The concept of a work role is central to organizational behavior. Murphy and Jackson (1999) define it as a set of performance responsibilities related to one’s position. Elaborating on this, Ashforth et al. (2000) conceptualizes role behavior as a manifestation of role identity within a social structure, while Sluss and Ashforth (2007) emphasize the purpose of roles is derived from their complementarity within embedded networks. In essence, organizational role theory posits that defining job functions and responsibilities is the cornerstone of discussing any organizational role.

Employees often enact a variety of roles, which are context-dependent and can be categorized by function, hierarchy, and status (Sluss and Ashforth, 2007). These encompass job-specific roles, relational roles (e.g., leader-subordinate), and broader identity roles as members of a department or the organization itself (Griffin et al., 2007; Ashforth et al., 2008). These multiple roles are nested within the organizational structure and can evolve in meaning and scope due to cultural, social, and situational factors, leading to role ambiguity and dynamism.

A fundamental distinction in this domain is between in-role and extra-role behavior. Katz and Kahn (1978) defined in-role behavior (IRB) as behaviors required to perform designated job duties, which are formally expected, evaluated, and rewarded by the organization (e.g., tasks in a job description; Becker and Kernan, 2003; Williams and Anderson, 1991). In contrast, extra-role behavior (ERB) refers to discretionary actions that benefit the organization but exceed prescribed role expectations (Van Dyne et al., 1994), and can be either positive or negative (Bolin and Heatherly, 2001).

This established theoretical dichotomy provides the foundational framework for our investigation. We now narrow our focus to a specific, under-examined domain within the broad spectrum of extra-role behavior: interpersonal interactions.

Building upon the theoretical foundation of extra-role behavior, we conceptualize Extra-role Interpersonal Interaction (ERII) as non-task-oriented, discretionary interactions that occur beyond the scope of formal job responsibilities, yet are grounded in past or current work-role relationships. To fully appreciate the prevalence and nuances of ERII, it is essential to consider the cultural context in which it is embedded.

Although the transformation of society by modern technologies has facilitated both the clashing and integration of diverse cultures, China’s local social and organizational culture nonetheless maintains an enduring anchor in the Confucian tradition. In most workplaces, interpersonal interaction among Chinese is a combination of multiple patterns of different sequences and the logic of action (Yum, 1988) and emphasizes harmony and resolution (Hwang, 1987; Leung et al., 2002). Chinese people tend to prefer to adopt diversified interaction practices with others in different relationships (Luo, 1997; Luo et al., 2016), reflecting the particularistic characteristics of both relationalism and a contract society (Chen et al., 2013). Two parties who are expected to have long-term contact or intersections tend to adopt attitudes to avoid conflicts, maintain face, control emotions, and create a harmonious atmosphere. In acquaintance relationships, instrumental behavior and emotional behavior are constantly and dynamically balanced to establish and expand connections (a self-centered trust network) to promote the sublimation of trust, interests, and other aspects (Luo, 2005; Luo, 2011). At the same time, the importance, understanding, perception, and expression of friendships between the two parties involved in the interactions are also significantly different from those in the West, especially in the sensitive perception of others’ friendships and the implicit expression of their own friendships.

Studies have found that in many Asian countries, including China, Korea and Japan, people are willing to form diverse, frequent, and informal social relationships (Oh et al., 2004; Horak and Klein, 2016; Horak et al., 2019; Zhang et al., 2005). In a workplace influenced by Chinese culture, new employees gradually acquire emotional expression norms adapted to the current organizational context through the observation, imitation, and exploration of interpersonal interaction patterns with their colleagues or superiors (Liu et al., 2015; Guo, 2019).

