.05 and a study power (1 − β) of 0.80. As a result of the analysis, the required sample size was calculated to be 311 participants. To increase the study’s power, a larger number of aviation security officers were included than initially determined by the power analysis. A total of 450 questionnaires were distributed, and participants were invited to voluntarily take part in the research. Of these, 383 questionnaires were returned. After excluding those with invalid or missing data, 379 questionnaires were deemed valid, resulting in a response rate of 84.2%.

The demographic characteristics of the sample are shown in Table 1. A total of 379 valid responses were collected, with 46% of the officers being female and 54% male. Of the workforce, 33.0% are single, while the majority, 67.0%, are married. About 41.6% of the participants fall within the 25–35 age range. Regarding educational background, 75.0% hold bachelor’s degrees. Additionally, 42.5% of the participants have been employed by their current firms for 6–9 years, and 39.0% have over 6–9 years of work experience. Table 1 presents the demographic features of the sample.

3.2 Measures of the Study

The study used the following measures:

Dependent variable (Y): The dependent variable of the research is job crafting (JC). JC was operationalized with three sub-dimensions – task crafting, cognitive crafting, and relational crafting – with 19 items (Slemp & Vella-Brodrick, 2014). The scale was adapted to the Turkish context by Kerse (2017).

Independent variable (X): The independent variable of the research is perceived organizational support (POS) The four-item scale from (Rasool et al., 2021) was operationalized to measure POS.

Mediator variable (M): WE is the mediator variable of the research. The 4-item scale from (Rasool et al., 2021) was operationalized to measure WE

Moderator variable (W): The moderator variable of the research is workplace SC. An 11-item scale developed by Howard et al. (2017) was used to operationalize the concept of workplace SC and adapted to the Turkish context by Mert et al. (2021).

A Likert scale with five points – 1 being strongly disagreed and 5 being in agreement – was used to score each scale’s measures for the study. The items of the scales can be seen in Appendix 1.

In this research, a single data collection technique, self-report, was used to measure the variables. The term ‘common method variance’ (CMV) refers to the potential for systematic bias in the findings when a single method is employed for data collection. One of the most commonly used statistical methods to control for CMV is Harman’s single-factor test, which assesses whether a single factor accounts for the majority of the variance in the data (Podsakoff et al., 2003). In this study, Harman’s single-factor Test, conducted using SPSS, revealed that a single factor accounts for only 25.10% of the variance, indicating that our dataset does not exhibit common method variance bias.

The research’s conceptual model is depicted in Figure 1 – the moderated mediation model was utilized within this research.

Figure 1

Conceptual model of the research.

Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was conducted to determine whether the sample was suitable for further analysis. Bartlett’s test of sphericity (p < 0.000) and the Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin measure of sampling adequacy (0.87) indicated that the data were appropriate for factor analysis (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2019). The extracted factors explain 77% of the total variance, with factor loadings ranging from 0.625 and 0.901. The reliability of the factor structure was assessed using Cronbach’s Alpha coefficient, which demonstrated satisfactory reliability (α = 0.85) (Nunnally, 1978). The SPSS software was used to perform the EFA.

Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was used to assess how well the hypothesized theoretical structure fits the data or to evaluate the fit of the data to a pre-existing factor structure. The Amos Graphical interface for structural equation modeling was employed to perform the CFA and examine the factor structure of the model.

For model fit, the following criteria were used as guidelines: CFI > 0.90; GFI > 0.90; NFI > 0.90; RMSEA < 0.08; (χ ²/df) ≤ 5 (Arbuckle, 2006; Table 2). After confirming the structural validity of the scales, the reliability was assessed by calculating Cronbach’s alpha values to determine internal consistency. Additionally, composite reliability (CR) and average variance extracted (AVE) values were examined. As shown in Table 2, he scales used in this study meet the necessary thresholds for AVE, Cronbach’s alpha, and CR (Hair et al., 2014).

1. Ethical approval: The study was conducted according to the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the Social and Human Sciences Scientific Research and Publication Ethics Committee of Akdeniz University (Protocol code: 145; approval date: March14, 2023).

2. Informed consent: Informed consent was obtained from all participants who took part in the study.

3.3 Data Analyses

The conceptual model developed in line with the study’s purpose and assumptions (Figure 1) will be tested using the moderated mediation analysis technique. The research model was tested using the Process Macro software. Process Macro is a tool that conducts mediation and moderation analyses, as well as various conditional mediation models, by applying path analysis based on linear regression to observed variables and estimating model parameters using ordinary least squares regression (Hayes, 2013). To confirm the moderated mediation hypothesis, as explained in the model section, two steps are required: first, an indirect (mediation) effect should be observed between the independent variable (perceived organizational support) and the dependent variable (job crafting) through the mediator (work engagement); second, the strength and magnitude of this indirect effect should vary depending on different values of the moderator variable (social courage). In light of these explanations, mediation analysis was first conducted to identify the existence of the indirect effect. Subsequently, moderated mediation analysis was performed to assess whether this indirect effect varies depending on the moderator variable. Hayes’ (2013) PROCESS Macro model 4 was used to examine the mediating role between the variables, while model 14 was applied to determine that SC moderated the mediation effect. Statistical significance was set at a two-tailed p-value of <0.05.

