Cognitive Workload Theory (CWT)

Cognitive workload theory suggests that the cognitive resources available to individuals are limited and may be overloaded when tasks require excessive mental effort or multitasking. This theory examines the relationship between task demands, cognitive resource capacity, and their impact on performance, attention, decision-making, and learning [7,26]. CWT offers a unique perspective that emphasizes the cognitive demands of tasks and how they are managed in real-time, which differs from the educational focus of cognitive load theory (CLT) and the broader behavioral framework of social cognitive theory (SCT). Disparate CWT focuses on the cognitive demands of tasks, and SCT focuses more on social and environmental influences on learning and behavior whereas CLT is more professional in terms of learning and instruction. In contrast, CWT provides a framework for understanding and managing mental effort during task performance [27,28]. Cognitive workload theory emphasizes that individuals’ cognitive resources are limited. In the context of HIWP, where employees may be involved in a variety of tasks or decision-making processes, it is crucial to understand how cognitive demands influence team creative performance [29]. In the team environment of HIWP, it becomes critical to understand the cognitive workload of each team member. Balancing workload among team members to avoid cognitive fatigue while maximizing creative input is critical to sustained performance. There is currently little conceptualization and empirical research on the potential interactions between HIWP, TR, and TCP. Furthermore, early studies used social exchange theory and the theory of planned behavior to explain the relationship between HIWP and various employee outcomes[16,25]. Few studies have used CWT to explain the relationship between HPWP and employee outcomes. Based on CWT, this article links HIWPs, TR, WD, and TCP, and proposes the latest perspective on the relationship between HIWPs, TR, and TCP.

High involvement work practices and team creative performance

The fundamental success of the organization is to support employees’ empowerment because employees have great concern with their appraisal, incentives, and rewards system. Therefore, the organization should develop such a scenario in which employees perform their work with high-involvement work practices (HIWPs) and get positive results. Further, organizations have trust in teamwork and create an environment in which employees work creatively. HIWP is characterized by practices such as participatory decision-making, extensive training, and performance-based incentives, which achieve these goals by promoting employee participation, empowerment, and collaboration all of which are key to fostering creative output. Extending the framework’s scalability to different knowledge economy sectors such as IT, finance, or healthcare can further emphasize its adaptability and usability [30,31]. Team creative performance (TCP) constructs a change in organizations and extends the level of competition within the organizational community [10]. Moreover, team creative performance relates to the critical substance of innovative work such as creative measures of work, innovative work ideas, appropriate use of goods, and effective use of services [32]. These essential substances increase the worth of organizational success. The relation between HIWPs and TCP can increase the ability to work successfully in organizations according to CW theory. Researchers suggested that in the human resource department, TCP shows an optimistic effect on HR practices [11,15]. There has been a great debate on whether HRM extends better organizational performance which includes HIWPs [13], HR practices in high performance, and innovation in creative work.

High involvement work practices and team reflexivity

Team reflexivity is a concept proposed by West [33] and refers to “the degree to which team members collectively reflect on work-related issues, including team goals, strategies, and operating procedures, and adapt to current or anticipated situations.” It involves reflective actions, including exploratory learning, attention, reviewing past events with self-awareness, and digesting and integrating new information [33]. Cognitive workload theory suggests that task demands, cognitive resource capacity, and their impact on performance cues from team managers influence perceptions of acceptable norms of behavior during work [26]. Researchers have empirically shown that HIWPs prompt followers to understand their work environment and encourage certain behaviors in the workplace [22]. Following CW theory, we note that team members recognize cognitive cues provided by HIWPs that demonstrate humility and then form a perception of legitimate development and growth [34]. Such cognitions are conducive to cultivating a reflective atmosphere throughout the team. Specifically, when HIWPs acknowledge the team’s imperfections in past tasks and put achievements in perspective [31], they encourage subordinates to accept their limitations and pursue improvement, legitimizing team members’ self-acceptance and self-transcendence. Hence, we can link the relationship between HIWP and team reflexivity to CW theory.

High Involvement Work Practices (HIWPs) and Work Demand (WD)

According to the human resource management (HRM) department, the process of HIWPs categories with different other scopes, these scopes classify HIWPs into innovational HRM practices and contingency perception practices independently [1]. A catalog of maintenance development and performance in HR classify system theory. HIWPs further aimed as a part of employees’ improvement in working skills and motivational working performance, and also have four working traits [14]; a) empowerment of employees during the decision-making process; b) interexchange of task information; c) incentive process (e.g., employee would be rewarded in participation, innovative information sharing, positive outcome behavior, and decision making); and d) employees’ skill and essential training [18].

