关键词: 休闲-工作协同, 类型与测量, 创新行为, 工作绩效, 兴趣社群实践

Abstract: Leisure-work synergizing refers to employees’ deliberate incorporation of work-related elements into leisure activities to develop work-relevant skills and capabilities. Although this emerging construct offers a new perspective on the work-leisure interface, existing research remains limited in three respects. First, leisure-work synergizing has largely been treated as a unidimensional construct, leaving its potentially distinct forms underexplored. Second, prior research has focused mainly on positive psychological outcomes, providing an incomplete account of its broader behavioral and performance consequences. Third, little is known about the conditions and social practices that encourage employees to engage in leisure-work synergizing. Drawing on the antecedent-behavior-consequence framework, this research develops an integrative model and examines it across four interrelated studies to investigate the types, consequences, and antecedents of leisure-work synergizing.
Study 1 develops a boundary-based typology of leisure-work synergizing. Rather than classifying employees according to their stable boundary preferences, the study treats specific leisure-work synergizing activities as the units of analysis and distinguishes between boundary-segmented and boundary-integrated forms. Boundary-segmented leisure-work synergizing occurs when employees deliberately separate work-related developmental activities from ordinary leisure activities in terms of time, space, or psychological focus. Examples include setting aside a fixed period to read professional books or attend career-related events. Boundary-integrated leisure-work synergizing occurs when work-related learning, ideas, or interactions are fluidly embedded in ongoing leisure activities, such as capturing a work-related insight while browsing social media or traveling. This distinction moves beyond the prevailing unidimensional conceptualization and provides a theoretical basis for explaining why different forms of leisure-work synergizing may generate different outcomes. The study will combine qualitative interviews, expert assessments, and survey-based validation to develop a multidimensional measurement instrument and establish its nomological validity.
Study 2 examines how the two forms of leisure-work synergizing differentially influence employee innovation. Drawing on cognitive load theory, the study proposes that boundary-segmented leisure-work synergizing reduces interruptions and supports sustained and systematic information processing. It therefore facilitates learning depth, which, in turn, promotes exploitative innovation by helping employees refine, improve, and apply existing knowledge. In contrast, boundary-integrated leisure-work synergizing increases employees’ exposure to heterogeneous, cross-domain, and unplanned information. It therefore facilitates learning breadth, which supports exploratory innovation by enabling employees to connect diverse elements of knowledge and identify novel possibilities. Cognitive style is introduced as an important boundary condition. Field-independent employees are expected to benefit more from the structured and focused environment created by boundary-segmented synergizing, whereas field-dependent employees are more likely to benefit from the diverse contextual cues embedded in boundary-integrated synergizing. By linking different boundary forms to distinct learning processes and innovation outcomes, this study moves beyond the assumption that all leisure-work synergizing activities operate through the same mechanism.
Study 3 theorizes the daily double-edged effects of leisure-work synergizing on next-day job performance. Integrating conservation of resources theory with recovery research, the study identifies two competing pathways. On the positive side, voluntary developmental activities can strengthen self-assurance by providing employees with a sense of progress, capability, and control over their future development. Enhanced self-assurance should increase employees’ confidence, initiative, and persistence at work, thereby improving their next-day performance. On the negative side, leisure-work synergizing may occupy time and attention that could otherwise support psychological detachment, relaxation, family interaction, and emotional recovery. It may therefore contribute to inadequate recovery and reduce employees’ energy and psychological availability on the following workday. Family support is proposed to strengthen the self-assurance pathway while buffering the pathway through inadequate recovery. The study further predicts that boundary-segmented synergizing will produce stronger self-assurance and less recovery impairment than boundary-integrated synergizing because clearer activity boundaries provide more stable cues of progress and make it easier for employees to disengage after the activity ends.
Study 4 investigates the antecedents of leisure-work synergizing by focusing on the practices of interest-based communities. Drawing on self-determination theory, the study proposes that such communities promote leisure-work synergizing by satisfying employees’ needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness. Autonomy is enhanced when employees can freely choose whether, when, and how to participate. Competence develops through opportunities for practice, knowledge exchange, problem-solving, and informational feedback. Relatedness emerges through sustained interactions with others who share similar interests and developmental goals. The satisfaction of these psychological needs increases employees’ willingness and confidence in their ability to integrate work-related knowledge, skills, and social resources into their leisure activities. Community network heterogeneity is further proposed as a key boundary condition that exerts an inverted U-shaped moderating effect. Moderate heterogeneity introduces diverse knowledge, experiences, and social connections while preserving mutual understanding and a shared interest base. By contrast, very low heterogeneity may generate redundant interactions, whereas very high heterogeneity may increase communication costs and weaken group identification.
Overall, this research makes three primary contributions. First, it reconceptualizes leisure-work synergizing as a multidimensional activity rather than a uniform behavioral tendency. Second, it develops a differentiated consequence model that connects distinct boundary forms to innovation and daily performance through learning, motivation, and recovery processes. Third, it identifies the practices of interest-based communities and psychological need satisfaction as important antecedent mechanisms, thereby extending research on leisure-work synergizing from its consequences to its formation. By integrating qualitative and quantitative methods, the proposed research provides a systematic foundation for future empirical inquiry and offers practical guidance on supporting employees’ career development, innovation, performance, and well-being.

Key words: leisure-work synergizing, typology and measurement, innovative behavior, job performance, interest-based community practices