Job involvement and valuation of job resources: The mediating effect of satisfaction with job resources

Purpose: Using the job demands-resources (JD-R) model as a general framework, this paper has two objectives: the first, to analyse the relationship between job involvement and valuation of job resources; the second, to analyse the mediating effect of satisfaction with job resources on the relationship between job involvement and employees’ valuation of job resources. Design/methodology: The survey was used as a research methodology.The participants correspond to a sample of 225 employees in Spain. The research model was tested using structural equation modelling, namely the partial least squares (PLS-SEM) technique, and SmartPLS. Findings: The hypotheses are positively contrasted. Job involvement is positively related to valuation of job resources, and satisfaction with job resources mediates the relationship between job involvement and valuation of job resources. The results of this work indicate that the most involved employees give greater importance to job resources. Originality/value: This paper evidences the relationship between job involvement and the importance that employees attribute to job resources. Therefore, this research advances the job demands-resources model, as it suggests that employees’ high involvement in their job leads to greater involvement of resources, which is related to employees’ psychological contract.


Introduction
There is support in the literature that highly involved employees demonstrate high levels of participation in their work (Mudrack, 2004).Such employees invest effort and manage resources to achieve successful goals (Dimitriades, 2007).Therefore, knowing how they perceive and evaluate the resources that the company provides to them is useful, firstly, to understand the behaviour of employee involvement towards their development (Frone & Major, 1988) and, secondly, to assess the investment effort of the companies in resources that affect the development of performance.
Rooted in this context and using the job demands-resources (JD-R) model as a general framework (Demerouti, Bakker, Nachreiner & Schaufeli, 2001), this work examines the relationship between job involvement and job resources.In the JD-R model, job demands and resources are related to employees' wellbeing through two different processes (Bakker & Demerouti, 2007).First, job demands can deplete energy and lead to chronic fatigue.The second process assumes that job resources are intrinsically or extrinsically motivating and improve involvement in the job.The corollary that could arise from this proposal is to consider to what extent the most motivated or involved employees value the resources offered by the company.In other words, when an employee has a particular interest in individual and organizational development, they will assume the resources as essential for their development purposes, leading them to deeply value the resources provided by their organization and then they can use them.From this proposal the first research question can be posed: • RQ 1. Do more job-involved employees attribute more value to job resources?If so, what does the company provide for the most job-involved employees?
However, it could be thought that the valuation of these resources is not only related to job involvement but also to satisfaction with the resources, since this satisfaction would be an affective reaction that results from the comparison of real results with those desired, expected and deserved (Castaneda & Scanlan, 2014).This proposal is related to the previous research question, so beyond the relationship between job involvement and the valuation of resources, the employees would need to be satisfied with the resources.In other words, job involvement affects the valuation of resources to the extent that the employee is satisfied with these resources.Accordingly, the second research question can be formulated as follows: • RQ 2. How does an attitude such as satisfaction with job resources intervene in evaluating such resources?
Therefore, this work has two objectives: firstly, to analyse the relationship between job involvement and the importance that employees give to resources-in other words, valuation of resources; and secondly, to analyse the mediating effect of satisfaction with job resources on the relationship between job involvement and the valuation of job resources.
This research makes an essential contribution to the literature on organizational behaviour (Wright, 2014) by examining the implications of job involvement in the recognition by the employee of the value of the support they receive from the company in terms of resources (Rhoades & Eisenberger, 2002).In other words, it is examined if job involvement is linked with the "participation" of employees through job resources.In addition, this work advances the JD-R approach (Dominguez, Chambel & Carvalho, 2020;Tan & Yeap, 2022;Sengupta, Tewari, Mohyuddin, Patel & Prikshat, 2021) and, in order to understand the meaning of job involvement and job satisfaction with job resources, proposes an analysis of the valuation that employees attribute to job resources as a dependent variable.For this reason, this work is relevant to human resources management (Burke, Dolan & Fiksenbaum, 2014) by relating job attitudes-involvement and satisfaction-to the valuation of job resources by employees.The literature on human resource management (Philip & Arrowsmith, 2021) has pointed out the relationship between a high degree of employee involvement and positive attitudes in the workforce.This work contributes to the literature on behaviour by deepening the relationship between job involvement and the requirement of resources, in other words, the relationship between expectations towards the job and the employee's effort towards results.The hypothesis was tested in a sample of 225 workers in Spain.All employees work in firms that belong to the private sector.