Lateral work demand refers to organized working conditions that are classified and subsequently further divided into two dimensions: workload and physical work environment. De Reuver, Van de Voorde [20] explained work demands are those psychological and physiological job aspects in organizations that reflect the requirement of stable mental and physical conditions related to physical and psychosomatic costs. Thus, we can relate the relationship between HIWP and WD with its elements WL and PWE by CW theory. Therefore, by mental and physical conviction, work demand has a structure that links with employees’ contributions, requirements, roles, expectations, and customs. Employees must be needed to acclimatize or adjust with psychological and physical exertion. Such exertion creates an effect on independent and dependent variables.

High involvement work practices, team reflexivity, and team creative performance

High-involvement work practices (HPWP) demonstrate the value and importance of employees within the organization and convey a message of organizational commitment and support [20,30]. Combining different HR practices in the form of HPWS has a more significant positive impact on organizational performance than the effects of these practices alone [20]. This research study presents team reflexivity as a proactive activity that serves as a mediator between HIWP and team creative performance. Cognitive work theory is a common academic framework for understanding the causal mechanisms by which HIWP affects organizational outcomes [4]. In work environments characterized by organizational support and resources provided by team leaders, employees develop a sense of psychological commitment to exert additional effort and demonstrate higher levels of organizational dedication and performance. Thus, this collective effect helps to improve firm performance [1]. Conversely, employees facing a dearth of resources encounter greater challenges in performing assigned job responsibilities and are less motivated to engage proactively. Wang, Cui [22] emphasized that collective creativity inside a team is the result of a combination of individual creativity, team composition, team characteristics, team dynamics, and environmental influences. Subsequent research has confirmed the idea that while individual creativity is a fundamental component of team creativity, simple summaries of individual creativity do not directly translate to overall team creativity. Instead, facilitating team creativity requires pertinent team processes and interactions that synergize each team member’s contributions to creativity [19,35]. As an important situational determinant, high-involvement work practice (HIWP) can not only enhance the creativity of individual team members but also have an impact on the entire team process, thereby promoting team creativity. Consistent with this notion, previous empirical studies have effectively established a correlation between team reflexivity and creative performance [36,37].

In teams characterized by increased levels of reflectiveness, members are willing to gather information while performing tasks, draw on their past experiences, and engage in reflective processes throughout task performance [32]. Earlier research has anticipated a mediating function of team reflexivity in bridging team inputs and outputs [22,37]. Working within this dynamic and interactive framework allows team members to not only acquire unique views that are essential to problem-solving and task execution but also to adjust their aims and solutions to changing conditions, which supports the team’s creative performance. Furthermore, the effectiveness of highly reflective teams in fostering innovation goes beyond conflict resolution. Team reflexivity strengthens team creativity by expanding and integrating team members’ cognitive abilities with amassed information and shared insights[37]. Furthermore, as it enhances the team’s strategic direction and harmonizes problem-solving and learning techniques, a positive link is expected between team reflexivity and team creative performance [3,38].

The basis of knowledge, reward, authority, and technology, HIWPs act as a primary feature and generate effects on team performance. Although having the distinctive existence of team performance from HIWPs, organizations increase creativity in work [39,40]. Previous research focused on HIWPs with general team performance such as team working tasks had the same way of fellowship, team command, working environment, process, techniques, and working motive. Even their working awareness and interpretation had similarities. Generally speaking, old research regarding HIWP and team performance had no innovation in their work. Team members have accumulated their planning, interchange working information, and learning perception according to the team’s motivational performance [4,41]. This team’s motivational performance leads to the regulatory procedure of team creative performance (TCP) [7]. Furthermore, researchers suggested that HIWPs can be affected by TCP [6]. Thus, no prior study explained the direct relation between HIWPs, TR, and TCP and their combined role of significance in organizations.