Figure 2 illustrates a second stage moderated mediation model in conceptual form (panel a) and in the form of a statistical model (panel b) as estimated in the POS and JC according to the Model 14 procedures. This process is modeled with two equations, one for WE and one for JC (Hayes, 2015):

Figure 2

A second stage moderated mediation model in conceptual form (panel a) and in the form of a statistical model (panel b).

3.4 Findings

3.4.4 Moderation and Moderated Mediation Analysis

An overall moderated mediation analysis was conducted by including all study variables. Hypothesis 3 posited that workplace SC moderates the direct impact of WE on JC. As shown in Table 7, SC significantly moderates the relationship between WE on JC (β = 3,125, p < 0.001). The statistical significance of this moderation is further supported by the fact that the upper limit of the confidence interval (ULCI = 0.4606) and the lower limit of the confidence interval (LLCI = 0.1644) do not include zero, indicating that the interaction term is significant. Therefore, Hypothesis 3 is supported.

Table 7

Test outcomes for the moderation of SC on the relationship between WE and JC (model 14 of PROCESS macro)

Model summary
Relationships	β	T	P	LLCI	ULCI	R²	F	P
POS → WE (a1)	0.3996	10.8789	<0.001	0.3274	0.4718	0.2389	118.3499	0.0000
POS → JC (c1)	0.1461	3.0495	<0.05	0.0519	0.2402	0.2589	32.7377	0.0000
WE → JC (b1)	−0.8038	2.6245	<0.05	−1.4060	−0.2016
SC → JC (b2)	−1.3027	−4.0304	<0.001	−1.9382	−0.6671
Moderator (WE × SC) (b3)	0.3125	4.1502	<0.001	0.1644	0.4606
	R²–Chng: 0.0341			F: 17.2240		p: 0.000

Bootstrap sample size = 5,000; LLCI = Bias corrected lower limit confidence interval; ULCI = Bias corrected upper limit confidence interval.

The effect size for this analysis was calculated as 0.3493, which, according to Cohen (1988), indicates a large practical significance.

Table 8 presents the varying degrees of the moderating variable (low, medium, high) in the effect of WE on JC. Additionally, interaction plots were created using values of 1 SD below the mean and 1 SD above the mean for SC (Figure 2).

Table 8

The effect of WE on JC in different levels of SC

	Effect	SE	T	P	LLCI	ULCI
−1 SD	0.2985	0.689	4.3304	0.0000	0.1629	0.4340
M	0.4888	0.605	8.0817	0.0000	0.3699	0.6078
+1 SD	0.792	0.823	8.2522	0.0000	0.5173	0.8410

Examining Figure 3, it becomes evident that SC peaks concurrently with WE, indicating that their combined influence has the strongest effect on JC. Additionally, the figure illustrates how varying levels of SC moderate the relationship between WE and JC.

Figure 3

Plots of moderated relationship.

To test the significantly moderated mediation, Hayes’ PROCESS macro (model 14) was employed as previously mentioned. It was predicted that the indirect effects of POS on JC through WE would be moderated by employees’ SC in the workplace. The moderated mediation was examined to demonstrate that SC among employees had particular conditional indirect effects (Table 9).

Table 9

Results of Hayes’ moderated mediation analysis

	Indirect effect β (boot SE)	95% CI lower level	95% CI upper-level
Low (−1 SD)	0.1193 (0.0378)	0.0524	0.1992
M	0.1953 (0.0390)	0.1263	0.2768
High (+1 SD)	0.2714 (0.0493)	0.1847	0.3739
Index of moderated mediation	0.1249 (0.0331)	0.0606	0.1906

In the analysis, 5,000 bootstrap samples were used, with a 95% CI. The results indicate that the indirect effect of POS on JC through WE is moderated by SC. This finding is supported by the index of moderated mediation (index = 0.1249, 95% CI = [0.606/0.1906]) as the upper limit ULCI (0.606), and lower limit LLCI (0.1906) of the CI do not include zero (Table 9). Consequently, Hypothesis 4 was supported. To enhance clarity, Figure 4 graphically illustrates the results, showing that the significance of the indirect effect of POS on JC through WE is conditional upon SC. Specifically, higher levels of employees’ SC increase the magnitude of this indirect effect.

Figure 4

Conditional indirect effect on SC.

4.1 Theoretical Implications

By providing empirical support for the relationships among POS, WE, SC, and JC among airport security officers, this study contributes to the existing body of literature. The confirmation of the positive impact of POS in fostering JC behaviors. This finding is consistent with the JD-R model, which emphasizes the role of resources, such as POS, in promoting proactive behaviors like JC among employees (Bakker et al., 2008; Demerouti & Bakker, 2014).