Job demands-resources model
Since its appearance in the early twenty-first century, the JD-R model (Demerouti et al., 2001) has gained great popularity among researchers.The JD-R model assumes that although each occupation has factors that can influence the wellbeing of employees (Bao, Liu, Ma, Feng & He, 2022;Van den Broeck, Van Ruysseveldt, Smulders & De Witte, 2011), these factors can be classified into two general categories, job demands and job resources.Together, these constitute a general model that can be applied to different occupational environments regardless of the particular resources and demands involved (Miao, Humphrey & Qian, 2017).
Job demands refer to the physical, psychological, social or organisational aspects of the job that require sustained physical and/or psychological (cognitive and emotional) effort or skills (Gillet, Fouquereau, Huyghebaert & Colombat, 2015).They are therefore associated with specific physiological and/or psychological costs.Job resources are defined as those physical, psychological, social or organisational aspects of work that are functional to achieve the work's objectives, reduce job demands and associated physiological and psychological costs, and stimulate personal growth, learning and development (Bakker & Demerouti, 2007;Schaufeli & Baker, 2004).Various job resources have been differentiated-for example, social and structural resources (Matsuo, 2019).Social job resources consist mainly of the relationships that an individual has at work that provide support and feedback.Structural job resources are mainly the design of work, providing opportunities for autonomy, creativity and development.Another job resource that has received special attention is supporting the reconciliation of work and family (Eddleston, Sieger & Bernhard, 2019).Job demands deplete resources as individuals respond to demands, gradually depleting those individuals' energy and eventually leading to exhaustion (Crawford, LePine & Rich, 2010;Fodor, Pohrt, Gekeler, Knoll & Heuse, 2020).Meanwhile, job resources trigger a motivating process that helps people achieve their goals, stimulates their personal growth/development, and reduces job demands, leading to positive outcomes such as engagement and satisfaction (Crawford et al., 2010).Therefore, job resources have been positively associated with improved performance (Nuutinen, Ahola, Eskelinen &Kuula, 2022).
The JD-R model is used as a tool for human resource management (Bakker & Demerouti, 2007): job demands predict job strain, and job resources predict motivation.The work of Topcic, Baum and Kabst (2016), based on the JD-R model, explains the relationship between the different high-performance work practices and stress, and a positive relationship between the demands of challenges and stress is evidenced.Cooke, Cooper, Bartram, Wang and Mei (2019) point out that a high-performance work system can be used as a labour resource to positively affect employees' resilience and, subsequently, engagement.
In addition, the JD-R model can help analyse the relationships between job involvement, job resources, and job well-being.The work of Pignata, Winefield, Provis and Boyd (2016), based on the JD-R model, approaches job involvement as a precedent for perceived procedural justice.Xiao, Cooke, Mavondo and Bamber (2022) related job resources and labour well-being.The results of this work indicate that the perceived benefits (job resources) influence the health and well-being of employees.
For the above, in line with other works (Nimon, Shuck, Fulmore & Zigarmi, 2021), the results of this study will help academics and academic practitioners to understand the complex relationships between job involvement and valuation of job resources and the effect of satisfaction in this relationship.

