Brainy 6

LuthansChapter7.pdf

Home >Business & Finance homework help >Management homework help >Brainy 6

IAP PR

OO FS

LEARNING OBJECTIVES  Frame the chapter in terms of positive psychology.  Discuss the theory, research, and application of hope, efficacy, resilience and optimism

as best POB criteria-meeting psychological resources and when in combination repre- sent psychological capital (PsyCap), the HERO within.

 Feature the theory, research, and development of psychological capital or PsyCap.  Present the theory, research, and application of happiness/subjective well-being (SWB)

as another positive construct.  Present emotions, intelligence, and combined emotional intelligence (EI) as other posi-

tive constructs.

Just as the overall field of organizational behavior has become more comprehensive (as reflected in the social cognitive theoretical framework for this text, given detailed attention in Chapter 1), there are a few important variables that have more recently emerged to help in both the better understanding and the effective application of organizational behavior. This new positive organizational behavior approach draws from positive psychology. The term positive organizational behavior, or simply POB, was coined and defined by Luthans as “the study and application of positive oriented human resource strengths and psycholog- ical capacities that can be measured, developed, and effectively managed for performance improvement in today’s workplace.”1 Besides being positive2 and a psychological resource capacity, to be included as a POB construct, the following operational criteria must be met:3

1. Based on theory and research. This criterion separates POB from the a theoretical, no research back-up popular, positive, self-help literature such as Steven Covey’s Seven Habits or the best-seller Who Moved My Cheese? by Spencer Johnson. Like the posi- tive psychology movement in general and the University of Michigan group’s positive organizational scholarship (known as POS),4 POB is based on constantly building the- oretical grounding and continuing basic and applied research findings.

2. Valid measures. Related to the above criterion of needing a grounding in theory and research and to further differentiate from the popular self-development literature, to be included in POB, the construct must have reliable and valid measures.

3. “State-like” and thus open to development. This criterion is especially critical to POB because it differentiates the approach from much of positive psychology. This criterion says that in order to be included in POB the construct must be “state-like” (situation- ally based, open to learning, change, and development) as opposed to trait-like (dispo- sitional, relatively fixed across situations and time). Although on a continuum rather than dichotomous, the state-like criterion says that the psychological capacity can be

CHAPTER 7 Positive Organizational Behavior and Psychological Capital

Co py ri gh t © 2 01 5. I nf or ma ti on A ge P ub li sh in g. A ll r ig ht s re se rv ed . Ma y no t be r ep ro du ce d in a ny f or m wi th ou t pe rm is si on f ro m th e pu bl is he r, e xc ep t fa ir u se s pe rm it te d un de r

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

EBSCO Publishing : eBook Business Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 12/29/2017 8:44 PM via LOUISIANA STATE UNIV AT SHREVEPORT AN: 999823 ; Luthans, Fred, Luthans, Kyle W., Luthans, Brett C..; Organizational Behavior : An Evidence-based Approach Account: s3563253

172 PART 2  COGNITIVE PROCESS OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR

IAP PR

OO FS

developed and trained, whereas most of the positive psychology variables like virtue and character are more trait-like and thus relatively fixed.5 The same is true of most of the mainstream organizational behavior constructs that come out of trait-like per- sonality and motivation theories.

4. Managed for performance improvement. This criterion again separates POB from positive psychology. POB is concerned with the workplace and how the positive psy- chological resource capacity can be applied to improve human performance, that of both leaders/managers and human resources in general.

The positive psychological capacities that have been determined to best meet these four criteria and that will be covered in this chapter are efficacy, optimism, hope, and resiliency. When combined, these four positive psychological resources have been demonstrated the- oretically6 and empirically7 to be a higher-order core factor that Luthans and colleagues term as psychological capital or PsyCap.8 In addition, there are a number of other potential positive constructs that to varying degrees meet the above POB criteria9 and the two fea- tured in this chapter are happiness/subjective well-being (SWB) and emotional intelli- gence.

All texts to date give only very brief mention, if at all, to positive organizational behavior and psychological capital. However, there is now enough theory and research evi- dence on the linkage to desirable employee attitudes and effective performance in the workplace that they deserve special attention along with the established psychological con- structs of personality, attitudes, and motivation. This chapter is framed in positive psychol- ogy and then gives the theoretical background, research, and development of first efficacy, optimism, hope, and resiliency and then overall psychological capital. The balance of the chapter is devoted to the more widely recognized positive capacities of happiness (SWB) and emotional intelligence.

POSITIVE PSYCHOLOGY

Mainly under the leadership of well-known psychologist Martin Seligman, the positive psychology movement emerged from a reaction to the almost exclusive preoccupation that psychology had given to the negative, pathological aspects of human functioning and behaving.10 Seligman and a few others11 became concerned several years ago that not enough attention was being given to the strengths and other positive features of people that make life worth living. Never claiming that they discovered the value of positivity, which has a very long and rich history, they simply wanted psychology to shift at least some of the emphasis away from just the worst things in life toward more of a balance to the study and understanding of some of the best things in life. The aim of positive psychology is to use scientific methodology to discover and promote the factors that allow individuals, groups, organizations, and communities to thrive. It is concerned with optimal human functioning instead of pathological human functioning.

In identifying the domain, Seligman and Csikszentmihalyi summarize the three levels of positive psychology as follows:12

1. Valued subjective experiences. Well-being, contentment, and satisfaction (in the past); hope and optimism (for the future); and flow and happiness (in the present).Co

py ri gh t © 2 01 5. I nf or ma ti on A ge P ub li sh in g. A ll r ig ht s re se rv ed . Ma y no t be r ep ro du ce d in a ny f or m wi th ou t pe rm is si on f ro m th e pu bl is he r, e xc ep t fa ir u se s pe rm it te d un de r

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

CHAPTER 7  POSITIVE OB AND PSYCHOLOGICAL CAPITAL 173

IAP PR

OO FS

2. Positive individual traits. The capacity for love and vocation, courage, interpersonal skill, aesthetic sensibility, perseverance, forgiveness, originality, future mindedness, spirituality, high talent, and wisdom.

3. Civic virtues and the institutions that move individuals toward better citizenship. Responsibility, nurturance, altruism, civility, moderation, tolerance, and work ethic.

These very “positive” goals have obvious implications not only for therapy, well- being, education, family life, social relations, and society at large, but, importantly, also for organizational life and behavior. In fact, there is considerable research evidence13 that there is a significant (almost .3 average correlations in meta-analysis of numerous studies) correlation (also some causal evidence) between health (both physical and mental), rela- tionships (both intimate and social) and work (both performance and satisfaction) or what could be called simply H-R-W well-being.14 In other words, analogous to Bandura’s trian- gular social cognitive model depicted in Chapter 1, the H-R-W model shown in Figure 7.1 indicates that there is an interactive, reciprocal determination between one’s health, rela- tionships, and work (i.e., individuals’ health affects their relationships and their relation- ships affect their health, their health affects their work and their work affects their health, and so forth).

Importantly, evidence has now grown to the point where research positive psycholo- gists such as Sonja Lyubomirsky confidently conclude that one’s happiness (or level of positivity or H-R-W well-being) is determined as follows:15

1. About half can be attributed to a genetic, dispositional “hard-wiring” (but not immutable) set point. This seems like a lot, but as Lyubomirsky points out, “appreci- ate the fact that 50 percent is a long way from 100 percent, and that leaves ample room for improvement.”16

2. Surprisingly, only about 10 percent seems to be the result of life’s circumstances. As Lyubomirsky notes, “Although you may find it hard to believe, whether you drive to work in a Lexus hybrid or a battered truck, whether you’re young or old, or have had wrinkle-removing plastic surgery, whether you live in the frigid Midwest or the balmy West Coast, your chances of being happy and becoming happier are pretty much the same.”17

3. Most importantly, the remaining 40 percent of one’s happiness, positivity, or H-R-W well-being is determined by intentional activity. Knowing that such a large portion is under one’s own control “is to appreciate the promise of the great impact that you can make on your own life through intentional strategies that you can implement to remake yourself as a happier person.”18

It is from this relatively large 40 percent intentional component that positive organiza- tional behavior in general and psychological capital in particular can have input and make an impact. Remembering the POB criterion of being state-like and open to development, the criteria-meeting POB positive psychological resources of efficacy, hope, optimism, and resiliency (and when combined into the core construct of psychological capital) can intentionally be used by one’s self or by leading human resources to directly impact work performance, and, in turn, relationships and health. Using this work done in positive psy- chology as the foundation and point of departure, the theory, research, and development of the four major POB constructs and overall PsyCap are now examined in depth.Co

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

174 PART 2  COGNITIVE PROCESS OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR

IAP PR

OO FS

SELF-EFFICACY/CONFIDENCE

The first and most theoretically developed and researched POB construct is self-efficacy. It may also be most relevant, at least for this particular text on organizational behavior, because as was presented in Chapter 1, social cognitive theory serves both as the concep- tual framework for this text and the theory from which self-efficacy is derived. Largely due to the work of well-known psychologist Albert Bandura over the past three decades, self- efficacy has a widely acclaimed theoretical foundation,19 an extensive body of knowledge gathered through basic research,20 and proven effectiveness in a number of application areas, including the workplace.21 Unmatched by any of the constructs covered in this text, to date nine large-scale meta-analyses consistently demonstrate that efficacy beliefs con- tribute significantly to the level of motivation and performance.22 In POB, we tend to use the term self-efficacy interchangeably with confidence. We do this to recognize the rich theoretical and research foundation associated with self-efficacy, but also the more com- mon and simplistic term of confidence more often used with application in business and sports.23 In this more academic discussion, the term efficacy will tend to be used. After the meaning, process, and impact are provided, the sources and development of efficacy are given attention, and, finally, its application to human performance in organizations.

The Theoretical Background and Meaning of Efficacy

Chapter 1 summarized Bandura’s social cognitive theory (SCT). SCT incorporates both social/environmental and cognitive elements and the behaviors themselves. SCT explains psychological functioning in terms of environmental events; internal personal fac- tors in the form of cognitive, affective, and biological variables; and behavioral patterns. These three (environment, personal cognitions, and behavior) operate as interacting deter- minants that influence one another bi-directionally. Embedded within SCT, along with the human’s capabilities of symbolizing, forethought, and observational learning, is a self-the- ory including both self-regulation and self-reflection. It is the capability for self-reflec-

FIGURE 7.1. The H-R-W Model (The Interaction of Health, Relationship, and Work)

WORK PERFORMANCE from Psychological Capital (PsyCap)

Effective Positive Intentions

Open to One’s Control and Development

WELL-BEING

RELATIONSHIPS • Social Networks • Friends/Life Partner

HEALTH • Physical • Mental

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

CHAPTER 7  POSITIVE OB AND PSYCHOLOGICAL CAPITAL 175

IAP PR

OO FS

tion—people reflect back on their actions/experience with a specific event/task to then cognitively process how strongly they believe they can successfully accomplish this event/ task in the future—that serves as the theoretical basis for self-efficacy.24

Bandura strongly emphasizes that this self-efficacy is the most pervading and import- ant of the psychological mechanisms of self-influence. He declares, “Unless people believe that they can produce desired effects and forestall undesired ones by their actions, they have little incentive to act. Whatever other factors may operate as motivators, they are rooted in the core belief that one has the power to produce desired results.”25

The formal definition of self-efficacy that is usually used is Bandura’s early statement of personal judgment or belief of “how well one can execute courses of action required to deal with prospective situations.”26 A somewhat broader, more workable definition for positive organizational behavior is provided by Stajkovic and Luthans: “Self-efficacy refers to an individual’s conviction (or confidence) about his or her abilities to mobilize the moti- vation, cognitive resources, and courses of action needed to successfully execute a specific task within a given context.”27 Notice that this definition deals with efficacy on a specific task and context. To further clarify the exact meaning of self-efficacy as it is used here in meeting the criteria of positive organizational behavior, specific versus general efficacy needs to be clarified. Earlier the differentiation between the various POB constructs was briefly discussed, but the difference between self-efficacy and closely related established organizational behavior constructs such as self-esteem, expectancy motivation, and attribu- tion/ locus of control also needs to be addressed.

Specific Versus General Self-Efficacy

Specific self-efficacy follows Bandura’s conceptualization and is widely recognized by almost all efficacy scholars and the psychology field as a whole.28 In recent years, how- ever, general self-efficacy has been used as another dimension of self-efficacy by a few efficacy researchers.29 They suggest that in addition to specific self-efficacy, there is a gen- eralized efficacy that reflects people’s belief in successfully accomplishing tasks across a wide variety of achievement situations. It should be recognized that this generalized effi- cacy is quite different from Bandura’s portrayal of self-efficacy. In particular, the accepted task-specific version of self-efficacy is state-like, and thus meets this important criterion for POB. Specific self-efficacy is highly variable depending on the specific task and is cog- nitively processed by the individual before any effort is expended.

Bandura argues that self-efficacy represents a task-and situation-specific cognition.30 On the other hand, general efficacy is conceptually the opposite; it is trait-like. That is, general efficacy is relatively stable over time and across situations; in this regard it is like a personality trait.31 Bandura contends with his years of theory building and basic research that “an efficacy belief is not a decontextualized trait.”32 However, Bandura and others point out that even though self-efficacy is not trait-like, this does not mean that specific self-efficacy evaluations never generalize.33 Instead, although not necessarily stable across situations, efficacy judgments on one task may generalize to others depending on the situ- ation, the task, and the person.