Compared with the Western social context, interpersonal interaction in the Chinese social and cultural background emphasizes long-term, stable, and harmonious interpersonal relationships (Flora Hung, 2004). As Liang (1990) stated, “Western people need to use wisdom, Chinese people need to use intuition–emotion […] The so-called discipline of filial piety and brother comity is everywhere still in love without me.” Similarly, Lin (1994) pointed out that “For Westerners, a viewpoint that is logically sound is often sufficient for acceptance. For the Chinese, however, logical correctness alone is insufficient; it must also be considerate of interpersonal harmony. In fact, this relational consideration often carries greater weight than pure logic.” This “human feeling (or renqin)” comprises the expression and expectations of emotions between people through reciprocal internal emotional care and external communication norms. Therefore, interpersonal interactions in Chinese society usually follow certain principles, including human preference, exchange, retention and appreciation, and the dynamic balance of human expression. These social norms have deeply penetrated all aspects of local culture, including local organizations and teamwork.

Therefore, the Chinese cultural context, with its emphasis on relational harmony (guanxi) and nuanced emotional expression (renqing), not only makes ERII a highly prevalent phenomenon but also imbues it with unique social and emotional significance that may differ from Western contexts.

To further clarify the theoretical space of ERII, it is crucial to distinguish it from several adjacent yet distinct constructs in the literature. In existing studies, the concepts related to ERII mainly include social interaction, informal socializing ties, networking, informal interaction, and workplace friendship. Specific content reflected by these concepts includes micro-breaks, empathy.

First, it should be clarified that the ERII proposed in this study is a type of frequent interpersonal interaction based on past or current work role relationships that is not required by work norms. They may occur inside and outside the workplace and have a certain purpose; however, they may also be arbitrary. In contrast, social interaction includes formal and informal interactions and is a general interpersonal or intergroup communication activity and process (Ikeda et al., 2012). Informal social bonding refers to relationships with people who are willing to spend their free time with them (Mehra et al., 2001; Reagans and McEvily, 2003; Oh et al., 2004), the core of which lies in a state of connection rather than an interactive process. An interpersonal network is a dynamic psychological phenomenon that differs from static relationship structures. It is a behavioral network constructed for job performance, career development, and job searching (Porter and Woo, 2015a,b).

Informal and workplace friendships are more strongly associated with out-of-role interactions; however, there are clear differences between the two. Compared with formal interactions, informal interactions emphasize the attributes of transcending organizational structure, being non-procedural and non-coercive, and are part of social interaction. Informal interaction is generally defined as the construction or maintenance of interpersonal networks by organization members outside the workplace, work organization structure, or under the requirements of informal work (Liu et al., 2017; Pittaway et al., 2004; Winslow et al., 2019). The key difference between this and out-of-role human interaction is whether the interaction is a job or task requirement. Because there is a considerable proportion of informal interactions that undertake certain functions, such as performing relevant tasks for the organization, coordinating related people or teams, disseminating organizational culture or other information, and choosing indirect or informal communication channels, there is a certain degree of task-oriented in-role components. Workplace friendship is considered a type of informal, voluntary peer relationship in line with public norms and social–emotional goals based on work identity connections in organizations (Pillemer and Rothbard, 2018). This is the most intimate but unstable type of organizational peer relationship (Morrison, 2004). Workplace friendship is an evolved relationship state rather than a normal bond that emerges from many high-quality human interactions. There may be some similarities between the two in terms of expression, such as talking about shared interests with colleagues, joking around, or conversations about non-work topics. However, it is evident that ERII neither necessarily reflect relational closeness nor lead to the formation of close relationships. As Simmel (1949) observed, sometimes “talking is an end in itself.”

Furthermore, it is critical to distinguish ERII from the foundational Chinese cultural construct of guanxi. While both transcend formal roles, guanxi refers to a structural, enduring relational tie built on long-term reciprocity, obligation, and trust (Chen et al., 2013). In contrast, ERII constitutes the situated, behavioral processes (e.g., casual chats and shared leisure) through which such ties may be cultivated or maintained. This distinction positions guanxi as a relational outcome or structure, and ERII as the interactive, behavioral micro-foundation (Horak et al., 2019; Pillemer and Rothbard, 2018). This distinction underscores that guanxi is more structural and identity-based, while ERII is more processual and action-based. Together, they illustrate how Chinese workplace relations are simultaneously shaped by enduring cultural logics and everyday interactive practices.