Job involvement and job resources
Job involvement refers to an employee's level of psychological attachment and identification with their current job and the value that the current job has in their life (Paullay, Alliger & Stone-Romero, 1994).It has also been highlighted that job involvement refers to a specific belief about the importance of a job for one's image (Lawler & Hall, 1970), which is associated with self-image and promotes adaptive behaviours (Scrima, Lorito, Parry & Falgares, 2014).It has also been indicated that it affects other attitudes related to commitment or help to other workers (Lin, Koopmann & Wang, 2020).
The literature has pointed out the relationship between job involvement and job effort (Diefendorff, Brown, Kamin & Lord., 2002), in the sense that job involvement energises employees who make an additional effort to achieve greater performance (Janssen, 2003).For this additional effort, the individual needs the support of significant resources.Therefore, an involved employee will ascribe more importance to job resources.In other words, the employee will value job resources as instruments of involvement in their job and personal development.The contribution of resources can mitigate the effect of disidentification with the organization, and the employee is involved in his work (De Clercq, 2022).
In addition, job involvement is an antecedent to work engagement (Hallberg & Schaufeli, 2006).The JD-R model has been proposed as a predictor of engagement (Bakker & Demerouti, 2007).Therefore, as proposed in the JD-R model reviewed by Schaufeli and Taris (2014), the hypothesis that job resources positively affect worker engagement can be upheld.However, given the flexibility of the JD-R model (Bakker & Demerouti, 2013), the extent to which engagement affects the valuation that workers grant the company's resources could also be considered.Job involvement refers to the person's identification with the job or the degree to which the job is central to the person's identity.In this sense, people get involved in the work when they perceive that the company can satisfy their needs for growth and achieve goals.In a certain way, the relationship between job involvement and the valuation of resources can be observed in Burke et al. (2014), showi ng that staff working part-time reported a more negative workplace, for example, less autonomy and opportunities for personal development.Therefore, the following hypothesis is proposed.
Hypothesis 1. Job involvement is positively related to the employee's valuation of job resources.

Employee satisfaction with job resources and job involvement
Job satisfaction is a topic that generates significant interest for both employees and company managers (Robertson, Gockel & Brauner, 2013).In this sense, the literature has indicated a positive relationship between job satisfaction and job performance (Han, Song & Whang, 2021;Heidemeier & Moser, 2019;Kessler, Lucianetti, Pindek, Zhu & Spector, 2020).Job satisfaction, defined as the "pleasurable or positive emotional state resulting from the appraisal of one's job or job experience" (Locke, 1976(Locke, , p. 1300)), is a multidimensional construct due to the different professions' very nature (García Torres, 2019).Satisfaction is not only derived from feelings towards the job, but has a significant cognitive component (Judge & Kammeyer-Mueller, 2012) and depends on the characteristics of the job, such as on the relationships that people maintain with co-employees and superiors, or the possibilities for professional development offered by the company (Xia, Zhang & Zhao, 2016).For example, an employee may be satisfied with his or her career development but not satisfied with a specific place of work; conversely, they may be happy with some aspect of the labour but not with the entire job.These circumstances allow an analysis of employees' satisfaction with different demands and job resources.Significant studies have examined various relationships between job resources and job satisfaction.The study by Tims, Bakker and Derks (2013) points out a positive relationship between job resources and job satisfaction.The work of Miao et al. (2017), based on the JD-R model, verifies the mediation effect of job resources between emotional intelligence and job satisfaction.
The reciprocal relationships between job involvement and job satisfaction have been studied in the literature.Matagi, Baguma and Baluku (2022) indicate the relationship between job involvement and job satisfaction.Cavapozzi and Dal Bianco (2021) suggest that a correlation exists between job satisfaction and job involvement.
In this sense, a high degree of focus on the job is a crucial personal characteristic for job satisfaction (Hackett, Lapierre & Hausdorf, 2001).More specifically, Stinglhamber, Ohana, Caesens and Meyer (2020) show that the organisation's support in terms of resources has positive consequences for job satisfaction.Besides, job satisfaction is linked to performance.Greater job satisfaction positively affects performance (Harrison, Newman & Roth, 2006).Job satisfaction is also linked to the importance ascribed by employees to the resources that facilitate performance.The work of Marescaux, De Winne and Sels (2013) indicates that the relationship between human resource practices and human resource management outcomes is partially mediated by satisfaction with autonomy and relationships.
Job satisfaction measures constitute an accurate means to predict behaviour, allowing employees to regulate their evaluation for possible changes in their behaviour (Zopiatis, Constanti &Theocharous, 2014).Therefore, satisfaction with job resources mediates the relationship between job involvement and job resources because job satisfaction is mainly related to job functions (Hulin, 1991) and thus to the importance that employees attribute to job resources.Job satisfaction is based on the feeling about work, from considering that there is a purpose that can be fulfilled in the organization to perceiving undervaluation in the job.This would imply that job involvement would affect the evaluation of the resources through satisfaction with the resources since the satisfaction reflects the need for a sense of accomplishment and the expectations that the work is challenging and appropriate.
In addition, the literature has pointed out that job satisfaction is an attitude that indirectly affects results (Peters, Cossette, Bates, Holton, Hansez & Faulx, 2014).More specifically, Al-Romeedy's ( 2019) data indicate that job satisfaction mediates between job turnover and worker performance.For its part, ul-Hassan, Ikramullah, Khan and Shah (2021) verified that job satisfaction mediates the relationship between role clarity and organizational commitment.In the context of the JD-R model, Nwafor, Ma, Hou and Johnson ( 2022) indicate that job satisfaction mediates a negative relationship between workers' perceptions that their rewards are fair and their intention to stop working for the company on demand.Therefore, the following hypothesis is proposed: Hypothesis 2. Satisfaction with job resources mediates the relationship between job involvement and valuation of job resources.
The research model and the hypotheses proposed are shown in Figure 1.The participants in the study were 225 employees from an incidental sample in the community of La Rioja in Spain.As a non-probabilistic sample, the research team directly and intentionally selected individuals from the population.In this way, data accessible to researchers was obtained.
According to the number of employees of the organisation in which they work, 27% of workers belonged to companies with between one and nine employees, 33.3% belonged to companies with between 10 and 99 workers, and 39.7% belonged to companies with more than 99 workers.Concerning companies' sector of activity, 28.9% worked in an industrial company and 71.1% in a service company.
Regarding employees' characteristics related to their education, 11.1% had primary or secondary studies, 29.3% had high school or professional training, and 59.6% had university studies.Moreover, related to their professional category, 7.1% had a managerial position, 16.9% were middle managers, and 76% had employees.