Based on this interconnected principle of HIWPs, the below hypothesis is made;

1.    H1: HIWP is positively associated with team creative performance.
2.    H2: HIWP is positively associated with TR.
3.    H3: TR is positively associated with team creative performance

Mediating role of team reflexivity

As introduced by Carter and West [36], the level of collaborative reflection on work-related issues among team members is referred to as team reflexivity. It includes the team’s goals, strategy, and operational processes, facilitating adaptation to existing or anticipated circumstances. This concept involves contemplative practices such as exploratory learning, focused attention, self-aware retrospective analysis of past events, and assimilation and integration of new information [23]. In light of organizations’ prioritization of acquiring, developing, and effectively utilizing employee capabilities to enhance performance [22], a substantial body of research underscores the notion that the connection between human resource management (HRM) and employee performance is influenced by factors such as competencies, attitudes, and behavior [41, 42]. Given this context, we propose to incorporate a mediating factor, specifically team reflexivity, to examine its impact on the association between HIWPs and TCP. First, in reaction to environmental changes, team reflexivity entails the joint and explicit assessment of work-related issues, such as team goals, tactics, and procedures [22]. Reflexivity activities encompass a range of cognitive processes such as meticulous observation, acknowledgment, vigilant monitoring, and appraisal of the subject of reflection [36]. The degree of team reflexivity may exhibit significant variation between various teams within an organization and can be impacted by contextual indicators, such as the prevailing corporate culture. Specifically, across several companies that exhibit collectivist cultural norms, employees actively pursue a sense of affiliation and derive satisfaction from their involvement as essential members of a team [43].

Within this particular framework, the establishment of a pleasant and amicable organizational atmosphere, facilitated by the implementation of HIWPs, has the potential to serve as a catalyst for team reflexivity. This is because team members, motivated by a pleasant environment, demonstrate a willingness to stay on the team and actively contribute to the collective outcome. Given the complexity, high demands, and uncertainty of tasks in research teams, their effectiveness depends on external factors such as access to information, resources, and support from the wider environment [44]. An important part of active participation is feeling empowered to question existing issues and express opinions openly. In turn, this plays a decisive role in the generation of innovative concepts and the formulation of fresh proposals [43]. Proponents of CWT argue that positive feedback loops (such as achieving success) caused by team reflexivity can spur teams to set bolder and more innovative goals. This in turn drives team members to commit more resources to achieve these goals [41,44]. Team reflexivity plays a vital role in fostering innovation by facilitating the exchange of ideas about work processes among team members. This allows for the incorporation of different perspectives where necessary and fosters a common understanding that effectively guides team processes and outcomes [42]. This framework supports our proposed hypothesis.

1.    H4: HIWP’s and TCP’s relationship has partially mediated by team reflexivity.

Moderating role of work demand

This research has connoted work demand as a moderator between HIWPs and TR. Work demand’s relation with TR is described a bit in Western studies [8]. However, in the context of HIWPs, work demand studied as a meta-analysis, established relations among HIWPs with working hours (22 samples) and supposed workload (10 studies) has significant ties with the workload and working hours. Such findings extended to the Western European country “Netherlands”. Thus on the eastern side, there must be conduction of such working findings [3,20].

In the hotel context, there is an extensive pressure of work on employees, and employees often face conflicting demands from hotels, managers, and customers and these conflicts create tension or dissonance for employees. Investigating the main dimensions of work demands (workload and physical work environment) is important[45]. In this research paper, work demand with its sub-moderator workload and the physical working environment contribute as a moderating role between independent variable HIWPs (power, information, rewards, and knowledge) and TR becomes the dependent variable. The workload as a moderator considers a remarkable between independent and dependent variables. However, researchers didn’t give attention to workload’s moderating role and only believed that workload is psychological pressure. It can be used by non-investigational techniques and objectively can be considered as a particular work behavior in the minimum period. Furthermore, workload is considered an activity that is essential for the work environment [46].

In this investigation workload judges as a technique that affects the intensity of TR and HIWPs in Pakistan’s service industry. In the daily routine hotels, authorities deal with many customers that produce workload. High involvement work practices (HIWPs) cope with this workload and contribute to a beneficial development process which promotes the best customer service in hotel management. Thus, we can link the relationship between HIWP, team reflexivity, and workload to CW theory. Moreover, HIWPs are also helpful for decreasing the workload effects and increasing the team’s creative performance. However, the primary focus of workload in the hotel industry is to enhance the hotel authorities’ work performance and to handle the flow of customers in a limited time span. Thus, the workload can be utilized as an indicator which can be beneficial to treat the flow of customers in the limit zone.