In recent years, similar behaviors arising from work or job roles have received attention from different perspectives. For example, researchers have focused on micro-breaks and their positive effects on individuals or organizations and regard them as a strategy for energy recovery, physical and mental recovery, and relationship recovery, which can bring various benefits to individuals (Kim et al., 2018). Specifically, these behaviors may include browsing the web during work breaks, replenishing energy with snacks, relaxing or briefly disconnecting from the current state of work by chatting with colleagues about something other than work, and learning certain skills by reading short articles or videos in a fragmented time. Microbreaks are related activities that take advantage of work breaks, which may be related to colleagues or may simply be individual actions. The part that is associated with colleagues is often some non-task-oriented interpersonal interaction outside of work, which may occur in or outside of the workplace. This comprises the social dimension of micro-breaks in the workplace (Kim et al., 2018). Research on micro-breaks during work provides a broad understanding of the content of extra-role interpersonal interaction because the content and form of social interaction are not limited to information exchange or dinner parties. In contrast, people choose different methods and contents of interaction according to different situations and objects. These social interactions also reflect the individuals’ need to connect with others.

In addition, research has found that people can not only build their own social networks and interaction circles but also generate emotional resonance during interaction, which makes it easier for them to understand each other and empathize (Galinsky et al., 2008). In fact, there is a significant difference between empathy and emotional interaction because emotional interaction does not allow both parties to empathize or reach the same level of empathy, but empathy is necessarily caused by emotional interaction. However, these emotion-related interactions are not included in the connotations of formal or informal interactions. In addition to the broad interactive content, extra-role interpersonal interaction should at least include interactions related to emotion from the perspective of research in the field of leisure. Individuals in organizations should pay more attention to their physical and mental health, especially to personal development and its meaning, redesigning the field of individual leisure by improving themselves and their environment with a positive attitude and participating in leisure activities and interactions that go beyond their job responsibilities. They may participate in or organize volunteer activities to this end (Berg et al., 2010). Leisure crafting explains individuals’ participation in or arrangement of activities and interactions outside of work from this perspective, including leisure experiences involving individuals and colleagues, such as hunting together and participating in mindfulness activities. Leisure crafting also shows concern for the aspects of individuals in an organization that dissociate themselves from the content of their work and may relate to their work colleagues. Relevant studies have also confirmed the positive effects of leisure crafting involving colleagues on individuals and work (Table 1).

In summary, while ERII has not been formally conceptualized, prior research has laid important epistemological groundwork. As Marshall (1986) observed, the boundary between work and leisure is often blurred, with “usually prudent work and play activities taking place simultaneously here [in the workplace].” Recent studies further highlight evolving workplace interactions, noting that increased interdependence and technological shifts have reshaped the ambiguity of roles and relationships among colleagues (Pillemer and Rothbard, 2018). Such changes facilitate the crossing of role boundaries through overlapping professional and social interactions (Yang and Wong, 2020). Researchers have also identified non-work domains beyond the family context, such as leisure spheres within organizational settings (Liang, 2018). Against this backdrop, ERII provides a nuanced and context-sensitive framework for capturing the broad range of low-obligation, daily interactions that constitute the informal fabric of organizational life. It represents the relational and behavioral micro-foundation upon which more formalized positive outcomes, including but not limited to OCB, may be built. By encompassing exchanges that are neither purely instrumental nor deeply emotional, ERII may fill a conceptual gap in the literature and offers a refined tool for examining how subtle, extra-role social processes influence workplace outcomes.

In summary, this study makes several key theoretical contributions. First, it systematically conceptualizes and operationalizes ERII in the Chinese context, addressing a significant gap in the literature concerning the definition and measurement of routine, work-role-based yet non-instrumental interpersonal interactions. The grounded theory approach identifies three core behavioral dimensions, illuminating how organizational members initiate or participate in such interactions by adjusting or transcending their formal role perceptions.