Measurements
This study collected data through a questionnaire survey that was conducted ad hoc (see Appendix 1).All the questionnaire responses were measured on a seven-point Likert scale, where 1 corresponded to "disagree" with the statement proposed and 7 corresponded to "agree".
Job involvement was considered through four items.These items were collected from the Spanish version of the job involvement questionnaire (Lodahl & Kejner, 1965) carried out by González and de Elena (1999).The questionnaire contains of 20 items.This work considers four of these items to be the most significant since they capture the essence of job involvement (González & de Elena, 1999).The items refer to personal involvement, involvement with the company, career involvement, and employee development.
Following the approach of authors such as Bakker and Demerouti (2007) and Schaufeli and Baker (2004), who point out job resources as a broad set of aspects of the job, different job resources have been considered.This work considers a previous investigation in the context of companies in Spain (Tamayo, 2016) to select six critical job resources.The first typology refers to social resources, where three items related to recognition and support are indicated (Trépanier, Fernet, Austin & Ménard, 2015).The second typology refers to structural resources: there are two items that refer to training and development (Bakker & Demerouti, 2013).The third typology refers to the reconciliation of family and work life (Eddleston et al., 2019), measured with one item.
Six items were considered to measure satisfaction with work resources, corresponding to the six work resources addressed in this study.Therefore, the study participants were asked about their satisfaction with the company's recognition, support, professional development, and family conciliation.

Results
A structural equation model (SEM) was used to perform the analysis.SEM is a statistical procedure that tests the measurement of functional, predictive and causal hypotheses.The research model was tested using partial least squares structural equation models (PLS-SEM).PLS-SEM can process structural equation models and is widely used in the social sciences (Richter, Cepeda, Roldán & Ringle, 2015).The Smart-PLS 3.2.4statistical software was developed by Ringle, Wende and Becker (2015).