On the basis of the previous researcher’s points of view, the hypothesis is built as under:

1.    H5a: Workload moderates the relationship among HIWP’s and Team reflexivity.

Mainly physical working environment (PWE) has a portion of the environmental, and psychological field. PWE has been based on the generous worthy working environment which has a generally convenient condition of the workplace. Virtually, this term explains the relations between employees and their PWE. However, researchers related PWE with other factors such as PWE studied with job satisfaction and performance, PWE with employees’ mood, PWE with behavior, and PWE generosity with demand and job stress [47, 48]. Thus, we can link the relationship between HIWP, team reflexivity, and PWE to CW theory.

As a part of the work demand, PWE has many possible challenges. In an organization, workers can complain regarding work environment quality, insolvent environmental acceptance, working limitations, and imitation in reactions and responses in a challenging environment [48]. Also, the quality of PWE can be expected to be an interface between two variables HIWPS and TR. This research studies that if the HIWP condition is high with the combination of low PWE quality, TR would be higher. Consequently, in contrast, it considers that PWE quality can rise high with the intensity of HIWP would be unrelated to the intensity of TR. Hence, based on the research literature, the following hypotheses have been constructed:

1.    H5b: PWE moderates the relationship among HIWPs and Team reflexivity.

Based on the above-proposed hypothesis, the study model has been developed as shown in Fig 1 which includes a total of one independent variable HIWPs along with its dimensions (Power, information, reward, and knowledge), one dependent variable (team creative performance), one mediator (team reflexivity) and one moderating variable work demand along with its dimensions (workload, physical work environment). Based on the study model, a total of five hypotheses H1, H2, and H3 have been developed based on the direct relationship between the independent variable HIWPs, intermediary variable TR, and the dependent variable TCP. Then H4 team reflexivity partially mediated among HIWP’s and TCR. Further hypothesis (H5a) presents the moderating role of work demand (workload) between HIWPs and TR. In the last, hypothesis (H5b) describes the moderating relationship of work demand (physical work environment) between HIWPs and TR. Fig 1 illustrates the conceptual framework employed in this investigation, depicting the major variables and corresponding hypotheses.

Download:

• PPT
  PowerPoint slide
• PNG
  larger image
• TIFF
  original image

Fig 1. Model of Study.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0320601.g001

High involvement work practices

HIWP scale including four practice dimensions from the previous studies we calculated using an eight-item scale developed by Lawler, Lawler III [14]. The HIWP practices include eight items with α=0.78, Power (In an awkward situation, employees have the power to make a decision. Employees have the opportunity to actively engage in the decision-making process.), ii) Information (The dissemination of information among personnel. Information must be aligned related jobs task, and goals), iii) Reward (The reward should be based on performance. The provision of rewards serves as a significant motivational component for employees.) and iv) Knowledge (Knowledge should be extended through different training plan. Employees should be familiar with rule and regulation.). All items employed a 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree.

Team creative performance

TCP was measured with a four-item item scale developed by Lewis [54].TCP includes; (four items with α=0.83, Team members perform their work originally and practically individually. Each member should be able to generate his creative idea as a team. Each member should have the ability to promote his ideas as a team. Each member should be capable of creating a creative solution to the problem as a team.). Participants indicated each item employed by a 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree.

Work demand

The work demand scale including two practice dimensions from the previous studies was measured using an eight-item scale developed by Groenewegen and Hutten [45]. The two practices include i) Workload (Four items with α=0.83, Ability to handle customer care efficiently. Ability to control a large number of customers. Well managed customer service hours. Hours for administrative training.) and ii) Physical work environment (Four items with α=0.85,e.g.,Ability to deal the incorporating openness of available space, Importance of public waiting areas, Availability of facilities and Building conditions which offer for services). All items employed a 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree.

Team reflexivity

TR was measured with five scales developed by Carter and West [36]. TR includes; (five items with α=0.89, Whether the team is working together effectively, will be discussed regularly. The method adopted to job done will be discussed regularly by the team. Due to changing circumstances, the set objectives can be modified by the team). Participants indicated each item employed by a 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree.