Second, this study positions ERII as a critical behavioral precursor and relational conduit for OCB. While traditional OCB research focuses on discrete, beneficial acts such as helping or courtesy (Podsakoff et al., 2000; Ocampo et al., 2018; Goel and Singh, 2024), our framework elucidates the relational substrate from which such behaviors emerge. The three dimensions of ERII represent recurring, low-stakes interactions that build social capital and psychological safety (Aselage and Eisenberger, 2003). Activities like dining together (BI), engaging in sports (RI), or offering mutual support (EI) cultivate the socio-emotional conditions that make voluntary acts of organizational citizenship more likely and spontaneous. Thus, ERII provides a more granular mechanism explaining how informal social processes underpin formal organizational functioning (Cropanzano et al., 2017; Dierdorff and Rubin, 2022).

Third, the study clarifies ERII’s conceptual distinctiveness and cultural boundaries. While the three-dimensional structure may generalize to other collectivist cultures (e.g., Korea, Japan), its specific manifestations and drivers are likely uniquely shaped by Chinese cultural rules of renqing and face (Chang, 2012; Hwang, 1987; Zhang et al., 2005). Furthermore, ERII is conceptually distinct from other informal interactions aimed primarily at information exchange or networking, due to its fundamental lack of a task or in-role orientation.

Our findings yield several actionable implications. First, organizations should formally recognize the value of ERII and foster its positive forms. Instead of mandated, scripted team-building, managers should facilitate organic, interest-driven micro-communities (e.g., hobby clubs, volunteer groups). Providing resources for such self-organized activities promotes authentic relationship-building while respecting employee autonomy.

Second, managers should design interaction-conducive environments and schedules. This includes creating informal shared spaces (e.g., lounges) and protecting time for non-task interaction (e.g., open-agenda team lunches). These structural adjustments lower barriers to spontaneous ERII, enhancing team cohesion and psychological safety.

Third, it is crucial to strengthen merit-based HR systems to mitigate potential risks like favoritism. Transparent performance criteria, team rotation, and clear ethical guidelines can help decouple interpersonal affinity from professional decisions, ensuring ERII enhances rather than undermines organizational fairness.

Finally, within the Chinese cultural context, leaders can consciously leverage ERII as a cultural resource to improve team stability and talent retention. By responsibly facilitating belongingness-, recreation-, and emotion-based interactions, organizations can build a more engaged, collaborative, and resilient workforce.

While this research provides a validated scale and establishes the foundational nomological network for ERII, certain aspects present opportunities for further refinement and verification in future studies.

First, although we implemented procedural and statistical remedies to mitigate common method bias, we acknowledge that this approach has to some extant inherent limitations. To build a more robust and causally nuanced understanding of ERII, future research would benefit from employing longitudinal or experimental designs. For instance, tracking how fluctuations in ERII predict subsequent changes in team cohesion or OCB over time would significantly strengthen inferences about its developmental impact. Additionally, collecting multi-source data (e.g., pairing employee self-reports of ERII with peer-ratings of their OCB) would further bolster the validity of the findings by reducing same-source bias. To more rigorously establish the predictive and incremental validity of the measurement and construct of ERII, future studies should explicitly test its ability to explain variance in key organizational outcomes, such as OCB or team performance, ideally using multi-source or multi-wave data.

Second, the dynamic nature of ERII, characterized by attributes like spontaneity and contextuality was integral to our conceptualization but not directly captured by the reflective scale items. Our scale successfully maps the content of these interactions, establishing a crucial taxonomic foundation. A logical and valuable next step would be to employ high-fidelity methodological approaches such as Experience Sampling Methodology or diary studies. These methods are ideally suited to capture these interactions and allowing researchers to model the within-person antecedents and consequences of ERII.

Finally, concerning cross-cultural applicability, this study was contextualized within Chinese guanxi culture. The strong psychometric properties demonstrated here confirm the scale’s validity within this specific context. However, to establish its generalizability and explore potential cultural moderators, rigorous cross-cultural validation is essential. Future work should involve systematic translation and back-translation procedures, followed by tests of measurement invariance across diverse cultural samples. This would enable meaningful cross-cultural comparisons of how ERII functions globally.