Measurement model
Since our primary constructs (job involvement, valuation of job resources, and satisfaction with job resources) are artefacts, Henseler (2017) argues that the composite indicators could probably be correlated.Consequently, these components have been estimated in mode A, using correlation weights (Table 1) (Rigdon, 2016).This means that traditional internal consistency measures, reliability and validity can be applied (Henseler, Ringle, & Sarstedt, 2016).
To evaluate an item's reliability, the loads of the indicators with their respective constructs were studied.All the items were preserved in the model as they exceeded the threshold of 0.55 (Hair, Hult, Ringle & Sarstedt, 2014).Some items obtained a relatively low threshold, such as involvement with the company (0.571) or involvement with work (0.586).However, they were preserved in the model to safeguard the construct of job involvement.The reliability of the constructs was evaluated using compound reliability.As seen in Table 1, the composite reliability exceeds or is very close to 0.8, and so the constructs are considered reliable.
Convergent validity was examined through the average variance extracted (AVE).For Fornell and Larcker (1981), this indicator must be greater than 0.5, a condition that is fulfilled in all the constructs considered in this investigation (see Table 1).Finally, the existence of discriminant validity was analysed (see Table 2).Using Fornell and Larcker (1981), it can be concluded that the correlations between constructs are lower than the square root of the AVE.Discriminant validity was also verified using the heterotrait-monotrait (HTMT) relationship (Henseler et al., 2016).Criterion and the strictest Heterotrait-Monotrait Ratio (HTMT) of 0.85 criteria All values are below 0.90 and 0.85 (Gold, Malhotra & Segars, 2001).

Structural model
Table 3 shows the main parameters obtained for the two study models related to the structural evaluation.Model 1 presents the total effect of job involvement on the valuation of job resources, which is significant (c = 0.383***).Model 2 indicates that the effect of employees' involvement on valuation of job resources is still significant, but with a lower degree of significance when satisfaction with job resources intervenes (c' = 0.310***) (see Table 2).Also, routes a and b are significant.Therefore, both the decrease in the direct effect (c') and the importance of the regression coefficients of a and b suggest the potential indirect effect of satisfaction with job resources between job involvement and valuation of job resources (Hypothesis 2).However, the critical condition to determine the mediator effect is to test the result of a x b (Hayes, 2009).Table 3. Structural model results

Relationships
Figure 1 shows the results of the model with total effects and with indirect effects that allow us to observe Hypothesis 1.To examine the previous proposal, the value of the indirect effect (a x b = 0.054*) of SMART-PLS is obtained, which is significant (see Table 4) and allows us to support the Hypothesis 2. For this, a partial mediation of satisfaction with job resources in the relationship between employees' involvement and job resources is found, since the direct effect is still significant (Hypothesis 1 = c') and the indirect effect (Hypothesis 2 = a x b) is significant (Baron & Kenny, 1986).In addition, in this work, the variance accounted for (VAF) (Hair, et al., 2014) is calculated, which determines the size of the indirect effect (a x b) on the total effect (c).In our case, the VAF is 14.82 per cent (see Table 4); according to this criterion, the effect is small and there would be no mediation.However, the most powerful criterion refers to the significance of the effects (Hayes, 2009).4999), one-tailed test) t(0.05;4999) = 1.645; t(0.01, 4999) = 2.327; t(0.001, 4999) = 3.092; (based on t(4999), two-tailed test); t(0.05, 4999) = 1.960, t(0.01, 4999) = 2.577; t(0.001, 4999) = 3.292.*p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.00 Table 4. Summary of mediating effect tests

Importance-performance map analysis
Finally, Table 5 presents the importance-performance map analysis (IPMA).This analysis expands the results of the PLS-SEM by considering the performance of each construct (Hair, Sarstedt, Ringle & Gudergan, 2018).IPMA includes the constructs in the model that are predecessors of the construct under study, in our case, the attribution of resource value.As can be seen in the table, job involvement is more critical (0.294) than satisfaction with resources (0.117), and a higher performance of job involvement (72.868) is observed compared to satisfaction with job resources (62.504).