Additionally, the validation of the mediating role of WE in the relationship between POS and JC underscores the importance of WE as a mechanism through which POS influences job-related outcomes. This finding supports earlier research that highlights WE’s crucial role in linking POS to positive job behaviors (Bakker et al., 2012; Nielsen et al., 2017).

The confirmation of Hypothesis 1 underscores the importance of POS in shaping employee job-crafting behaviors, thereby reinforcing the theoretical foundations of the JD-R models. The results of Hypothesis 2 further illuminate how job resources influence employees’ motivational states and influence emphasizing the mediating role of WE in the relationship between POS and JC. Hypothesis 3 posits that the relationship between WE and JC is moderated by employees’ SC. According to this research, workers who exhibit higher levels of SC are more likely to engage in JC behaviors, especially when they are highly engaged at work. Companies can support this process by encouraging employees to take risks, fostering a culture that recognizes and promotes courage, and empowering individuals to take on innovate roles. Moreover, the confirmation of Hypotheses 3 and 4 underscores the moderating role of SC in the relationship between WE and JC as well as the strength of the mediating relationship between POS and JC through WE. These findings suggest that employees’ SC amplifies the effect of WE on JC, indicating that socially courageous employees are more likely to take the initiative to modify their work, especially when they perceive strong organizational support.

The study provides empirical support for the JD-R model by demonstrating meaningful connections between POS, WE, SC, and JC among airport security officers. The results confirm that POS positively influences JC, with WE acting as a mediator in this relationship. Additionally, the relationship between JC and WE, as well as the strength of the mediating effect of WE between POS and JC, are moderated by SC. These findings align with the JD-R model’s hypotheses, emphasizing the importance of both personal and organizational resources – such as SC – in fostering proactive behaviors and enhancing JC among employees.

4.2 Practical Implications

The study’s conclusions have several practical implications for businesses, particularly those in the aviation sector. Employers should prioritize providing employees wıth the resources and support necessary to enhance engagement and foster job-crafting practices. This can be achieved by implementing policies and practices that promote a positive workplace environment, such as regular feedback, opportunities for professional development, and recognition programs. Additionally, employers should recognize the role of SC in encouraging JC activities. Employees who participate in training programs designed to cultivate SC may experience better job design and stronger relationships with coworkers. Since POS positively influences JC, companies can promote JC by creating a supportive work environment. This can be accomplished through actions such as rewarding and recognizing proactive behavior, offering opportunities for skill enhancement, and fostering a culture of trust and collaboration.

Regarding the moderating role of SC among employees, it is suggested that organizations can enhance JC by promoting and rewarding courageous behavior. This can be achieved by fostering a culture that values creativity and risk-taking, as well as by providing employees with the tools and support needed to push beyond their comfort zones. With SC in mind, companies should create secure environments where employees feel empowered to voice their opinions, take initiative, and design their own jobs.

It is crucial for practitioners to recognize that the effectiveness of organizational support programs may vary depending on employees’ levels of SC. Tailoring interventions to meet the unique needs of individuals can lead to better outcomes.

Practical interventions can also be informed by understanding the mediating role of WE. Job crafting may be indirectly supported by enhancing employee engagement through meaningful work, increased autonomy, and skill development. By fostering WE, organizations can cultivate a more dynamic and adaptable workforce capable of thriving in demanding and uncertain work environments.

4.3 Limitations and Future Studies

Despite the study’s merits, several limitations should be acknowledged. First, the findings may have limited generalizability due to the study being conducted at a single airport in Türkiye. To validate the results, future studies could replicate this research in various cultural contexts. Additionally, the research relied on self-reported data, which may be subject to common method bias. To mitigate this, future studies could incorporate objective measurements or supervisor ratings. Finally, the study focused on the aviation sector, which has unique characteristics. Future research could explore the applicability of the findings across different industries to enhance the theoretical robustness of the conclusions.

Considering the mentioned limitations, this study opens up several avenues for further research. First, companies can gain practical insights by exploring which specific features of POS are most critical for promoting job crafting. Second, examining potential boundary conditions for the identified correlations could enhance the generalizability of the findings. For instance, the moderating effect of SC might be more pronounced in certain job types or organizational cultures. Finally, longitudinal research could track changes in POS, WE, SC, and JC over time, providing a more dynamic understanding of these relationships.

The validated hypotheses present opportunities for future investigations to explore the complex interactions among POS, WE, SC, and JC. Future research could focus on conducting more comprehensive studies into the mechanisms by which these variables interact and how they are influenced by contextual influenced such as leadership styles and organizational culture.

Furthermore, future studies could explore how individual differences influence the relationships between these variables. For example, examining how personality traits or demographic factors affect the connection between SC and JC could provide valuable insights into how organizations can tailor their strategies to enhance JC behaviors across diverse employee groups.