In summary, as presented here as a POB construct, self-efficacy is state-like and there- fore is aimed at specific tasks and open to training and development. For example, a sys- tems analyst may have high self-efficacy on solving a particular programming problem, but low self-efficacy on writing up a report for the CIO (chief information officer) on how the problem was solved. Importantly for POB, this low efficacy can be raised through train- ing and development, and the enhanced efficacy will result in improved performance.Co

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

176 PART 2  COGNITIVE PROCESS OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR

IAP PR

OO FS

How Self-Efficacy Differs From Established Organizational Behavior Concepts

At first glance self-efficacy appears very similar and is often confused with widely recognized organizational behavior concepts, in particular, self-esteem (Chapter 5) and expectancy motivation (Chapter 6). The same confusion also often surfaces with the well- known construct of attribution/locus of control (covered in Chapter 6). A brief summary of the major differences will help clarify the exact meaning of self-efficacy.34

1. Self-efficacy vs. self-esteem. Following from the preceding discussion of specific ver- sus general self-efficacy, there is no question that general self-efficacy is very similar to self-esteem, but the widely accepted specific self-efficacy as used here is quite dif- ferent. The first difference is that self-esteem is a global construct of one’s evaluation and belief of overall worthiness, whereas self-efficacy is one’s belief about a task-and context-specific capability. Second, self-esteem is stable and trait-like, whereas self- efficacy is changing over time as new information and task experiences are gained and developed and is state-like. Finally, self-esteem is aimed at any aspect of one’s current self, whereas self-efficacy is a current assessment of one’s future success at a task.35 An example of the differences would be the salesperson who has high self- efficacy of selling a luxury item to low-income customers, but low self-esteem because he knows his career has been based on selling unneeded items to his custom- ers and this takes away from their ability to buy some of the basic necessities for their families.

2. Self-efficacy vs. expectancy concepts. Chapter 6 briefly discussed under expectancy theories of motivation the effort-performance (sometimes called E1) and behavior- outcome (sometimes referred to as E2) expectancy relationships. Although E1 and self-efficacy would both say that effort leads to performance, self-efficacy involves much more. Self-efficacy beliefs also involve perceptions of ability, skill, knowledge, experience with the specific task, complexity of the task, and more. In addition, self- efficacy has psychomotor reactions such as emotions, stress, and physical fatigue. With the E2 (behavior-outcome expectancy) there are even more pronounced differ- ences. The process is different—efficacy is a judgment of one’s ability to successfully execute a certain behavior pattern (i.e., “I believe I can successfully execute this task”), whereas the outcome expectancy is a judgment of the probable consequence such behavior will produce (i.e., “I believe that what I do will (or will not) lead to desired outcomes”). In other words, the individual’s self-efficacy evaluation will usu- ally come before any behavior outcome expectancies are even considered.36

3. Self-efficacy vs. attribution/locus of control. The third close, but different, construct that is often confused with self-efficacy comes from attribution theory, specifically locus of control. Those who make internal attributions about their behavior and its consequences (success or failure) believe they are in control of their own fate (e.g., “It is my effort or ability that makes the difference”) and assume personal responsibility for the consequences of their behavior. Externals, on the other hand, make attributions to the circumstances (“The task was too hard”) or to luck and do not take personal responsibility for the consequences of their behavior. Bandura has argued that locus of control attributions are causal beliefs about action-outcome contingencies, whereas self-efficacy is an individual’s belief about his or her abilities and cognitive resources that can be marshaled together to successfully execute a specific task.37Co

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

CHAPTER 7  POSITIVE OB AND PSYCHOLOGICAL CAPITAL 177

IAP PR

OO FS

Although the differences outlined above may seem quite technical, they must be pointed out to make sure that self-efficacy is indeed a valid, independent construct and help clarify its exact meaning.

The Process and Impact of Self-Efficacy

The self-efficacy process affects human functioning not only directly, but has an indi- rect impact on other determinants as well. Directly, the self-efficacy process starts before individuals select their choices and initiate their effort. First, people tend to weigh, evalu- ate, and integrate information about their perceived capabilities.38 Importantly, this initial stage of the process has little to do with individuals’ abilities or resources per se, but rather how they perceive or believe they can use these abilities and resources to accomplish the given task in this context. This evaluation/perception then leads to the expectations of per- sonal efficacy which, in turn, determines:39

1. The decision to perform the specific task in this context 2. The amount of effort that will be expended to accomplish the task 3. The level of persistence that will be forthcoming despite problems, disconfirming evi-

dence, and adversity

In other words, from the preceding it can be seen that self-efficacy can directly affect:

1. Choice behaviors (e.g., decisions will be made based on how efficacious the person feels toward the options in, say, work assignments or even a career field)

2. Motivational effort (e.g., people will try harder and give more effort on tasks where they have high self-efficacy than those where the efficacy judgment is low)

3. Perseverance (e.g., those with high self-efficacy will bounce back, be resilient when meeting problems or even failure, whereas those with low self-efficacy tend to give up when obstacles appear)

In addition, there is research evidence that self-efficacy can also directly affect:40

4. Facilitative thought patterns (e.g., efficacy judgments influence self-talks such as those with high self-efficacy might say to themselves, “I know I can figure out how to solve this problem,” whereas those with low self-efficacy might say to themselves, “I knew I couldn’t do this, I don’t have this kind of ability”)

5. Vulnerability to stress (e.g., those with low self-efficacy tend to experience stress and burnout because they expect failure, whereas those with high self-efficacy enter into potential stressful situations with confidence and assurance and thus are able to resist stressful reactions)

These examples of the direct impact of efficacy on human functioning are right in line with high-performing individuals. Perhaps the best profile of a high performer on a given task would be the highly efficacious individual who really gets into the task (welcomes it and looks at it as a challenge); gives whatever effort it takes to successfully accomplish the task; perseveres when meeting obstacles, frustrations, or setbacks; has positive self- thoughts and talks; and is resistant to stress and burnout.

As if this high-performance profile is not enough, Bandura emphasizes that efficacy also plays a vital role in other important human performance determinants such as goal Co

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

178 PART 2  COGNITIVE PROCESS OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR

IAP PR

OO FS

aspirations, the incentives in outcome expectations, and the perceived opportunities of a given project.41 What level of goal is selected, how much effort is expended to reach the selected goal, and how one reacts/perseveres when problems are encountered in progress- ing toward the goal all seem to be greatly affected by self-efficacy.42 So do the outcome incentives people anticipate. Those with high self-efficacy expect to succeed and gain favorable, positive outcome incentives, whereas those with low self-efficacy expect to fail and conjure up negative outcome disincentives (i.e., “I won’t get anything out of this any- way”). Especially relevant to strategy formulation, entrepreneurial start-ups, and strug- gling transitionary economies in developing countries,43 Bandura comments on the perceptions of opportunities as follows:

People of high efficacy focus on the opportunities worth pursuing, and view obstacles as surmountable. Through ingenuity and perseverance they figure out ways of exercis- ing some control even in environments of limited opportunities and many constraints. Those beset with self-doubts dwell on impediments which they view as obstacles over which they can exert little control, and easily convince themselves of the futility of effort. They achieve limited success even in environments that provide many opportunities.44

Whether direct or indirect through other processes, high efficacy is strongly related and very predictive of high performance. The extensive research solidly supports this con- clusion. Not only does Bandura’s seminal book on self-efficacy cite hundreds and hun- dreds of studies, but, as the introductory comments indicated, there are no less than nine meta-analyses including ours (see Staikovic and Luthans45) that consistently find a posi- tive relationship between self-efficacy and performance in different spheres of functioning under laboratory and naturalistic conditions.46

Sources of Efficacy

Because Bandura has provided such a comprehensive, rich theoretical understanding, backed by years of research, there is common agreement on the principal sources of self- efficacy. Shown in Figure 7.2, it must be remembered from social cognitive theory that these four sources of efficacy only provide the raw data. The individual must select out, cognitively process, and self-reflect in order to integrate and use this information to make self-efficacy perceptual judgments and form beliefs. For example, the major input into self- efficacy of performance attainments, Bandura notes, “may vary depending on their inter- pretive biases, the difficulty of the task, how hard they worked at it, how much help they received, the conditions under which they performed, their emotional and physical state at the time, their rate of improvement over time, and selective biases in how they monitor and recall their attainments.”47 In other words, successful performance does not automatically raise the level of efficacy. Rather, the efficacy depends on how the individual interprets and cognitively processes the success.

In order of importance, the following briefly summarizes the major sources of infor- mation for self-efficacy:

1. Mastery experiences or performance attainments. This is potentially the most power- ful for forming efficacy beliefs because it is direct information about success. How- ever, once again, it should be emphasized that performance accomplishments do not directly equate with self-efficacy. Both situational (e.g., the complexity of the task) and cognitive processing (e.g., the perception of one’s ability) concerning the perfor-Co

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

CHAPTER 7  POSITIVE OB AND PSYCHOLOGICAL CAPITAL 179

IAP PR

OO FS

mance will affect the efficacy judgment and belief. Bandura also points out that mas- tery experiences gained through perseverant effort and ability to learn form a strong and resilient sense of efficacy, but efficacy built from successes that came easily will not be characterized by much perseverance when difficulties arise and will change more quickly.48

2. Vicarious experiences or modeling. Just as individuals do not need to directly experi- ence reinforced personal behaviors in order to learn (they can vicariously learn by observing and modeling relevant others who are reinforced), the same is true of acquiring efficacy. As stated by Bandura, “If people see others like themselves suc- ceed by sustained effort, they come to believe that they, too, have the capacity to suc- ceed. Conversely, observing the failure of others instills doubts about one’s own ability to master similar activities.”49 It is important to emphasize that the more simi- lar the model (e.g., demographics such as age, sex, physical characteristics, and edu- cation, as well as status and experience) and the more relevant the task being performed, the more effect there will be on the observer’s efficacy processing. This vicarious source of information is particularly important for those with little direct experience (e.g., a new assignment) and as a practical strategy to enhance people’s efficacy through training and development.

3. Social persuasion. Not as powerful a source of information as the previous two, and sometimes oversimplified as a “can-do” approach, people’s belief in their efficacy can be strengthened by respected, competent others persuading them that they “have what it takes” and providing positive feedback on progress being made on this particular task. On the other side of the coin, there is no question of the powerful impact that unkind words and negative feedback (e.g., “you can’t do that”) have in disabling and deflating one’s confidence. Too often, a small negative comment or even nonverbal gesture can have a big impact on one’s emotions and efficacy. Unfortunately, giving people positive feedback and pointing out their strengths for successfully accomplish-

FIGURE 7.2. The Major Sources of Information for Self-Efficacy

Mastery Experiences or Performance Attainments

Vicarious Experiences or Modeling

SELF-EFFICACY

Social Persuasion

Physiological and Psychological Arousal

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

180 PART 2  COGNITIVE PROCESS OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR

IAP PR

OO FS

ing a task does not seem to be processed by most people with as much impact as the negative. However, by being genuine, providing objective information, and then tak- ing follow-up actions to actually set up the individual for success and not failure, social persuasion can be selected and processed for building efficacy. Such social per- suasion becomes more useful to fill in gaps when people begin to struggle or doubt themselves while pursuing a task than it is in trying to build one’s efficacy for a new task.

4. Physiological and psychological arousal. People often rely on how they feel, physi- cally and emotionally, in order to assess their capabilities. More than the other sources of information, if these are negative (e.g., the person is very tired and/or not physi- cally well or is particularly anxious/depressed and/or feels under a lot of pressure) this will generally greatly detract from efficacy. On the other hand, if these physical and mental states are well off, they don’t necessarily process as contributing much to the individual’s efficacy. On balance, however, if the individual is in excellent physical and mental condition, this can serve as a good point of departure to build efficacy in other ways and may even in and of itself arouse a person’s efficacy on a physically and/or psychologically demanding task.

Importantly for organizational behavior and human resource management, each of these sources of efficacy are highly malleable and changeable. As discussed earlier, spe- cific self-efficacy is a state, not a trait. In other words, self-efficacy can definitely be enhanced through training and development targeted at these four sources. For example, as shown in Table 7.1, training expert Robert Mager has pinpointed specific training implica- tions for each of the sources of self-efficacy. In fact, developing self-efficacy in trainees may be a solution to the long-standing problem of transferring training to the job. As Mager notes,

People need a strong sense of efficacy before they will try to apply what they have learned and before they will try to learn new things. Belief in their ability to perform makes them less vulnerable to on-the-job conditions that aren’t always supportive. It helps them to survive rejection. It helps them to persevere in the face of obstacles and setbacks.50

Self-efficacy not only has these important implications for training, but also for many other areas of today’s workplace as well.