Discussion
This work has two objectives: firstly, to analyse the relationship between job involvement and employees' valuation of job resources; and secondly, to analyse the mediating effect of satisfaction with job resources on the relationship between job involvement and valuation of job resources.As a result of these two objectives, two hypotheses have been formulated.The first proposed that job involvement positively affects the employee's valuation of job resources.The second proposed that satisfaction with job resources mediates the relationship between job involvement and the valuation of job resources.
Regarding the first hypothesis, our study finds support for the relationship between job involvement and job resources.The research data indicates that job involvement affects the valuation of job resources, which means that job resources are especially significant for an involved employee.In this sense, prominent authors (Scrima et al., 2014) have pointed out the motivating effect of job involvement on effort.These results suggest that employees with more significant work involvement have a greater requirement for resources that facilitate their work in the company.This situation could reflect the so-called "psychological contract" (Robinson & Morrison, 2000).When the worker perceives his contribution to the organization is balanced, his commitment and involvement increase (Soares & Mosquera, 2019;Stoner & Gallagher, 2010).These arguments are consistent with those presented by Chang, Hsu, Liou and Tsai (2013), who indicated that the contribution of resources enhances employee commitment.Also, the work of Ruokolainen, Mauno, Diehl, Tolvanen, Mäkikangas, and Kinnunen (2016) revealed that employees with high levels of education have a greater demand for resources from employers.
Regarding the second hypothesis, the mediation effect of satisfaction with job resources, a partial effect has been found.In other studies, it was found that job satisfaction, or satisfaction with some attribute of the job, functioned as a mediating variable for different behaviours.These results are significant for management since they indicate the function of resources satisfaction in the relationship between job involvement and job resources.Moreover, they confirm that involvement affects satisfaction with job resources (Wirawan, Jufri & Saman, 2020).It is also appropriate to consider that the mediating effect is not total, meaning that the effect of satisfaction does not annul the relationship between job involvement and the valuation of resources.This result highlights the meaning of job involvement.Individuals with high involvement recognise that their job is a means of personal development.Therefore, the value of resources as a development instrument goes beyond the satisfaction, they could obtain with the resources offered by human resource management.

Theoretical implications
This work contributes to the literature on the JD-R approach (Demerouti et al., 2001) by introducing subjective consideration, or employees' valuation of job resources.This research considers the idea that involvement and job performance can be increased through actions directed at resources (job and personal) (Bakker & Demerouti, 2013).As has been verified in this research, the valuation of resources is related to involvement and satisfaction with job resources.This is because, in a way, job satisfaction can also be seen as a scale to measure one's work (Lan, Chen, Zeng & Liu, 2020).
In addition, this research has helped to clarify the psychological process that people most involved in the organisation go through, and it has helped to advance the importance of the psychological contract (Snyder, Stewart & Shea, 2020).Moreover, this work has aided understanding of how involvement is related to other attitudes (Truss, Shantz, Soane, Alfes & Delbridge, 2013) and how this involvement is linked to employees' recognition and demands in organisations.
On the other hand, this work indicates the mediating effect of satisfaction with job resources on the relationship between job involvement and job resources.Other research has also indicated the mediating effect of job satisfaction.For example, in the work of Zheng, Yin and Lui (2019), job satisfaction mediates the relationship between leadership and self-efficacy, and in the work of Rahmadani, Schaufeli and Stouten (2020), job satisfaction mediates the relationship between helping behaviour and citizenship behaviour.In this sense, an attitude such as job satisfaction or satisfaction with certain work aspects works as a mediator since it is an emotion or feeling that tempers behaviour, which is also an indicator of work wellbeing (Parasuraman & Simmers, 2001).