Data analysis

An in-depth understanding of sample characteristics was obtained through descriptive analysis with SPSS 25. The initial evaluation of study measures included evaluating composite reliability (CR), Cronbach’s alpha (α), and average variance extracted (AVE) to ascertain the reliability and validity of the measures. As shown in Table 3, the α value indicates a range of 0.78 to 0.89, and the composite reliability value demonstrates a range of 0.77 to 0.90. These findings suggest that these measures have satisfactory reliability. Furthermore, the range of AVE values observed in this study varied from 0.59 to 0.70, which suggests that the research instrument had convergent validity. These values surpass the acceptable criterion of 0.50 proposed by Fornell and Larcker [55]. To identify the distinctness of study variables, we followed the guidance of Fornell and Larcker [55]. Table 4 demonstrates that for each variable, the square root of the AVE is greater than the correlation of that variable with the other constructs. Variance inflation factors (VIFs) for all predictor variables were below the threshold of 10, indicating that multicollinearity was not a concern in the analysis [49].

Download:

• PPT
  PowerPoint slide
• PNG
  larger image
• TIFF
  original image

Table 3. Factors loading and reliability analysis.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0320601.t003

Download:

• PPT
  PowerPoint slide
• PNG
  larger image
• TIFF
  original image

Table 4. Descriptive statistics and correlation analysis.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0320601.t004

This provides further evidence that the chosen research metrics are impartial and appropriate for evaluating the prospective model. To ensure the accuracy of self-reported measures, it is recommended to consider the potential impact of common method variance (CMV). The confounding effects of CMV have been shown to exaggerate or deflate the associations between these measures when participants’ answers are affected by social expectations [56].

Consequently, the statistical software AMOS 24 was employed to conduct a sequence of confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) on the study measures using maximum likelihood estimation. Therefore, an analysis was conducted on five sets of fit indices to assess the suitability of fit for the dataset at hand. The relative chi-square (X²/df) value of less than 5 suggests a favorable fit of the model [57]. For the Incremental Fit Index (IFI) and the Comparative Fit Index (CFI), values over 0.90 indicate a satisfactory fit [58]. A Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) result that falls below the threshold of 0.08 suggests a satisfactory level of fit for the model [59]. A TLI rating in close proximity to 1 indicates a favorable level of fit [58]. To achieve the goal, a maker-variable test method was employed, as described by Boso, Story [60]. The approach involves conducting a comparative analysis between the suggested model and two alternative competing models to assess the impact of common method variance (CMV) on pre-existing datasets. In the first model, referred known as the method-only model, each item was constrained to load on only a single factor. As can be determined by the values shown (RMSEA = 0.12, CFI = 0.62, TLI = 0.61, IFI = 0.63, X²/df = 5.57), the test was underfitted. The next step was to build a second model (a trait-only model) in which each item was given free rein to load the variables that best described them.

The present investigation suggests good model fitting results, RMSEA = 0.08, CFI = 0.92, TLI = 0.89, IFI = 0.90, and Χ²/df = 3.77. In a subsequent step, the third model incorporates the assessment of both the method model and the trait model. This entails the incorporation of a shared latent variable into the suggested theoretical framework and establishing connections between this latent variable and all observed elements. The findings indicate that the model fitting effectiveness of model three is superior, as evidenced by the following indices: RMSEA = 0.069, CFI = 0.91, TLI = 0.93, IFI = 0.92, and X²/df = 3.43. The results of this study indicate that Model II has a superior level of fit compared to Model I and is more closely aligned with the fit observed in Model III. With the minimal difference in fit indices between models 2 and 3, it can be concluded that the presence of general method bias is not an issue in this dataset. Therefore, this bias is unlikely to distort the interrelationships among the study variables [60].

The direct effects and mediation

Hypotheses H1, H2, and H3 propose direct effects. Furthermore, there is an indirect relationship (H4) between highly involved work practices (HIWP) and team creative performance (TCP), mediated by team reflexivity (TR). The evaluation of partial mediation models involved the utilization of the mediation testing approach proposed by Baron and Kenny [61]. This method entails the assessment of mediation models based on three requirements, which necessitate the significance of all direct relationships between variables in the model. The present study’s model suggests that there are substantial direct impacts. Specifically, the relationship between HIWP and TCP (β =  0.28, p <  0.01), HIWP and TR (β =  0.33, p <  0.01), as well as TR and TCP (β =  0.35, p <  0.01) were shown to be statistically significant. Incorporating the mediator (team reflexivity) into the proposed partial mediation model, the connecting HIWP → TR → TCP (β =  0.12, p <  0.05) retained its significance. This suggests partial support for the mediating role of team reflexivity in the relationship between HIWP and team creative performance.