Implications for Efficacy in the Workplace and POB

Self-efficacy theory was first used almost 40 years ago as a clinical framework “for analyzing changes achieved in fearful and avoidant behavior.”51 Psychotherapeutic treat- ments such as desensitization, symbolic modeling, and firsthand mastery experiences were clearly found to change behavior of clients through the common pathway of perceived self- efficacy. However, the scope of efficacy quickly broadened beyond this domain of clinical behavior change to be successfully applied in areas such as: (1) the promotion of health and recovery from physical setbacks, (2) the control of eating, (3) resistance to addictive sub- stances, (4) educational achievement, (5) athletic performance, and, importantly, (6) for the study and application of organizational behavior and performance in work settings.52

Whereas the POB constructs discussed next have to date relatively few research stud- ies in the workplace, efficacy has a very well-established body of knowledge as to its appli-Co

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

CHAPTER 7  POSITIVE OB AND PSYCHOLOGICAL CAPITAL 181

IAP PR

OO FS

Luthans) meta-analysis included 114 studies and 21,616 subjects.53 The results indicated a highly significant, .38 weighted average correlation between self-efficacy and work- related performance. When converted to the effect size estimate commonly used in meta- analysis, the transformed value represents a 28 percent increase in performance due to self- efficacy.54

By comparison, these results for self-efficacy in the workplace represent a greater average gain in performance than the results from the meta-analyses of other popular orga- nizational behavior interventions such as goal setting (10.39%),55 feedback (13.6%),56 or organizational behavior modification (17%),57 and also seems to be a better predictor of work-related performance than the personality traits (e.g., the “Big Five”) or relevant atti- tudes (e.g., job satisfaction or organizational commitment) commonly used in organiza- tional behavior research.58 Also, a sub-analysis of recent research on PsyCap indicated that the efficacy component by itself was significantly related to work performance and job sat- isfaction across different samples.59

Although the workplace is given considerable attention in Bandura’s widely recog- nized book, Self-Efficacy,60 more recently he provided a focused review of the growing research literature of the direct and indirect impact that self-efficacy has on work-related personal and organizational effectiveness.61 This research review of the impact of self-effi- cacy includes a wide range of organizational behavior topics such as career choice and development, new employee training, work design/job enrichment, supportive communi- cation, teams (i.e., collective efficacy), innovation, entrepreneurship, leadership, and

TABLE 7.1. Implications of Self-Efficacy for Effective Training

Sources of Efficacy Key for Successful Training and Transfer to the Job Training Recommendations

1. Mastery experience and performance attainment

Trainees must learn they are the cause of their performance.

1. Plenty of practice so mastery (as defined by the training objectives) is reached

2. Break learning into series of obtainable endpoints to help self-confirmation of skills.

3. Provide feedback on progress (not shortfalls) and contribu- tions

2. Vicarious experience and modeling

Model(s) used should have similar demographic attributes, and the training being done should be similar to what the trainees will be doing back on the job.

1. Carefully select models used in the training to have similar characteristics as the trainees.

2. Set up training so that trainees perceive performance is due to the capability of the model and not other factors.

3. Models should take a task-diagnostic perspective (i.e., focus on task and if mistake is made, interpret as way to learn rather than personal inadequacy).

3. Social persuasion All comments have impact, so feedback must be phrased positively to build trainee confidence.

1. Set trainees up for success so feedback comments can be very positive.

2. Trainers must be careful and sensitive to keep positive things that are said and done in the presence of the trainee.

4. Physical and psychological arousal

Make sure trainees experiencing physical or psychological symptoms interpret them as the nature of the training task and not some personal inadequacy (i.e., lack of ability).

1. Trainees must understand that the need to exert consider- able physical (or psychological) effort does not mean a lack of personal capability.

2. Getting trainees physically and psychologically fit may help arouse motivation to learn and be successful.

Source: Adapted from Robert F. Mager, “No Self-Efficacy, No Performance,” Training, April 1992, pp. 34–36.

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

182 PART 2  COGNITIVE PROCESS OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR

IAP PR

OO FS

stress. He then devotes considerable attention to the strategies and principles for develop- ing and strengthening beliefs of personal efficacy in the workplace.

From this considerable body of theory and research on self-efficacy, the following sec- tions offer some practical implications and specific guidelines for the more effective prac- tice of managing human performance in today’s and future organizations.

Selection of Human Resources

In hiring for a particular job, making an assignment to a specific project, or promoting someone into an identifiable area of responsibility, assessing the person’s present magni- tude and strength of self-efficacy could be valuable input into the selection decision. Mag- nitude measures the level of task difficulty that a person believes he or she is capable of executing, and strength indicates whether the magnitude is strong and likely to produce perseverance when difficulties are encountered.62

Although most applicable to specific tasks within a job assignment or promotion, self- efficacy scales could be set up for each of the major tasks or for the overall domain of a given job. This scale would include, in ascending order, items that represent the increasing levels of difficulty. The respondent would check for each item yes or no (magnitude) and then next to it 0–100 percent probability of attainment (i.e., strength). Figure 7.3 shows such a scale. The efficacy scores are derived by getting a total of the probability strengths for each item with a yes. This so-called Composite I method of scoring has been shown to be a valid measure of self-efficacy and more reliable than other measures.63

If regular questionnaire item scales are developed, they should be tailor-made for each specific selection purpose. Bandura advises that the content of such scales “must represent beliefs about personal abilities to produce specified levels of performance, and must not include other characteristics.”64 Of course, people should not be selected only on the basis of their present self-efficacy assessment, but because it has been found to be such a good predictor of performance, self-efficacy could make a significant contribution to the selec- tion process. This assessment could also be used as a training and development needs anal- ysis.

FIGURE 7.3. An Example of a Self-Efficacy Scale Developed for an Auto Sales Position

Number of Car Sales per month

I believe I can sell 2

Yes or No Strength of Certainty (0–100%)

I believe I can sell 4

I believe I can sell 6

I believe I can sell 8

I believe I can sell 10

I believe I can sell 12

I believe I can sell 14

I believe I can sell 16

Totals

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

CHAPTER 7  POSITIVE OB AND PSYCHOLOGICAL CAPITAL 183

IAP PR

OO FS

Training and Development As discussed previously (see Table 7.1), because self-efficacy is a state (rather than a

stable trait) and the sources have been identified (see Figure 7.2 and accompanying discus- sion), efficacy training and development can have considerable impact for employee per- formance management. Training can be set up around each (and in combination) of the sources of efficacy listed in Table 7.1.

Bandura recently categorized his approach to training and development into three areas.65 First is what he calls guided mastery, which includes instructive modeling to acquire a skill or competency, guided skill perfection, and then transferring the training back to the job to ensure self-directed success. Second is for the more complex—but increasingly common for all levels in the modern workplace—ways to enhance efficacy for decision making and problem solving. He calls this cognitive mastery modeling to learn thinking skills and how to apply them by observing the decision rules and reasoning strat- egies successful models use as they arrive at solutions to problems and make effective deci- sions. For example, one study taught managers how to generate ideas to improve the quality of organizational functioning and customer service by providing them guidelines and practice in innovative problem solving.66 Finally, he suggests the development of self- regulatory competencies (i.e., self-motivation or self-management).

The development of this increasingly important self-management involves a variety of interlinked self-referent processes such as self-monitoring, self-efficacy appraisal, per- sonal goal setting, and use of self-motivating incentives.67 A meta-analysis (117 studies) evaluating the effects of behavioral modeling training (BMT) found:68

1. The largest effects of BMT were on learning outcomes, but BMT also had an impact on job behavior and results outcomes.

2. Although the BMT effects on knowledge decayed over time, the effects on skills and job behavior remained stable or even increased.

3. The greatest impact of BMT was when: a. both negative and positive models were presented; b. practice included trainee-generated scenarios; c. trainers were instructed to set goals; d. trainees’ supervisors were also trained; and e. rewards and sanctions were instituted in the trainees’ work environment.

Whether using the more pragmatic training aimed at enhancing the four sources dis- cussed earlier (Table 7.1 summarizes) or these more sophisticated approaches suggested by Bandura and others, there is proven effectiveness of this training and development of self- efficacy,69 and the potential for the future seems unlimited. For example, our research has found that training managers and employees in manufacturing, insurance, and the public sector using Bandura’s sources was able to significantly increase their efficacy beliefs of successfully coping with diversity initiatives.70 As part of a larger PsyCap study including efficacy (and the other positive capacities covered next), we were able to raise the level of efficacy as part of PsyCap in an experimental, control group study design,71 and also we have demonstrated the dollar utility impact on participants’ performance improvement.72

Other Applications Besides selection and training/development, self-efficacy also has implications for

stress management (Chapter 9), self-managed teams (Chapter 11), job design and goal set-Co py ri gh t © 2 01 5. I nf or ma ti on A ge P ub li sh in g. A ll r ig ht s re se rv ed . Ma y no t be r ep ro du ce d in a ny f or m wi th ou t pe rm is si on f ro m th e pu bl is he r, e xc ep t fa ir u se s pe rm it te d un de r

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

184 PART 2  COGNITIVE PROCESS OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR

IAP PR

OO FS

ting (Chapter 6), and leadership (Chapters 13 and 14). One applications approach backed by research has been to enhance self-efficacy to better cope with stress73 and facilitate pro- ductive teamwork74 and collective efficacy75 of self-managed teams. Another approach would be to use job designs that provide more responsibility, challenge, and empowered personal control over the work to enhance the jobholder’s perception of self-efficacy.76 In setting goals, goal difficulty and commitment will be affected by self-efficacy. By the same token, goal progress and attainment will in turn affect self-efficacy.77 In addition to these more established applications, a more recent study has shown that efficacy can be applied to the creative process in organizations. It was found that creative self-efficacy (employ- ees’ beliefs that they can be creative in their work roles) predicted creative performance beyond the predictive effects of job self-efficacy.78

Perhaps at least potentially the most significant but still largely overlooked implication for application lies in leadership efficacy.79 Although the importance of a leader’s confi- dence has been recognized in the leadership literature over the years,80 to date there have been very few attempts to measure and research the proposition drawn from self-efficacy theory and research presented here,81 that leadership efficacy will have a strong positive impact on followers (e.g., the leader can serve as a model to enhance followers’ self-effi- cacy) and performance outcomes. As part of the POB theoretical foundation and the posi- tive, authentic, approach to leadership, we do include confidence/efficacy,82 and this will be given attention in the leadership chapters. In addition, self-efficacy has implications for most of the remaining chapters in both Part Three, Dynamics of Organizational Behavior, and Part Four, Managing and Leading for High Performance.

OPTIMISM

Optimism is a major construct in positive psychology and has long been recognized by both psychologists and people in general. The positive impact of optimism on physical and psychological health and the attendant characteristics of perseverance, achievement, and motivation leading to academic, athletic, political, and occupational success are well doc- umented. By the same token, pessimism is known to lead to passivity, failure, social estrangement, and, in its extreme, depression and mortality.

Not as well known, except for the psychological researchers in the area, is that opti- mism also can have drawbacks, dysfunctions, and costs. Well people tend to be optimistic about their future health and therefore often neglect needed nutritional and physical main- tenance, or in an organization optimistic managers may become distracted from making the necessary action plans to attain goals or contingency plans for clearly impending problems. For example, one expert on the financial crisis at the end of 2008 observed:

The recent recklessness of residential and commercial real-estate lending was in plain view, and a vocal minority wrote about it. But the financial and business communities dismissed all the warnings, insisting that any damage—should it ever arrive—would be contained to the subprime section. The folly was obvious. Even if decision makers had deemed the grim forecasts to be of low probability, the potential outcomes were so dire that they demanded contingency plans.83

The problem of unbridled optimism, especially in retrospect when things go wrong, does seem to be a bigger problem than the downside of the other positive constructs (e.g., over- confidence or false hope). However, optimism is receiving growing attention in psychol- ogy, but except for the general knowledge carryover, the field of organizational behavior Co

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

CHAPTER 7  POSITIVE OB AND PSYCHOLOGICAL CAPITAL 185

IAP PR

OO FS

has to date largely neglected optimism as an important concept and application in improv- ing employee performance.

In defining optimism, contemporary positive psychologists go far beyond the old adage of the “power of positive thinking” popularized by widely read and heard writers a number of years ago, such as Norman Vincent Peale and Dale Carnegie, in recent times Tony Robbins and Steven Covey, and political leaders such as Franklin Roosevelt, Ronald Reagan, and Barack Obama. Psychology treats optimism as a cognitive characteristic in terms of a generalized positive outcome expectancy (see Chapter 6) and/or a positive causal attribution. Optimism is also often used in relation to other positive constructs such as hope (covered next) and emotional intelligence. Emotional intelligence expert Daniel Goleman, for instance, devotes considerable attention to the role of optimism in his discus- sions of emotional intelligence and even at one point refers to optimism as an emotionally intelligent attitude.84 However, as positive psychologist Christopher Peterson pointed out in a comprehensive analysis, “Optimism is not simply cold cognition, and if we forget the emotional flavor that pervades optimism, we can make little sense of the fact that optimism is both motivated and motivating.”85

The Dimensions of Optimism

Most psychologists treat optimism as human nature and/or an individual difference. Unfortunately, like other psychological and organizational behavior concepts, there are still many unresolved issues surrounding optimism.

Optimism as Human Nature

Both the early philosophers (Sophocles, Nietzsche) and psychologists/psychiatrists (Freud, Allport, Erikson, Menninger) were generally negative about optimism. They felt that optimism was largely an illusion and that a more accurate perception of the hard facts of reality was more conducive to healthy psychological functioning. However, starting in the 1960s and 1970s, cognitive psychologists began to demonstrate that many people tend to have a more positive bias of themselves than cold reality, and that psychologically healthy people in particular have this positive bias. This positivity has gone all the way to being portrayed by some anthropologists, evolutionary psychologists, and neuropsycholo- gists as inherent in the makeup of people—part of their basic human nature.86

Optimism as an Individual Difference

More in tune with mainstream modern psychology is to treat optimism (as with other psychological constructs) as an individual difference; people have varying degrees of opti- mism. Treating optimism as an individual difference focuses on cognitively determined expectations and causal attributions. Most closely associated with the expectancy theoreti- cal perspective are Carver and Scheier who simply state, “optimists are people who expect good things to happen to them; pessimists are people who expect bad things to happen to them.”87 Seligman, on the other hand, is associated with the attributional approach. He uses the term explanatory style to depict how an individual habitually attributes the causes of failure, misfortune, or bad events.88 This explanatory style is an outgrowth of Selig- man’s earlier work on learned helplessness (also covered in Chapter 9 on stress and con- flict). He had found that dogs and then humans, when continually experiencing Co

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

186 PART 2  COGNITIVE PROCESS OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR

IAP PR

OO FS

uncontrollable, punishing, aversive events, eventually learn to be helpless. This helpless- ness generalized to the point that even when the animals or humans could subsequently control and escape the aversive conditions, they still acted in a helpless manner. Impor- tantly, however, not all the subjects learned to be helpless. About a third resisted; they per- severed and refused to give in and be helpless. Seligman extended this work on learned helplessness into generalized causal attributions or explanatory styles of optimism and pes- simism.