Practical implications
In the area of HRM and performance, two critical aspects stand out.The first is that the workers most involved with the company ascribe greater importance to job resources.In this sense, human resources practices could focus on providing resources to workers since the provision of resources is related to greater job involvement (Philip & Arrowsmith, 2021).This proposal would align with works such as Anvari, Chikaji and Abu Mansor (2015), who indicate that organizational citizenship behaviour (OCB) is related to job performance.Therefore, to be successful, a company must pay attention to the OCB (altruism, conscientiousness, courtesy, sportsmanship and civic virtue of its employees) because this can affect employees' productivity.However, this relationship should be studied in depth to determine if workers with a higher demand for resources demonstrate high intrinsic motivation, and how to develop motivational policies for all workers (Runhaa,r Sanders & Konermann, 2013).In addition, collaboration among involved employees could be fostered, allowing them to optimise their job resources proactively (Van Wingerden, Bakker & Derks, 2017).This would allow high-performance practices, which are critical in the current technological context (Llinas & Abad, 2019).This would entail mobilising employees to design their work to increase job resources, which would subsequently lead to increased wellbeing and performance (Kooij, Tims & Akkermans, 2017).The autonomy of the individual over scheduling and tasks, a supportive organisational climate, and individuals' perceptions of social support in their workplace constitute critical resources to avoid factors such as exhaustion (Mäkikangas, Leiter, Kinnunen & Feldt, 2021).However, companies should also consider the employees' motivations and levels of demand (Debusscher, Hofmans & De Fruyt, 2017), since not all employees respond to the same professional concerns.
The second implication refers to the fact that satisfaction with resources mediates the relationship between job involvement and validation of job resources, but only partially and, as has been pointed out, with a small indirect effect.Therefore, management should consider satisfaction with resources and the contribution of resources, because employees demand resources not only due to satisfaction with them but also because of the possible consequences for the development of their career or job wellbeing.Therefore, job design and job characteristics also influence satisfaction by clarifying an individual's understanding of their role within an organisation (Rogers, Miller, Flinchbaugh, Giddarie & Barker, 2021).
These two practical implications were confirmed by the IPMA analysis, which showed that companies should focus on improving job involvement.The results of this study show that work engagement has greater importance and performance in the explanation of the model in the valuation of job resources construct.Nevertheless, it cannot be forgotten that satisfaction with resources continues to be of relatively high importance.Therefore, organisations should also pay attention to this construct.

Limitations of the work and lines of research
This work has some limitations.The results are based on self-reported data, which could increase the risk of overestimating the relationships due to standard method variation (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Lee & Podsakoff, 2003).However, both the reliability and the validity of the measurement model have been verified.An attempt was made to limit the potential problem of variation from the standard method by ensuring anonymity during data collection.Another limitation may be the relatively small explanatory value of the model.This was also observed in Van den Broeck et al.'s (2011) research regarding the analysis of resources.Perhaps a more experimental type of research could increase the model's explanatory power (McClelland & Judd, 1993).On the other hand, the JD-R model consists of two main elements (Demerouti et al., 2001): demands and resources.In this work, only satisfaction with resources has been considered.In subsequent investigations, the intervention of labour demands in the model-for example, in terms of disaffection, such as in Kubicek, Paškvan and Korunka (2015)-and some intensified demands could also affect positive work-related outcomes such as job satisfaction.In short, it would be a question of verifying to what extent there might be a perception of balance between demands and the job resources (Lavigne, Forest, Fernet & Crevier-Braud, 2014).Finally, it is essential to continue investigating which human resources policies are efficient in engaging employees (Jeske, Sheehan, Linehan & Moran, 2017) and how to develop more involved employees.And develop in other areas such as school (Arroyave, Dasí & Redondo, 2021).
In this research, satisfaction with resources has been considered a mediating variable.Future works might verify how other variables are related to a series of results, such as psychological well-being, organizational commitment or self-assessed performance.In addition, the analysis of the psychological contract could be deepened (De Cuyper & De Witte, 2006).All this would help to better understand the links between the attitudes and behaviours of employees about their expectations towards work and development.