Furthermore, the utilization of bootstrapping with 2000 resampling iterations with replacement and through empirical observation-derived sample distributions (Hayes, 2013) confirmed the persistence of significant indirect pathways (p <  0.01). As well as based on the reduction in path coefficients, shifting from 0.28 to 0.12, alongside the retention of both direct and indirect significantly which can be seen in Tables 5 and 6, the mediation of team reflexivity (TR) between HIWP and team creative performance (TCP), was found to be partial. This supports Hypothesis H3. Moreover, Table 5 results given for the assessment of control variables (age, gender, tenure, and team size) yielded no notable effects significant in the current model.

Download:

• PPT
  PowerPoint slide
• PNG
  larger image
• TIFF
  original image

Table 5. Results of hypothesis using path analysis (mediation effect).

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0320601.t005

Download:

• PPT
  PowerPoint slide
• PNG
  larger image
• TIFF
  original image

Table 6. Results of hypothesis using path analysis (moderation effect).

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0320601.t006

The moderation effect of work demand

A subsequent set of hypotheses (H5a and H5b) postulated that the correlation between highly involved work practices (HIWP) and team reflexivity (TR) would depend on the moderating effects of workload and physical work environment. To explore this, we initially generated two interactive terms: “HIWP’s workload” and “HIWP’s physical work environment”. These new terms were subsequently incorporated into the proposed model, each term containing its job demand variable. The results showed that the interaction terms “Workload of HIWP” (β =  0.18, p <  0.05) and “Physical work environment of HIWP” (β =  0.13, p <  0.05) showed significance. Based on these results, hypotheses H5a and H5b are empirically supported.

Additionally, an exploration was performed to determine whether the strength of the interactive effects of workload, physical work environment, and HIWP on team reflexivity (TR) differed at low and high levels. To achieve this, operate the low and high levels of each regulator by setting thresholds 1 standard deviation below and above the mean. This approach is consistent with the guidance provided by Preacher, Rucker [62] for assessing statistical significance. As shown in Figs 2 and 3, the results show that the effect of HIWP on TR increases when the workload level increases. Conversely, this effect is attenuated when the workload level is low. Likewise, the effect of HIWP on TR showed greater strength at higher levels of the physical work environment and attenuated at lower levels of the physical work environment.

Download:

• PPT
  PowerPoint slide
• PNG
  larger image
• TIFF
  original image

Fig 2. WL strengthens the positive relationship between HIWP and team reflexivity.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0320601.g002

Download:

• PPT
  PowerPoint slide
• PNG
  larger image
• TIFF
  original image

Fig 3. PWE strengthens the positive relationship between HIWP and team reflexivity.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0320601.g003

Theoretical contribution

In the organization’s context, this investigation is helpful to contribute to the key driving force promoting TCP. However, past literature ignored HIWPs’ significance in the scenario of team creativity performance (TCP). This study contributed by using the multilevel model of HIWPs which includes power, information, rewards, and knowledge. Most of the earlier studies consider it as a single level, for all individual, team, and organizational perspectives [23]. This study explored the relationship between HIWPs and team creative performance in a different way which has been done by very few studies at the individual level but not at team levels. Such relationships should be investigated as HIWP practices may be one of the most significant, expensive, and controllable in an organizational context.

Work demand as a moderator overcomes stress and enhances TCP. It also motivates HR practices to perform TCP [65]. Thus, the consequences are also reliable with previous learning, highlighting the need to decrease the work demand in the context of team performance. Further, the moderating relationship of workload between HIWPs and TR worked for all practices. The results are also justified from the previous literature [20]. It signals the importance of workload in the hotel industry and emphasizes that workload and schedules should be appropriately managed for hotel employees, otherwise, a high workload can decrease the creativity among different hotel teams [66]. Along with the workload, the physical work environment for the team is also a significant indicator to foster team performance. The interaction results found that a supportive physical work environment may increase the team’s creative performance. The results were in line with the previous studies as previous studies emphasized the importance of a supportive physical work environment in the hotel industry [48]. Hence, an important insight gained from this study is that team reflexivity can mediate more effectively between high-involvement work practice (HIWP) and team creative performance (TCP) than certain attitude constructs. Compared with emotional commitment and organizational citizenship behavior (OCB), team reflexivity has a broader scope and includes cognitive, affective, and behavioral dimensions. This wider range means that team members who exhibit higher engagement are likely to be more likely to exhibit diverse cognitive, attitudinal, and behavioral outcomes [22,23].