Here are the causal attributions or explanatory style pessimists and optimists tend to habitually use in interpreting personal bad events:89

1. Pessimists make internal (their own fault), stable (will last a long time), and global (will undermine everything they do) attributions.

2. Optimists make external (not their fault), unstable (temporary setback), and specific (problem only in this situation) attributions.

Research continues on explanatory style, and it has been found that the internality attribu- tion does not hold up as well as the stability or globality.90 Overall, however, no matter how optimism is measured, it has been shown to be significantly linked with desirable characteristics such as happiness, perseverance, achievement, and health.91 Again, under positive psychology, the emphasis shifted in both theory building and research from what can go wrong with people (e.g., learned helplessness, pessimism, and depression) to what can go right for people (e.g., optimism, health, and success).92

Some Unresolved Optimism Issues

Even though there is considerably more research and definitive conclusions on opti- mism than, say, emotional intelligence, there is still much room for conceptual refinement and further research. Peterson identified and summarized three of the more important opti- mism issues as follows:93

1. Little vs. big optimism. The magnitude and level of optimism may function quite dif- ferently. Little optimism involves specific expectations about positive outcomes (e.g., I will finish my assignment by 5 o’clock so I can watch the ball game tonight), whereas big optimism refers to more generic, larger expectations of positive out- comes (e.g., our firm can become the leader in the industry). Although there may be some relationship between little and big, there is also the distinct possibility of some- one being a little optimist, but a big pessimist, or vice versa. There seems little ques- tion that the strategies, mechanisms, and pathways linking optimism to outcomes may differ (e.g., time management versus visionary leadership).

2. 2. Optimism vs. pessimism. Although the assumption is often made that optimism and pessimism are mutually exclusive, they may not be. Some people expect both good outcomes (optimism) and bad outcomes (pessimism) to be plentiful. Interestingly, explanatory style derived from attributions about bad events are usually independent of explanatory style based on attributions about good events. In other words, attribu- tions about bad events are identified as optimistic or pessimistic, but attributions about good events are not. It would seem that attributions about good events would be as, if not more, important to understanding optimism.

3. 3. Learning and sustaining optimism. Although optimism is sometimes portrayed as a stable personality trait (e.g., Scheier and Carver’s dispositional optimism),94 Selig-Co

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

CHAPTER 7  POSITIVE OB AND PSYCHOLOGICAL CAPITAL 187

IAP PR

OO FS

man has led the way in popularizing learned optimism. This says that anyone, includ- ing pessimists, can learn the skills to be an optimist.95 Of course, it is critical that this developable, statelike nature of optimism be included in POB. The social learning process of modeling (i.e., observing positive events and outcomes in one’s relevant, valued environment) can contribute to the learning of optimism. By the same token, as Chapter 9 on stress will indicate, reducing and coping with bad events and stress can also help sustain optimism.

Overall, the past, present, and future of optimism as an exciting psychological construct for the better understanding and application of human functioning in general and for organiza- tional behavior in particular seems very “optimistic.”

Optimism in the Workplace

As discussed, there is no question that optimism is both motivated and motivating; has the desirable characteristics of perseverance, achievement, and health; makes external, unstable, and specific attributions of personal bad events; and is linked with positive out- comes such as occupational success. Obviously by extrapolating this profile, optimism could be a very positive force in the workplace. For example, optimists may be motivated to work harder; be more satisfied and have high morale; have high levels of aspiration and set stretch goals; persevere in the face of obstacles and difficulties; make attributions of personal failures and setbacks as temporary, not as personal inadequacy, and view them as a one-time unique circumstance; and tend to feel good and invigorated both physically and mentally. The accompanying OB in Action: “Half-Empty” or “Half-Full” gives some real- world scenarios of such optimistic people in the workplace. There are some jobs and career fields where optimism would be especially valuable (e.g., sales, advertising, public rela- tions, product design, customer service, and in the health and social services fields).

The Downside of Optimism

Despite the overwhelming anecdotal evidence of the positive power of optimism in the workplace, it must be remembered that the academic literature does warn that in certain cases optimism can lead to meaningless or dysfunctional outcomes. For example, Peterson notes that optimistically driven behavior may be aimed at pointless pursuits (e.g., finish in the top five of the company golf league) or unrealistic goals (e.g., striving to attain an unat- tainable sales goal that results in stress, exhaustion, and high blood pressure).96 Moreover, “realistic optimism” would result in more effective leadership than “false optimism.”97 There are also certain jobs in which at least mild pessimism would be beneficial (e.g., some technical jobs such as safety engineering or jobs in financial control and accounting).

Seligman’s Met Life Studies

For studies of optimism in the workplace, Seligman again leads the way with his pio- neering work at Metropolitan Life Insurance. After conferring with the president of this huge company, he was able to test the obvious hypothesis that optimism and its attendant motivation and perseverance were the keys to sales success. A shortened version of his the- ory-based Attributional Style Questionnaire (ASQ) was administered to 200 experienced Met Life sales agents. This open-ended version of the ASQ was designed to determine the Co

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

188 PART 2  COGNITIVE PROCESS OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR

IAP PR

OO FS

habitual explanatory style by asking the respondents to interpret six good and six bad vignettes in terms of personalization, permanence, and pervasiveness. Importantly, this test has been found to be very difficult to fake optimism; the right answers vary from test to test, and it does contain “lie scales” to identify those not telling the truth. Results were that agents who scored in the most optimistic half of the ASQ had sold 37 percent more insurance on average in their first two years than agents who scored in the pessimistic half. Agents who scored in the top 10 percent sold 88 percent more than the most pessimistic 10 percent.98

Despite the impressive findings from the initial study, Seligman was still not sure of the direction of causality from the correlational results (i.e., if the optimism caused the high performance or if the high performers became optimistic). He next conducted a pilot study on 104 new hires that took both the standard insurance industry selection test and the ASQ.

Although to date there are not many research studies of the role of optimism in the workplace, it is nevertheless happening day to day in the way in which organiza- tional participants interpret and react to events. Some people view the “glass” (everyday and important events) as half-full (optimists) and some as half-empty (pessimists). Here are some actual examples.

1. Take the case of two executives who were passed over for promotion because of negative evalua- tions from their boss. a. The “half-empty” exec reacted to the snub in a

rage. He had fantasies of killing his boss, complained to anyone who would listen of his unfair treatment, and went on a drinking binge. He felt like his life was over. He avoided his boss and looked down when pass- ing him in the hall. In an interview, however, he admitted “Even though I was angry and felt cheated, deep down I feared that he was right, that I was sort of worthless, that I had failed, and there was nothing I could do to change that.”

b. The “half-full” exec who did not get the pro- motion was also stunned and upset. But instead of going into a rage, he reasoned to himself, “I can’t say I was surprised, really. He and I have such different ideas, and we’ve argued a lot.” Instead of sulking, he openly discussed the set- back with his wife to determine what went wrong and what he could do to correct it. He realized that maybe he was not giving his all at work and resolved to talk to the boss. Here is how it went: “I had some discussions with him and things went very well. I guess he was trou- bled about what he had done, and I was trou- bled about not working up to potential. Since then, things have been better for both of us.”

2. Another “half-full” case is Anne Busquet of American Express. She was relieved of her duties as head of the Optima Card division when it was discovered that some of her employees had hid- den millions of dollars in bad debt. Although not involved, she was held accountable and was dev- astated by the setback. However, instead of quit- ting, she was still confident in her abilities and took a lower position trying to save the com- pany’s failing merchandising service division. She made a self-examination of what went wrong in the Optima Card division and concluded that maybe she was too strict and critical of her peo- ple. She reasoned that this style may have led her people to fear her to the point where they hid the losses. She resolved to soften her style and become more open, patient, and a better listener. Using this approach to manage the troubled mer- chandising service division, she saw it reach profitability within two years.

3. Perhaps the greatest “half-full” case is Arthur Blank, the founder of Home Depot. In 1978, after personality clashes with his boss at the hardware chain Handy Dan’s, he was fired. Instead of get- ting angry, he got even. He believed in his abilities and vision for this type of retailing. He did not give up after the setback at Handy Dan’s. When an investor approached him, he jumped at the chance to put his talents to work and founded Home Depot. The rest is history.

The half-full optimists interpret bad events in terms of Seligman’s explanatory style, and, as the preceding three examples indicate, this can result in future posi- tive outcomes. Whereas the half-empty pessimists tend to give up and go into a downward spiral after prob- lems or failures, the half-fulls view setbacks as a lesson to be learned for future success.

OB IN ACTION: “HALF-EMPTY” OR “HALF-FULL”

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

CHAPTER 7  POSITIVE OB AND PSYCHOLOGICAL CAPITAL 189

IAP PR

OO FS

Interestingly, he found that new insurance agents are more optimistic than any other group tested (e.g., car salespeople, commodity traders, West Point plebes, managers of Arby’s restaurants, baseball stars, or world-class swimmers). Optimistic scorers were much less likely to quit (a big problem in the insurance industry where about half turn over the first year) and did as well as the industry test in predicting performance.

He next launched a full-blown study involving 15,000 applicants to Met Life taking both the industry test and the ASQ. One thousand were hired and, importantly, 129 more (called the “Special Force”) that had scored in the top half of those taking the ASQ but had failed the industry test were also hired. In the first year the optimists (those who scored in the top half of the ASQ) outsold the pessimists by only 8 percent, but in the second year by 31 percent. The “Special Force” (those who had flunked the industry test and would not have been hired except for scoring as optimists on the ASQ) outsold the hired pessimists in the regular force by 21 percent the first year and 57 percent the second. They sold about the same as the optimists in the regular force. Met Life, on the basis of Seligman’s studies, then adopted the ASQ as an important part of their selection process of new agents.99

Other Research and Application in the Workplace

With the exception of the comprehensive Met Life study, to date there has been rela- tively little research to directly test the impact of optimism in the workplace. An older study did examine competent managers and found that they attribute their failures to a cor- rectable mistake, and then they persevere (i.e., an optimistic explanatory style).100 As with the other positive resources, optimism has also been part of recent studies in POB. For example, one POB study found optimism was related to employee performance, job satis- faction and work happiness.101 This optimism-performance relationship was also found with workers in Chinese factories.102

Other work on optimism has been applied to leadership. For example, there has been recognition given in leadership theory to the importance of optimism,103 and a field study found the measured optimism of military cadets had a significant relationship with their military science professors’ rating of leadership potential.104 Another study of business leaders found that on average they were more optimistic than a sample of non-leaders, that those most effective in initiating change were less pessimistic, and that the more optimistic the leader, the more optimistic the followers.105 There also have been a few publicized applications of deliberate attempts to use optimism in human resource management (HRM) such as in the selection process. One example is the highly successful Men’s Wear- house discount retailer, where an HRM executive stated:

We don’t look for people with specific levels of education and experience. We look for one criterion for hiring: optimism. We look for passion, excitement, energy. We want people who enjoy life.106

Besides selection, another example is American Express Financial Advisors that report- edly uses optimism training with their associates.107

HOPE

In the positive psychology movement, optimism has received relatively more attention than hope, but in POB hope is a more central concept.108 Most people think of hope in terms of “hope for the best,” a bit of sunny, optimistic advice offered by friends, relatives, Co

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

190 PART 2  COGNITIVE PROCESS OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR

IAP PR

OO FS

and counselors in times of trouble. In positive psychology, however, hope has taken on a specific meaning. Previously in clinical psychology, hope was largely portrayed as a uni- dimensional construct involving an overall perception that one can attain his or her goals.109

However, deceased positive psychologist C. Rick Snyder provided the now most widely recognized bi-dimensional definition of hope that we use in POB. Through exten- sive theory and research, he and colleagues precisely defined hope as: “A positive motiva- tional state that is based on an interactively derived sense of successful (a) agency (goal- directed energy), and (b) pathways (planning to meet goals).”110 More simply, this mean- ing of hope consists of both the “willpower” (agency) and the “waypower” (pathways). Importantly, considerable research over the past several years indicates it has a very posi- tive impact on academic achievement, athletic accomplishment, emotional health, the abil- ity to cope with illness and other hardships.111 Although not yet part of the mainstream organizational behavior literature, hope does make a good fit with the POB criteria.

Even though hope draws from each of the positive psychology constructs, there are some conceptually important differences. From the perspective of emotional intelligence, Goleman states that “having hope means that one will not give in to overwhelming anxiety, a defeatist attitude, or depression in the face of difficult challenges or setbacks.”112 In rela- tion to optimism, Seligman states, “Whether or not we have hope depends on two dimen- sions of our explanatory style: pervasiveness and performance. Finding temporary and specific causes for misfortune is the art of hope.”113 Perhaps conceptually the term closest in meaning to hope is self-efficacy (covered in the last sections). However, Snyder114 and others115 demonstrated that efficacy (as well as other POB constructs) and hope are con- ceptually and psychometrically (measurement) distinct (i.e., hope has construct validity).

Over the past decade, Snyder and his colleagues developed a brief self-report “State Hope Scale” with items such as “I energetically pursue my goals” and “There are lots of ways around any problem”116 and conducted a number of studies using this scale. This research finds a positive link between hope scores and work-related goal expectancies, per- ceived control, self-esteem, positive emotions, coping, and achievement.117 Although the considerable research base showing the positive impact of hope deals with academic, ath- letic, and mental and physical health, the carryover implications for the workplace seem quite clear. For example, there is research evidence that those with hope in stressful profes- sions such as human services perform better118 and survive with the most satisfaction, are less emotionally exhausted, and are most likely to stay.119 There is also direct work-related research beginning to emerge. For example, Snyder and colleagues, in an ongoing survey of U.S. firms, have found that those with higher-hope human resources are more profitable, have higher retention rates, and have greater levels of employee satisfaction and commit- ment.120 Moreover, a field study we recently conducted found that managers with higher hope levels had correspondingly higher performing work units, better retention rates, and more satisfied employees.121 More recent POB studies have found employees’ level of hope related to their job satisfaction, organizational commitment, work happiness, and per- formance122 and also, like optimism, there was a significant relationship between Chinese factory workers’ hope and their performance.123 Moreover, a recent comprehensive study focused on hope across different types of jobs and industries found more hopeful sales employees, mortgage brokers, and management executives had higher job performance, and the management executives also produced more and better quality solutions to a work- related problem.124 Hope also seems to have a positive impact on the entrepreneurial pro- cess. We found that higher-hope entrepreneurs express greater satisfaction with business Co

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

CHAPTER 7  POSITIVE OB AND PSYCHOLOGICAL CAPITAL 191

IAP PR

OO FS

ownership and consider themselves relatively better compensated than their lower-hope peers.125

These initial studies indicate that hope may have as powerful of a positive impact in the workplace as it has demonstrated outside the workplace. In human resource manage- ment, hope may play an important role in selection, especially for certain types of jobs and because it is learned and state-like (can change) rather than a stable trait, it can be enhanced by training and development to improve on-the-job performance and retention of valuable employees.126

RESILIENCY

Unlike the other criteria-meeting POB psychological resources, resiliency is reactive rather then proactive in nature. In positive psychology, resiliency is defined as “a class of phe- nomena characterized by patterns of positive adaptation in the context of significant adver- sity or risk.”127 As a component of positive organizational behavior, resiliency is viewed “as the capacity to rebound or bounce back from adversity, conflict, failure or even positive events, progress and increased responsibility.”128 This “bouncing back” capacity involves flexibility, adjustment, adaptability, and continuous responsiveness to change and uncer- tainty that can otherwise represent a source of psychological strain and challenge one’s well-being over the long term. Traditionally in clinical psychology, resiliency was por- trayed as an exceptional capability that only a select few possess. More recent theory and research now conclude that resiliency comes “from the everyday magic of ordinary, nor- mative human resources.”129 Moreover, resiliency is not just an outcome that people strive to achieve, nor is it only a valuable input that enhances their chances of success. It is a life- long journey, an elaborate process in which competence is developed over time as people interact with their environment most often characterized by continuous change and uncer- tainty.130

Although the research on resiliency and adaptation originally focused on at-risk chil- dren and adolescents (a negative perspective), recent studies have emphasized the positive aspects of resiliency.131 Moreover, resiliency is increasingly being viewed not only as a desirable characteristic of humans in general, but also as an essential attribute of today’s employees,132 managers,133 organizations,134 and even countries,135 especially in light of recent troubling and tragic events related to economic and geopolitical problems both in the United States and abroad. Important in meeting the criteria of positive organizational behavior, resiliency has been shown to be state-like, that is, it is trainable and develop- able.136 This state-like conceptualization opens the door for proactive efforts to create and develop resilient individuals, teams and organizations.137 Several instruments have been developed to measure resilience, for example the “Ego-Resiliency Scale (ER89)” includes items such as “I quickly get over and recover from being startled” and “I enjoy dealing with new and unusual situations.”138

Based on the established research of positive psychologist Ann Masten and her col- leagues, resiliency has been found to be influenced and developed by three types of factors: assets, risks, and adaptational processes.139 Resiliency can be developed through enhanc- ing the assets that a person possesses, through education, training, and nurturing social relationships, and in general by improving the quality of resources available for the person to draw upon. Risk factors can be managed through appropriate physical and psychological health care. Adaptational processes can be enhanced through developing other positive psychological capacities such as self-efficacy, hope, and optimism, as well as through Co

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

192 PART 2  COGNITIVE PROCESS OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR

IAP PR

OO FS

teaching people how to use effective coping, stress management, problem solving, and goal-setting strategies and practical techniques. In fact, resiliency may be more adversely impacted by the process that links risk conditions with specific dysfunctional outcomes than by the presence, number or frequency of risk factors, or lack of necessary assets.140

The overall profile of resilient people is that they are characterized by “a staunch acceptance of reality; a deep belief, often buttressed by strongly held values, that life is meaningful; and an uncanny ability to improvise.”141 As today’s employees face the risks and uncertainties associated with economic turbulence, global sourcing, technological change, downsizing, work-life balance, extensive customer-service orientation, stress, and burnout, resiliency is becoming an indispensable factor that can turn such threats into opportunities for growth, development, and sustainable adaptability to change.142

Resiliency is also a positive strength from which not only individual managers and employees can benefit, but also overall organizations can no longer afford to be without.143

Turbulence and instability have become the norm in today’s business environment, and only organizations that can rejuvenate their adaptational systems and bounce back to swiftly respond to their ever-changing environments are likely to improve or even survive. A strong and stable organizational mission, vision, and set of values create a sense of com- munity, direction, and purpose, enhancing a resilient corporate culture.144

Strategic planning, teamwork, decentralization, employee involvement, and open communication channels can be used to build a resilient organization that aligns organiza- tional, unit, and individual goals and objectives, and builds trust, commitment, and effec- tive organizational learning and adaptational systems.145 Counter to conventional wisdom, organizational rules and regulations that seemingly introduce rigidity and hinder creativity may actually help as effective structuring tools that foster an organization’s resilience in times of turbulence.146

Whether at the individual or organizational level, this resiliency dimension of positive organizational behavior may have the most potential impact on development and sustain- able performance in the current difficult times. Although theory-building and research on resiliency within the domain of positive organizational behavior is just getting started, the results to date are very encouraging.147

PSYCHOLOGICAL CAPITAL (PSYCAP)

Using positive psychology and POB in general, and the four criteria-meeting psychological resources of efficacy, optimism, hope, and resiliency, in particular, as the foundation and point of departure, as indicated in the introductory comments, Luthans and colleagues have theoretically148 and empirically149 demonstrated a higher-order core construct called psy- chological capital or PsyCap. This PsyCap goes beyond economic (what you have, physi- cal and financial assets), social (who you know, network of friends), and human capital (knowledge, skills, abilities, experience), and is defined as:

An individual’s positive psychological state of development that is characterized by: (1) having confidence (self-efficacy) to take on and put in the necessary effort to succeed at challenging tasks; (2) making a positive attribution (optimism) about succeeding now and in the future; (3) persevering toward goals and, when necessary, redirecting paths to goals (hope) in order to succeed; and (4) when beset by problems and adversity, sus- taining and bouncing back and even beyond (resiliency) to attain success.150Co

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

CHAPTER 7  POSITIVE OB AND PSYCHOLOGICAL CAPITAL 193

IAP PR

OO FS

Background and Research on PsyCap

Each of the four psychological constructs or resources that currently make up PsyCap are commonly found in the positive psychology literature, but, perhaps with the exception of efficacy, have received relatively little, if any, attention in the organization behavior field. Luthans and colleagues’ intent in the 2004 published articles151 was to label these four resources that best met the established criteria (theory, research, valid measurement, statelike, and performance impact) when combined as “psychological capital” because to their knowledge the term had not been used before. We subsequently found that Csikszent- mihalyi had mentioned the term a couple of times in a book152 that was not yet published when the first PsyCap articles were written and then came out a bit later in the journals. Also, a recent Google search found the term in an economics article on wages in 1997. As noted by Luthans and colleagues, “Our aim in labeling this as a type of ‘capital’ was also related to the idea that there is considerable attention in workplace research being given to economic, social, human and even intellectual capital, but to our knowledge the positive resources we associate with psychological capital had not yet received interest or inquiry. In using the term PsyCap, we suggested that there was a common conceptual thread run- ning through the four components characterized as “a positive appraisal of circumstances and probability for success based on motivated effort and perseverance.”153

We firmly believed from the beginning and reiterated in a point/counterpoint article154 that the most important “Point” we would like to make about positive organizational behavior in general and PsyCap in particular was the important role that research (i.e., an evidenced-based approach) must play. We noted at the outset that the value of positivity has been recognized through the years in psychology and even more so in the field of orga- nizational behavior, but in this new focus on POB and now PsyCap we wanted to make sure we were not associated with the non-researched positive, Pollyannaish approach too often found in the popular leadership and management literature. Thus, our first major research project was to validate a measure called the PsyCap Questionnaire or PCQ, and provide beginning empirical evidence that PsyCap was a second-order core construct accounting for more variance in employee performance and satisfaction than each of the four individual positive constructs that make it up.155 Also, in this comprehensive basic research study we found that PsyCap was relatively less stable over time than were recog- nized personality traits, but not as unstable as positive emotions, thus providing empirical evidence for PsyCap meeting the state-like criterion.156

After the background and theory-building presented in our book (Luthans, Youssef, and Avolio, Psychological Capital, Oxford, 2007) and the first major research project out- lined above, we (especially along with James Avey and Carolyn Youssef-Morgan) have a stream of research to refine and expand PsyCap. The following is representative of the evi- dence-based facets of PsyCap to date.

1. PsyCap was found to be positively related to desired organizational citizenship behaviors (covered in Chapter 6) and negatively to undesired organization cynicism, intentions to quit, and counterproductive workplace behaviors. Importantly, PsyCap predicted unique variance in these attitudes and behaviors over and above their demo- graphics (age, education, experience, etc.), core self-evaluation traits, personality traits, and person-organization and person-job fit.157

2. To determine if PsyCap held across cultures, an early preliminary study found that a sample of workers in Chinese factories (metallurgical products and shoe manufactur- ers) partially tested PsyCap related to their performance.158 A recent follow-up study with different samples of Chinese factory workers using the full PsyCap model and Co

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

194 PART 2  COGNITIVE PROCESS OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR

IAP PR

OO FS

PCQ measure replicated these findings.159 Such evidence becomes very important to developing countries such as China who need to leverage their still largely untapped wealth (in this case psychological capital) of their human (not just natural) resources for sustained growth and competitive advantage in the global economy.

3. Besides these studies relating PsyCap directly to attitudinal and performance out- comes, recent research indicates that PsyCap may also have implications for combat- ing stress (there is a negative relationship);160 help facilitate positive organizational change (PsyCap is related to positive emotions that are in turn related to their attitudes and behaviors161 relevant to organization change); mediate the relationship between supportive organizational climate and employee performance;162 and be related to both employee creativity163 and employee well-being over time.164

4. Finally, PsyCap is also playing a role in our research on authentic leadership (covered in Chapter 13).165 For example, one study found that a leader’s level of PsyCap impacted followers’ perceived trust and evaluations of leader effectiveness166 and another found a positive relationship between a leaders’ level of PsyCap and follow- ers’ level of PsyCap and performance.167 Other such research is at various stages and PsyCap also has an input into the theory building of positive leadership in general.168

PsyCap Development

Besides theory/research, valid measurement, and performance impact, a key distin- guishing feature is that PsyCap is state-like and open to development. As indicated, the first major research project provided empirical evidence of this state-like nature of PsyCap,169 and subsequent experimental research has indicated that PsyCap can indeed be developed in short (2 or 3 hours) training interventions.170 Importantly, since these were experimental designs, the randomly assigned control groups, who had the same characteristics but received a group dynamics training intervention instead of the PsyCap intervention, did not increase their level of PsyCap. In other words, armed with this evidence, we can be more confident that PsyCap can be developed in a short training intervention. There is also pre- liminary experimental evidence that such PsyCap training causes performance to improve.171

The PsyCap intervention (PCI) model is drawn from the positive (and clinical) psy- chology field for each of the four components and is shown in Figure 7.4 and a brief verbal summary description in Figure 7.5. As indicated, this training intervention has been con- ducted in one- to three-hour highly interactive, large and small face-to-face sessions and even online (downloading exercises, use of movie clips, etc.). Using widely recognized human resource management utility analysis techniques,172 on both publicly available cor- porate data and actual results from our studies, has yielded impressive results.173 For example, one such analysis indicated a 270 percent return on investment in developing the PsyCap of a sample of high-tech engineers (the dollar return minus the cost of the PsyCap training divided by the cost of the PsyCap training).174

The results of research on PsyCap so far seems to indicate a bright future for its role not only in positive organizational behavior, but also as an effective evidenced-based approach to leadership and employee development and performance management. Research to meet the call for longitudinal studies175 has recently provided needed further evidence of the state-like nature of PsyCap and its causal impact on objective perfor- mance.176 There is also just completed group-level research indicating that a work team’s “collective PsyCap” in the restaurant industry had significant relationships with service quality, customer satisfaction and unit revenues.177 Finally, there is a need to recognize Co

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

CHAPTER 7  POSITIVE OB AND PSYCHOLOGICAL CAPITAL 195

IAP PR

OO FS

other positive constructs besides those reviewed so far. Two of the more established are happiness/subjective well-being and emotional intelligence to which the rest of this chapter is devoted.