Another important insight gained from this study is the recognition that team reflexivity exhibits a multidimensional nature, manifesting itself through different mechanisms. In particular, this study highlights the synergistic impact of high-involvement work practice (HIWP) and work demand attributes on team reflexivity. The combination of institutional variables (represented by HIWP) and individual variables helps to expand the thrust of the CW theory. Moreover, CWT is favored because it provides a detailed, practical, and adaptable framework for understanding and managing cognitive demands in complex environments. Its emphasis on task complexity, practical applications in high-stress environments, comprehensive measurement techniques, and the integration of human factors make it an excellent choice for studying cognitive workload in specific professional contexts. The theory examines the relationship between task demands, cognitive resource capacity, and their impact on performance, attention, decision-making, and learning [28]. This investigation specifically delves into the combined interplay between HIWP practices (including power, information, reward, and knowledge) and specific work demand characteristics (including workload and physical work environment) that lead to increased team reflexivity. This means that implementing HIWP practices in the work environment alone may not promote team reflexivity; it is the assortment of contextual and personal variables that actively engage employees’ intention and willingness with the organizational relevance of the team. These results also claim that a high workload may decrease the innovative perspective among employees. These results verified the application of CWT in this context and are consistent with the earlier studies as work demand significantly creates a vital role in decreasing individual and TCP [65]. Team members should interact with each other to share their workload which could help supervisors and management to distribute the proper workload among teams and workers. Overall, the model provides an innovative perspective on the complexities of team creative performance, thereby paving the way for interesting avenues of future research.

Practical implications

This research has multiple potential consequences for the service industry in Pakistan. The findings of the study recommend that companies can increase work creativity through HIWPs. Additionally, HRM practices are the most significant exerting influence on employees and teams within the organizations. From the multilevel model of HIWPs involving power, information, rewards, and knowledge, HRM managers should find out the relevancy of practice to increase employee or team performance. Changing business environments and cut-throat competition direct organizations to prioritize HIWPs to survive and focus on TCP [32]. The primary focus of the organizations should be team performance which enhances the creativity of employees, and the team performance should be based on high-involvement work practices (HIWPs) that are the main idea of this study. In the team creative performance (TCP) creativity obtains competitive benefits. This creativity should depend on both the individual and the team. HIWPs variable knowledge is considered as an insignificant predictor with TCP because organizations should arrange the training sections to extend the employees’ working knowledge and communication skills.

Moreover, organizations should carefully apply the HIWPs with increased TCP as the Asian countries had the conventional approach to power behavior and are disinclined to adopt the transformation of organizations. Secondly, this research found an important part of work demand among HIWPs and TCP. Companies should give special consideration to work demands while trying to boost creativity. Extensive duties, tight work schedules, supervisor’s strictness, and negative feedback may decrease teams’ creativity and push them to focus on current responsibilities rather than making them proactive. In a more specific context, this study provides evidence that recruiting individuals accustomed to increased workloads and demanding physical work environments increases the direct impact of high-involvement work practice (HIWP) interventions on team reflexivity. Furthermore, the mediating role played by team reflexivity provides insights into improving team creativity performance. This means that supervisors have the potential to encourage team reflexivity, thereby improving creative performance within teams and organizations. When supervisors create an environment that encourages team members to learn from mistakes, embrace team member diversity, and engage in thoughtful reflection, team members’ psychological safety is enhanced[29]. In turn, this is expected to enhance collective creativity within the team. Furthermore, given the importance of reflexivity in team learning and innovation, it was observed that the impact of team reflexivity on innovation is more pronounced in more demanding work environments [42], promoting team reflexivity is becoming increasingly important for modern work teams aiming to improve creative performance. While the moderating effect of the work demand with its elements WL and PWE in between HIWP and TR. Work demand with its elements WL and PWE as moderators overcomes stress and enhances TR. It also motivates HR practices to perform TCP [65]. Thus, the consequences are also reliable with previous studies, highlighting the need to decrease the work demand in the context of team performance. Along with the workload, PWE for the team is also a significant indicator of fostering team performance. The interaction results found that a supportive physical work environment may increase TCP. The results were in line with the previous studies which emphasized the importance of a supportive PWE in hotels [48]. These results also claim that a high workload may decrease the innovative perspective among employees. These results verified the application of CWT in this context and are consistent with the earlier studies as work demand significantly creates a vital role in decreasing individual and TCP [65]. Team members should interact with each other to share their workload which could help supervisors and management to distribute the proper workload among teams and employees.