OTHER POSITIVE CONSTRUCTS

Although self-efficacy/confidence, optimism, hope, and resiliency have been determined to best meet the criteria established for inclusion in POB and PsyCap, as indicated, there are a number of other positive capacities that have potential for also being included.178

FIGURE 7.4. Psychological Capital Intervention (PCI)

Source: Adapted from F. Luthans, J. B. Avey, B. V. Avolio, S. M. Norman, and G. J. Combs, “Psychological Capital Development: Toward a Micro-Intervention,” Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 27, 2006, pp. 387–393.

Note: The PCI is intended to affect each state as well as the overall level of PsyCap for performance impact.

Developmental dimensions

Proximal outcomes

(Psychological Capital)

Distal outcomes

Goals and

pathways design

Implementing

obstacle planning

Hope

Building efficacy

/Confidence

Developing positive

expectancy

Experiencing

success/Modeling

others

Persuasion and

arousal

Realistic

optimism

Efficacy/

Confidence

Sustainable

veritable

performance

impact

Building

assets/Avoid risks

Resiliency

Affecting the

influence process

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

196 PART 2  COGNITIVE PROCESS OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR

IAP PR

OO FS

Examples would include constructs such as mindfulness, gratitude, forgiveness, cour- age, and even spirituality. However, the two positive constructs that have received the most attention over the years that are especially applicable to the workplace, would be happi- ness/subjective well-being (SWB) and emotional intelligence (EI).

Happiness or Subjective Well-Being (SWB)

Both with the general public and academic psychology, the importance of happiness has been widely recognized. However, similar to the distinction that positive psychology makes with the common usage of the term hope, positive psychological theory and research prefers to use the more precise and operationally defined term subjective well-

FIGURE 7.5. Summary Descriptions of the Psychological Capital Intervention (PCI) Model

Source: Adapted from F. Luthans, J. B. Avey, B. J. Avolio, S. M. Norman, and G. Combs “Psychological Capital Development: Toward a Micro-intervention,” Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 27, 2006, pp. 387–393.

Hope Development Hope was shown to be impacted and influenced by goals, pathways, and agency. Specifically, participants practiced generating work-related goals that were personally valuable and reasonably challenging and that included a clear beginning and end point. These goal characteristics generated sustained motivation, thus using goal components to increase agency. In addition, participants practiced generating multiple pathways to their work-related goals, and they identified obstacles that they should plan to encounter. After completing the exercise individually, each participant received feedback from the group on additional or alternative pathways that could be utilized and obstacles that could be expected. This practice increased each participant’s pathway-generating skill and ability to identify and plan for obstacles, thus reducing the negative impact of obstacles on agency.

Optimism Development Building efficacy in pathway generation and obstacle planning provided a foundation for the development of generally positive expectations. When participants were confident that they could identify and plan to overcome obstacles, their expectations of achieving their goals increased. Negative expectations that goals would not be accomplished were challenged as individuals began to see pathways to success and options on how to overcome obstacles. Group feedback increased positive expectations as individuals saw other group members also expect and plan for success. As participants’ expectations of success increased, optimism both individually and within the group increased.

Efficacy Development Participants practiced setting up stepwise techniques to accomplish goals. Then they explained each subgoal (each step) to the group, and they answered questions about how each was to be accomplished. Task mastery for designing and pursuing goals was thus attained. Vicarious learning took place as each participant saw peers work toward their goals and heard success stories about how goals were attained. This stage included emotional arousal, which was influenced by positive expectations of achieving goals as well as the social persuasion by the facilitator and group members by validating schedules and timelines, goals would be accomplished.

Resiliency Development

Resiliency was increased by building awareness of personal assets in the form of talents, skills, and social networks. Participants were asked what resources they could leverage to accomplish a given goal. After creating the list of resources, the facilitator and peer group members identified additional resources participants did not include on their list. Participants were then encouraged to leverage these resources as necessary. Similar to planning for obstacles, participants were encouraged to identify in advance obstacles that could impede their progress. Whereas in the hope exercise the focus was on making plans to overcome these obstacles, in this exercise, the focus was on making plans to avoid the obstacles or to prevent them from becoming legitimate concerns. Finally, the influence process was impacted by each participant becoming aware of his or her initial thoughts and feelings when faced with adversity (i.e., confidence or despair, etc.) and choosing to focus on resilient thoughts based on their assessment of their resources and options to overcome adversity.

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

CHAPTER 7  POSITIVE OB AND PSYCHOLOGICAL CAPITAL 197

IAP PR

OO FS

being, or simply SWB, instead of happiness. As Seligman and Csikszentmihalyi noted: “In practice, subjective well-being is a more scientific-sounding term for what people usually mean by happiness.”179 Sometimes the terms are used interchangeably, but SWB is usually considered broader and is defined as people’s affective (moods and emotions) and cogni- tive evaluations of their lives.180 Under this psychological meaning, it is not necessarily what in reality happens to people that determines their happiness or subjective well-being; but instead how they emotionally interpret and cognitively process what happens to them is the key. Like hope, SWB has not been in the mainstream of the organizational behavior literature, and although it does not meet the POB criteria quite as directly as self-efficacy, optimism, hope, and resiliency, it is included here as part of POB and there have been some work-related studies in the SWB research literature.

The Background on SWB

Positive psychologist Ed Diener’s work over the past three decades is most closely associated with SWB.181 As an important part of the positive psychology movement, SWB’s popularity and importance reflect societal trends valuing the good life and what makes people happy. Almost everyone seems to rate happiness over money (e.g., in a sur- vey of 7,204 college students in 42 countries, only 6 percent rated money more important than happiness).182 Academically, Diener and his research group made a break from sim- ple feelings of happiness and just the demographic characteristics that correlate with it. Most recently, the interest is more on the processes that underlie life satisfaction. Specifi- cally, there has been a shift away from who is happy (i.e., the demographics) to when and why people are happy and on what the processes are that influence SWB.183 Specifically, in their book Diener and Biswas-Diener provide the following evidence-based conclu- sions:184

1. Happiness is a process, not a place. “Happiness is an ongoing process that requires a way of experienced life and the world that includes positive attitudes, meaning, and spirituality. Being truly rich is as much about the attitudes within us as the circum- stances surrounding us.”185

2. There is actually an optimal level of happiness. Those “too happy” may perform less well at school and work, and even be less healthy (e.g., may ignore symptoms or required regiments).

3. Though not linear, happiness is clearly related to health and longevity, relationships, and effectiveness at work.

As to the last point on happiness leading to a longer life, a now famous study on the order of nuns who entered convents as young adults between 1931 and 1943 is very inter- esting and revealing about the power of happiness.186 The researchers analyzed the autobi- ographies of the entering nuns as to their level of positivity and happiness. Since these nuns had almost identical food, activities, and circumstances (i.e., the environment was basically held constant or under control over their lifetime), the researchers could draw conclusions about the impact the nuns’ level of happiness/positivity had on their length of life. Amaz- ingly, the most happy nuns (the top 25% in the ratings) lived on average ten years longer than the least (25%) happy nuns. To put these results in perspective, smoking a pack of cig- arettes a day is estimated on average to take three plus years off of one’s life, regular exer- cise accounts for three to five extra years, statin drug therapy used to lower cholesterol levels 2.5 to 3.5 years, and even regular church attendance may add two to three additional Co

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

198 PART 2  COGNITIVE PROCESS OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR

IAP PR

OO FS

years,187 but being happy and positive may on average have three times as much impact on longevity.

Besides the relationship with health/longevity and relationships (e.g., Diener and Biswas-Diener note that “many studies show that happy people are more blessed with good families, friends, and supportive relationships”188) of interest here is the impact that SWB has on work outcomes.

SWB in Work

Although not included in organizational behavior or HRM textbooks, SWB research- ers do give attention to work and the workplace as one of its domains, and there are a grow- ing number of studies. In particular, SWB has demonstrated a direct correlation to job satisfaction (covered in Chapter 5). A meta-analysis of 34 studies found an average correla- tion of .44 between job satisfaction and life satisfaction.189 To determine whether job sat- isfaction leads to SWB or vice versa (i.e., the correlation studies do not yield the direction of causality), Judge and colleagues used sophisticated statistical designs. It was found that SWB was a significant predictor of job satisfaction five years later, but not vice versa.190

Thus, it appears that people who are satisfied with their lives tend to find more satis- faction in their work.191

There is accumulating research evidence that happiness or SWB leads to desired out- comes beyond just job satisfaction in the workplace. Not only have happy employees been found to be more effective and productive,192 but after a search of the research literature it was also concluded that “on average, happy workers make more money, receive more pro- motions and better supervisor ratings, and are better citizens at work.”193 An increasing number of organizations are recognizing and using this value of happiness with their employees and customers. Organizations such as Toyota, the American Red Cross, Sprint Nextel, and David’s Bridal have launched training programs for their employees based on happiness principles. For example, at David’s, the largest chain of bridal stores, salespeo- ple have been taught techniques such as focusing on things that bring them joy when deal- ing with stressed-out, anxious brides-to-be. Also, increasingly market research in general is focusing on how products and services can appeal to customers’ happiness.

Similar to PsyCap, happiness (SWB) is open to change and development. Although there is definitely a set point (i.e., approximately the 50 percent “hard-wiring” noted at the beginning of the chapter), the role of intentional control and effective developmental guidelines are becoming recognized. As Lyubomirsky points out, “intentional, effortful activities have a powerful effect on how happy we are, over and above the effects of our set points and the circumstances in which we find ourselves.”194 She then prescribes the fol- lowing guidelines and specific activities for developing and sustaining happiness:195

1. Practicing gratitude and positive thinking (expressing gratitude, cultivating optimism, and avoiding overthinking and social comparison);

2. Investing in social connections (practicing acts of kindness and nurturing social rela- tionships);

3. Managing stress, hardship, and trauma (developing strategies for coping, learning to forgive);

4. Living in the present (increasing flow experiences, savoring life’s joys); 5. Committing to your goals; 6. Taking care of your body and soul (practicing religion and spirituality, meditation,

physical exercise, and acting like a happy person).Co py ri gh t © 2 01 5. I nf or ma ti on A ge P ub li sh in g. A ll r ig ht s re se rv ed . Ma y no t be r ep ro du ce d in a ny f or m wi th ou t pe rm is si on f ro m th e pu bl is he r, e xc ep t fa ir u se s pe rm it te d un de r

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

CHAPTER 7  POSITIVE OB AND PSYCHOLOGICAL CAPITAL 199

IAP PR

OO FS

Although these are all very general, Lyubomirsky provides details on how to do each, and importantly, supporting research evidence that they work. For example, on the last point of “acting like a happy person,” citing published research196 she notes, “Remarkably, pre- tending that you’re happy—smiling, engaged, mimicking energy and enthusiasm—not only can earn you some of the benefits of happiness (returned smiles, strengthened friend- ships, successes at work and school) but can actually make you happier.”197 The future of the role that happiness may play in the workplace seems very bright.

Emotional Intelligence (EI)

Emotional intelligence (EI) predates the emergence of POB and is more widely known in popular management circles. However, EI has to date not been featured as a major part of POB because it has not yet met the criteria of POB.198 In particular, the major shortcom- ing in meeting the POB criteria has been the limited research support for a valid measure of EI and its relationship with performance outcomes. However, this is beginning to change199 and is why it is included here. This concluding section of the chapter first exam- ines its two conceptual components: emotion and intelligence. After these two important psychological constructs are examined separately, the synergy created by combining them into emotional intelligence becomes a potentially powerful positively oriented construct for the understanding and application approach to the study and application of organiza- tional behavior.

The Role of Emotion

Over the years, emotion has been a major variable in psychology, and, compared to the other POB constructs, has received relatively more attention in the organizational behavior field.200 Similar to other psychological constructs, the exact definition and meaning of emotion are not totally agreed upon. However, most psychologists would agree that the best one word to describe emotion would be how a person feels about something. These emotional feelings are directed at someone or something, are not as broad as the meanings of the term affect (as used in the discussion of positive and negative affect in Chapter 5 on personality), and are more intense and specific than the definitions of the term mood. The specific differences between emotion, affect, and mood are summarized as follows:

Emotions are reactions to an object, not a trait. They’re object specific. You show your emotions when you’re “happy about something, angry at someone, afraid of some- thing.” Moods, on the other hand, aren’t directed at an object. Emotions can turn into moods when you lose focus on the contextual object. So when a work colleague criti- cizes you for the way you spoke to a client, you might become angry at him [emotion]. But later in the day, you might find yourself just generally dispirited. This affective state describes a mood.201

Emotional Processing

How do emotional reactions come about, and what are the inputs into emotional pro- cessing? A very simple, layperson’s explanation of the process is that emotional feelings are in contrast with rational thinking. Put into popular terms, emotions come from the “heart” whereas rational thinking comes from the “head.” For example, a young manager given a choice between two assignments may undergo the following cognitive processing: Co

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

200 PART 2  COGNITIVE PROCESS OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR

IAP PR

OO FS

“my ‘head’ tells me to get involved with Project A because it has the best chance of suc- ceeding and helping my career, but my ‘heart’ says that Project B will be more fun, I like the people better, and I can take more pride in any results we achieve.” Obviously, such emotions often win out over rational thinking in what people decide, do, or how they behave.

Traditionally in psychology, both personality traits (e.g., extraversion/neuroticism or conscientiousness) and mood states (either positive or negative) have separate influences or emotional processing. More recently, however, to represent the more realistic complex- ity involved, it is suggested that: (1) mood states interact with individual differences in emotion-relevant personality traits to influence emotional processing, and/or (2) personal- ity traits predispose individuals to certain mood states, which then influence emotional pro- cessing.202

In other words, for (1) above, someone in a positive mood may have to have (or will be enhanced by) a personality trait such as conscientiousness in order to experience emo- tional happiness. For (2) above, the individual may have to have the personality trait such as extraversion in order to get into a positive mood state. This positive mood in turn will lead the person to experience emotional happiness. These moderation and meditation mod- els of emotional processing help resolve some of the inconsistencies that have been found in the research using the separate influences of moods and personality traits for emo- tions.203

Types of Emotions

Like the meaning of emotion, there is also not total agreement on the primary types of emotions. Table 7.2 summarizes the primary emotions and their descriptors most often mentioned in the psychology literature. Importantly, each of these emotions are very com- mon in the workplace. For example:

 Juan has grown to love his paramedic emergency team as they solve one life-threaten- ing crisis after another.

 Mary feels happy when her boss comments in front of the sales team that she just landed the biggest contract of the quarter.

 Jami is surprised to hear that the firm’s stock price dropped two and one-half points today.

 George fears the new technological process that he believes may replace him.  Trent feels sad for Alison because she does more than her share of the work, but gets no

recognition from the supervisor.  Lane is angry because he was passed over for promotion for the second time.  Mark is disgusted with the favoritism shown to his colleague Steve when the regional

sales manager assigns territories.  Kent has a sense of shame for claiming expense reimbursement for a trip he did not

take.

As shown by the preceding representative examples, the whole range of emotions are found in the workplace. In addition, it is probably not an exaggeration to state that most personal and many managerial/organizational decisions are based on emotional processes rather than rational thought processes. For example, career decisions are often based on emotions of happiness and affection or even fear, rather than on what is rationally best for one’s career.204 In fact, management decisions are often driven by negative emotions such Co

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

CHAPTER 7  POSITIVE OB AND PSYCHOLOGICAL CAPITAL 201

IAP PR

OO FS

as fear or anger rather than marginal costs, return on investment, or other criteria that the traditional rational economic/finance models would suggest.205 By the same token, there is important basic research coming from the positive psychology movement that the capacity to experience positive emotions may be a fundamental human strength central to the study of human flourishing,206 and positive emotions can also be applied to upward spirals in today’s organizations.207 For example, one of the most recognized breakthroughs in posi- tive psychology that has particular relevance and understanding for POB and PsyCap is Barbara Fredrickson’s “Broaden and Build” theory.208 Supported by considerable research evidence,209 this theory says that experiencing positive emotions broadens (i.e., opens peo- ple’s hearts and minds) and builds (i.e., allows people to develop new skills, relationships, knowledge and to become more effective overall).

Emotional Categories and Continuum

Besides identifying the different types of emotions, as shown in Table 7.2, they can be put into positive and negative categories. Whether a person feels a positive or negative emotion in the workplace has a lot to do with goal congruence (positive) or goal incongru- ence (negative).210 For example, if salespeople meet or exceed their quota, they feel happy, are relieved, and like their customers, but if they fall short they may feel sad, disgusted, guilty, anxious and may blame or be angry with their boss and/or customers.

Emotions can also be conceptualized along a continuum. One classic emotional con- tinuum is the following:211

Happiness—Surprise—Fear—Sadness—Anger—Disgust

Table 7.2 is arranged in the same order except with the positive extreme of love/affection on the front end and the negative extreme of shame on the back end.

The key is that the closer the primary emotions are related to one another, the more dif- ficult it is for others to distinguish between them when expressed. For example, almost everyone can readily distinguish the facial expressions of positive versus negative catego- ries of emotion, but may not readily interpret the differences within categories (e.g.,

TABLE 7.2. Types of Emotions

Positive Primary Emotions Other Descriptors Love/affection Acceptance, adoration, longing, devotion, infatuation

Happiness/joy Cheerfulness, contentment, bliss, delight, amusement, enjoyment, enthrallment, thrill, euphoria, zest

Surprise Amazement, wonder, astonishment, shock

Negative Primary Emotions Other Descriptors

Fear Anxiety, alarm, apprehension, concern, qualm, dread, fright, terror

Sadness Grief, disappointment, sorrow, gloom, despair, suffering, dejection

Anger Outrage, exasperation, wrath, indignation, hostility, irritability

Disgust Contempt, disdain, abhorrence, revulsion, distaste

Shame Guilt, remorse, regret, embarrassment, humiliation

Source: Adapted from H. M. Weiss and R. Cropanzano, “Affective Events Theory,” in B. M. Staw and L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in Organizational Behavior, Vol. 18, JAI Press, Greenwich, Conn., 1996, pp. 20–22 and Daniel Goleman, Emotional Intelligence, Bantam Books, New York, 1995, pp. 289–290.

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

202 PART 2  COGNITIVE PROCESS OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR

IAP PR

OO FS

between happiness and surprise or anger and disgust). Yet, based on the concept of emo- tional labor212 which refers to service personnel required to express false, not natural expression, positive emotions such as smiling, most seasoned customers can easily pick up the difference. For example most “Frequent Flyers” can tell the difference between a gen- uine, natural smile and “Have a nice day!” and a forced, false smile and insincere happy comment from an angry or disgusted reservationist or flight attendant. The nonverbal facial cues and tone of voice are usually a loud and clear indication of what real emotions are being expressed. Organizational communication research indicates that positive emotions, not just negative emotions, need to be displayed in prevailing socially acceptable ways, and the appropriate display of negative emotions typically means masking those emotions,213 that is, experience emotional labor.

Emotional labor not only has dysfunctional consequences for the employees doing it (e.g., stress and burnout),214 but also detracts from effective customer service. World-class customer service firms such as Southwest Airlines recognize this by hiring only those with very positive personalities. As Herb Kelleher, the founder of Southwest, declared: “We want people who can do things well with laughter and grace.”215 By putting humor and happiness at the top of its hiring criteria, Southwest knows, and the academic literature would support,216 that its people will tend to express positive, genuine emotions (not emo- tional labor) in all their encounters with customers and coworkers.

Most academics and practicing managers would agree with the systematic assessment that emotions permeate all of organizational life,217 but the reason emotions are singled out for special attention in this chapter is the popularity of emotional intelligence and its poten- tial relevance to the study and application to positive organizational behavior. Emotionally intelligent people not only can read the expressed emotions of other people, but also have the maturity to hold their felt emotions in check and not display undesirable, immature neg- ative emotions such as anger or disgust. This distinction between felt and displayed emo- tions,218 as well as the rest of the above discussion on the meaning, cognitive processing, and types/categories/continuum of emotions, when combined with the next section on intelligence, serve as the foundation and point of departure for the role that emotional intel- ligence may be able to play in positive organizational behavior.

The Role of Intelligence

Intelligence has played a major role in psychology but a very minor role in organiza- tional behavior. About a hundred years ago, Alfred Binet created a written test to measure the “intelligence quotient” or IQ of grade school children in Paris. Eventually the U.S. Army used the test with recruits in World War I, and then it was widely used in schools and businesses. IQ was assumed to be fixed at birth and went largely unchallenged as a predic- tor of school, job, and life success. However, just as in personality (covered in Chapter 5), in recent years there has been a renewed nurture versus nature debate on intelligence and the recognition of multiple intelligences.

Nature Versus Nurture Intelligence

Again, similar to personality (see Chapter 5), recent breakthroughs in genetic and neu- roscience research seem to provide added support for the nature (biological) argument of intelligence. For example, one study suggested that a variation in the gene for IGF2R, a receptor for a human growth factor, was associated with extremely high SAT scores, and Co

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

CHAPTER 7  POSITIVE OB AND PSYCHOLOGICAL CAPITAL 203

IAP PR

OO FS

other studies have shown that IQ scores are correlated with the amount of gray matter in certain brain regions.219 These types of findings receive a lot of popular press coverage, but often ignored are other facts such as the identified gene accounted for only about 2 per- cent of the variance in the SAT scores and that a follow-up study failed to even replicate the initial findings.220

On the nurture, developmental side of intelligence, there are also some recent interest- ing findings of support. For example, there is some theory and research suggesting that a “stereotype threat” may help explain the difference in average IQ scores between groups generalized on the basis of race, gender, age, and other social distinctions.221 One study, for instance, found that television commercials that depict stereotypical female behavior impair women’s performance on math tests and reduce their interest in pursuing quantita- tive careers.222 Also, cross-cultural research is clearly indicating that how intelligence is conceptualized and measured depends on learned cultural values and ways of thinking. For example, it has been found that people in Western cultures view intelligence as a means for individuals to devise categories and to engage in rational debate, while those in Eastern cultures see it as a way for members of a community to recognize contradiction and com- plexity.223 Moreover, “Many psychologists believe that the idea that a test can be com- pletely absent of cultural bias—a recurrent hope of test developers in the twentieth century—is contradicted by the weight of the evidence.”224

Recognition of Multiple Intelligences

The impetus for an expanded and positive perspective of intelligence in psychology and education is mostly attributed to Howard Gardner. Over 30 years ago he published his breakthrough book, Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences.225 Binet’s IQ basically measured two relatively narrow dimensions: mathematical/logical and verbal/ linguistic. As shown in Table 7.3, Gardner recognized these two plus initially five others. In developing these seven multiple intelligences or MIs, he found that intelligence was not entirely genetic and fixed at birth, but instead it could be nurtured and grown.

To be considered an intelligence under Gardner’s well-known multiple approach, the following three criteria must be met: (1) measurable, (2) valued by the person’s culture, and (3) a strength that the person defaulted to when challenged to be creative or solve a problem. Gardner is careful to point out that his identified intelligences are: (1) a new kind of construct and should not be confused with a domain or discipline; (2) a capacity with component processes and should not be equated with a learning style, cognitive style, or working style; and (3) based wholly on empirical evidence that could be revised or added to on the basis of new empirical findings.226 Importantly, the MIs are equal in importance and most people are strong in three or four but, because they are not fixed, there is always room for improvement in the others.

This expanded view of intelligence has had a dramatic impact on psychology, and many educators have used MI as a new paradigm for schools and classrooms.227 However, there have to date only been a very few applications of MI in the business world, mainly in training workshops such as at 3M, Coseco Insurance, and Northeast Utilities Service. MI has only recently been acknowledged in the organizational behavior literature. However, with the recent addition of emotional intelligence or EI to Gardner’s original seven (see Table 7.3), the recognition and theoretical foundation provided by Gardner’s work becomes relevant and necessary to the understanding and application of EI in the work- place.Co

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

204 PART 2  COGNITIVE PROCESS OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR

IAP PR

OO FS

Intelligence as Cognitive Mental Ability

Although the field of organizational behavior and human resource management has generally ignored multiple intelligences, there has been recognition and attention given over the years to the narrower concept of cognitive mental abilities. Applied to the work- place, ability refers to the aptitudes and learned capabilities needed to successfully accom- plish a task. Both physical (e.g., manual dexterity, hand-eye coordination and body strength, stamina, and flexibility) and mental, intellectual, or cognitive abilities are recog- nized for jobs. However, with some obvious exceptions of jobs requiring considerable physical activity (e.g., in construction, manufacturing, repair services, sports or health clubs), the vast majority of jobs in today’s workplace are concerned more with cognitive abilities.

Although some unique tasks require specific mental abilities (e.g., accounting tasks require numerical mental ability), most jobs, including those of an accountant or interior designer, require general mental ability (GMA). Over the years, psychologists have pro- posed numerous mental abilities, but those most widely recognized as underlying effective performance in jobs are summarized in Table 7.4

Importantly, there is considerable research evidence that GMA tests are a good per- sonnel selection and job training program predictor of overall job performance. Specifi-

TABLE 7.3. Gardner’s Multiple Intelligences

Original Intelligences Characteristics Famous Examples 1. Logical/mathematical Processes analytically, calculates, quantifies Scientist Albert Einstein

2. Verbal/linguistic Thoughts through words, uses words to nurture Consultant Tom Peters

3. Interpersonal Understands others, processes through interaction, empathizes, humor

Entertainer Oprah Winfrey

4. Intrapersonal Thinks in quiet, likes to be alone, goal oriented, independent, perseveres

Business Tycoon Howard Hughes

5. Visual/spatial Uses mental models, thinks three dimensionally, pictures how to get places or solve problems

Architect Frank Lloyd Wright

6. Musical Sensitivity to pitch, melody, rhythm, found in both performers and listeners

Composer Wolfgang Mozart

7. Bodily/kinesthetic Physical movement, involves whole body, processes by jumping or dancing

Basketball Player Michael Jordan

“New” Intelligences Characteristics Famous Examples 8. Naturalist Needs to be with/survive in nature, strength in categorization in

nature or urban world Singer John Denver

9. Existential Not religion per se, knows why he or she is here, personal mission

Civil Rights Leader Martin Luther King

10. Emotional Emotionally mature, recognizes own anger, reacts to emotions of self and others

Pacifist Leader Mohandas Gandhi

Source: Adapted from Lou Russell, The Accelerated Learning Fieldbook, Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer, San Francisco, 1999, pp. 60–70. For the original work see: Howard Gardner, Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences, Basic Books, New York, 1983 and Howard Gard- ner, “Are There Additional Intelligences? The Case for Naturalist, Spiritual and Existential Intelligences,” Unpublished White Paper, 1996. It should be noted that emotional intelligence is not necessarily recognized as an MI by Gardner.

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

CHAPTER 7  POSITIVE OB AND PSYCHOLOGICAL CAPITAL 205

IAP PR

OO FS

cally, Schmidt and Hunter summarized 85 years of research and based on metaanalytic findings concluded that the highest validities for predicting job performance were: (1) GMA plus a work sample test; (2) GMA plus an integrity test; and (3) GMA plus a struc- tured interview.228 An additional advantage of (2) and (3) is that they can be highly pred- icative for both entry-level selection and selection of experienced employees. One further refinement is that GMA predictive validity is higher for more-complex jobs and lower for less-complex jobs.

Emotional Intelligence

As a point of departure for the important role that emotions have played in psychology over the years and Gardner’s recognition of multiple intelligences has been the recent aca- demic interest and popular appeal of emotional intelligence. Although its roots are usually considered to go back many years to what was called social intelligence,229 at the begin- ning of the ’90s psychologists Peter Salovey and John Mayer are usually given credit for having the first comprehensive theory and definition of emotional intelligence. Taking off from a foundation in the theory of emotion and multiple intelligence, Salovey and Mayer defined emotional intelligence as “the subset of social intelligence that involves the ability to monitor one’s own and others’ feelings and emotions, to discriminate among them, and to use this information to guide one’s thinking and actions.”230 However, it was the publi- cation of the 1995 best-selling book Emotional Intelligence by psychologist/journalist Daniel Goleman that greatly popularized the construct. He defines emotional intelligence or EI as

The capacity for recognizing our own feelings and those of others, for motivating our- selves, and for managing emotions well in ourselves and in our relationships.231

Table 7.5 summarizes the major EI dimensions that Goleman has determined to have the most relevant and biggest impact on understanding behavior in the workplace.

TABLE 7.4. Cognitive Abilities Related to Job Performance

Mental Ability Characteristics of Ability Examples of Job Task Verbal comprehension

Comprehend what is read or heard, understand what words mean and the relationships to one another

Supervisors following organization policy on sexual harassment

Numerical Make fast and accurate arithmetic computations Auto salespeople calculating the sales tax and their commission

Spatial visualization

Perceive spatial patterns, imagine how an object would look if position in space were changed

A builder describing a change to a customer

Perceptual speed Quickly identify visual similarities and differences, carry out tasks needing visual perception

A quality control engineer noting a product defect

Memory Rote memory, retain and recall past incidents/experiences A knowledge manager drawing from past experiences in the firm to advise a newly formed project team

Inductive reasoning

Identify logical sequence from specific to general A scientist in the research department drawing from several independent studies to design an innovative product

Source: Adapted from M. D. Dunnette, “Aptitudes, Abilities, and Skills,” in M. D. Dunnette (Ed.), Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Rand McNally, Skokie Ill., 1976, pp. 478–483.

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

206 PART 2  COGNITIVE PROCESS OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR

IAP PR

OO FS

As previously indicated, the major problem of EI not being considered to be a major construct of POB is that two streams have seemed to develop for EI. One is a very popular, applications-only approach stimulated and largely taken from Goleman’s best-selling book. Unfortunately, this applications approach has been judged to have questionable the- ory, research, and carefully developed measures applied to it232 as is being done more in the other stream in EI by theory- and research-oriented social psychologists such as Salovey and Mayer,233 and more recently in the organizational behavior field.234 As Mayer observed, “If you’re going to take the term ‘emotional intelligence’ seriously as an intelligence, it’s got to be about how one reasons about emotions and also about how emo- tions help reasoning, and most of the field does not do that.”235 However, even though the quality of theory, research, and measures to date is mixed, since Goleman did base his pop- ular book on some theory and research and progress seems being made to refine the con- struct and its measures,236 and its application in the field of organizational behavior (e.g., a study found that employees’ EI was related to performance and satisfaction237), it is included here in the discussion of other positive constructs.

Importantly, Goleman, like Howard Gardner’s recognition of multiple intelligences before him, makes a clear distinction between IQ and EI. The EI (or sometimes called EQ as a takeoff from IQ) literature carefully points out that the two constructs are certainly not the same but also not necessarily opposite from one another. As one summary of the anal- ysis of IQ and EQ notes,

Some people are blessed with a lot of both, some with little of either. What researchers have been trying to understand is how they complement each other; how one’s ability to handle stress for instance, affects the ability to concentrate and put intelligence to use.238

Similar to the influence that neural activity and the brain play in IQ, Goleman also believes the brain pathways may help process EI. However, whereas IQ mostly is associ-

TABLE 7.5. Goleman’s Dimensions of Emotional Intelligence in the Workplace

EI Dimensions Characteristics Workplace Example

Self-awareness Self-understanding; knowledge of true feelings at the moment

John recognizes that he is angry so he will wait to cool down and gather more information before making an important personnel decision.

Self-management Handle one’s emotions to facilitate rather than hinder the task at hand; shake off negative emotions and get back on constructive track for problem solution

Amber holds back her impulse to become visibly upset and raise her voice at the customer’s unfair complaint and tries to get more facts of what happened.

Self-motivation Stay the course toward desired goal; overcome negative emotional impulses and delay gratification to attain the desired outcome

Pat persisted to successful project completion in spite of the many frustrations from the lack of resources and top management support.

Empathy Understand and be sensitive to the feelings of others; being able to sense what others feel and want

Because the head of the team knew her members were mentally if not physically exhausted, she took everyone bowling during an afternoon break and bought refreshments.

Social skills The ability to read social situations; smooth in interacting with others and forming networks; able to guide others’ emotions and the way they act

Jeremy could tell from the nonverbal cues from his staff members that they were not buying into the new policy being presented, so after the meeting he visited with each of them to explain how they will all benefit.

Source: Adapted from Daniel Goleman, Emotional Intelligence, Bantam Books, New York, 1995, pp. 43–44, and Daniel Goleman, Work- ing with Emotional Intelligence, Bantam Books, New York, 1998, p. 318.

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

CHAPTER 7  POSITIVE OB AND PSYCHOLOGICAL CAPITAL 207

IAP PR

OO FS

ated with the more recent (on the thousands-of-years-old evolutionary chain) neocortex (the thinking brain) located near the top of the brain, EI draws from the very early (in the evolution of the brain) inner sub-cortex more associated with emotional impulses. Impor- tantly, however, unlike IQ, which has traditionally been considered largely inherited and fixed, Goleman also recognizes the role that personality and behavioral theories play in EI. Goleman provides a very comprehensive explanatory foundation for EI that includes the brain, but also suggests that learning seems to play an important role in EI. He states in his original book that

Our genetic heritage endows each of us with a series of emotional set points that deter- mines our temperament. But the brain circuitry involved is extraordinarily malleable; temperament is not destiny. The emotional lessons we learn as children at home and at school shape the emotional circuits, making us more adept—or inept—at the basics of emotional intelligence.239

In the second book, Working with Emotional Intelligence, he goes much further on the role of learning and the development of EI in maturing adults:

Our level of emotional intelligence is not fixed genetically, nor does it develop only in early childhood. Unlike IQ, which changes little after our teen years, emotional intelli- gence seems to be largely learned, and it continues to develop as we go through life and learn from our experiences—our competence in it can keep growing.… There is an old- fashioned word for this growth in emotional intelligence: maturity.240

These seeming contradictions between the roles of genetic endowment, the brain, per- sonality traits (that are pretty well set, see Chapter 5), and learning/development have drawn some criticism of Goleman’s approach to EI.241 However, there is recent research evidence that EI competencies can be developed in students working toward their masters of business administration.242 Goleman also cites “studies that have tracked people’s level of emotional intelligence through the years show that people get better and better in these capabilities as they grow more adept at handling their empathy and social adroitness.”243 In total, even though there remains some controversy and potential problems with the con- cept and operationalization of EI, it has such intuitive appeal and growing evidence for suc- cessful application to the workplace that it deserves further attention and research in the future of POB.

SUMMARY

This chapter presents the focus on positive organizational behavior (POB) and psycholog- ical capital (PsyCap). It is based on positive psychology—looking for strengths and what is right with people instead of concentrating on dysfunctions and what is wrong with peo- ple. Besides the positivity, specific criteria must be met to be included in POB: (1) based on theory and research, (2) valid measures, (3) statelike and open to development, and (4) managed for performance improvement. The psychological capacities (or capital) that to date best meet these POB criteria and are covered in this chapter are efficacy, optimism, hope, resiliency, and, when combined, form the core construct of psychological capital or PsyCap. The other positive constructs covered include happiness/SWB, emotions, intelli- gence, and emotional intelligence (EI).

Relatively most of the attention in the chapter is devoted to the theory, research, and application of the positive resource self-efficacy or confidence and overall psychological Co

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

208 PART 2  COGNITIVE PROCESS OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR

IAP PR

OO FS

capital (PsyCap). Having the best fit with the POB criteria, social cognitive theory posits that environmental, behavioral, and personal cognitive dimensions are in interaction, and the self-reflective human capacity serves as the major theoretical underpinning of self-effi- cacy. Defined as the belief one has in his or her abilities to mobilize the motivation, cogni- tive resources, and courses of action necessary to successfully execute a specific task within a given context, self-efficacy is a state, not a trait. Through this theory building and extensive research of Bandura, four major sources of information to cognitively determine self-efficacy have been identified. These are, in order of importance, mastery experiences or performance attainments, vicarious experience or modeling, social persuasion, and physiological or psychological (emotional) arousal. Each of these can be used in training and development to enhance self-efficacy.

Self-efficacy started off as a clinical technique to change client behavior, but soon was successfully applied to many other health, educational, and athletic pursuits. Unlike the other POB constructs, there is also a considerable research-derived body of knowledge on the strong positive relationship between self-efficacy and work-related performance. The Stajkovic and Luthans meta-analysis (114 studies, 21,616 subjects) found a highly signifi- cant .38 weighted average correlation that transforms to an impressive 28 percent gain in performance (higher than the results of meta-analyses of other popular organizational behavior constructs and techniques). With such substantial theory and research backup, there are important implications for effective practical applications of self-efficacy. Besides training and development to enhance self-efficacy and thus help the transfer of training to the job and increase performance, the measurement of self-efficacy could be used in the selection process. Self-efficacy can also be used to make job design, goal set- ting, teams, and stress management more effective.

Besides efficacy/confidence, the other positive capacities that have been determined to best meet the POB criteria are optimism, hope, and resiliency. Although optimism has been around for a long time and is associated with many positive things in life, its use in a psy- chological and POB capacity applicable to the workplace is relatively recent. Both moti- vated and motivating, optimism has some evidence not only of being part of human nature, but also more support for contributing to individual differences. The pioneering work of Seligman treats optimism in terms of cognitively determined expectancies and causal attri- butions (i.e., explanatory style). Specifically, pessimists make internal, stable, and global attributions of bad events, whereas optimists make external, unstable, and specific attribu- tions. Although there can be some dysfunctional consequences such as stress from pursu- ing unattainable goals and there are some cases where a mild pessimist may be needed in organizations (e.g., safety engineer or accountant), in general, realistic optimism is very beneficial in life and in the workplace. Research is just starting, but evidence from Selig- man’s widely recognized extensive work with sales agents at Metropolitan Life and more recent studies in POB indicate the very positive impact that optimism can have on human performance in organizations.

Besides optimism, the closely related but conceptually and empirically distinct con- struct of hope also meets the POB criteria. As used in psychology and its potential applica- bility to organizational behavior, hope is more than the sunny advice of “hope for the best.” Although both Goleman and Seligman talk about hope in relation to EI and optimism respectively, the work of Snyder on hope is most recognized in positive psychology. He defines hope not only in terms of the person’s determination that goals can be achieved, but also as the beliefs that successful plans can be formulated, pathways identified, and self- motivation exhibited in order to attain the goals. In simple terms, this meaning of hope includes both the willpower (agency) and the “waypower” (the alternate pathways). There Co

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

CHAPTER 7  POSITIVE OB AND PSYCHOLOGICAL CAPITAL 209

IAP PR

OO FS

has been such strong evidence of the relationship between hope and academic, athletic, and mental/physical health positive outcomes that the carryover to the workplace is also being demonstrated by initial research in POB and seems very promising for the future.

The fourth major recognized positive capacity in POB is resiliency. Considerably dif- ferent from the other POB variables, resiliency tends to be more reactive than proactive. Also with roots in clinical psychology, especially focused on at-risk children and adoles- cents, it has been characterized by positive adaptation to significant adversity or risk. In POB it is presented as the positive capacity to rebound or bounce back from adverse or even very good events. In recent years, such a resilient capacity is very relevant and desir- able at the employee, manager, team, and organizational levels. Although studies in POB are just beginning, there appears to be unlimited potential for developing and managing resiliency as the environment becomes ever more uncertain and turbulent.

When the four resources are combined into PsyCap, there is both theory and research evidence that it is a higher-order, core construct. A valid measure of PsyCap (the PCQ) has been developed and there is growing evidence that it is related to not only performance and job satisfaction, but to other desirable outcomes such as combating stress, facilitating pos- itive organizational change, mediating the relationship between supportive organizational climate and employee performance, both employee creativity and well-being and at the team level service quality, customer satisfaction and unit revenues. There is initial evi- dence that PsyCap is also related to effective leadership and desired college student out- comes. Finally, being state-like, research has demonstrated that PsyCap can be developed in relatively short training interventions with causal impact on performance and yields a very high return on the investment in PsyCap development.

Because of meeting the established criteria, the lion’s share of attention in this chapter has been devoted to the four positive psychological resource states of efficacy, optimism, hope, resiliency and overall PsyCap. Obviously, there are other positive constructs that have been and will be important to POB. The other positive constructs covered in this chapter are happiness or what some academics prefer to call subjective well-being or SWB and then emotions, intelligence, and when combined, emotional intelligence (EI). In par- ticular, there have been some work-related studies in the SWB research literature. For example, the work of Diener is very relevant to POB. As with the other positive constructs in this chapter, he is concerned with the underlying processes that influence life satisfac- tion, satisfaction with important domains (including work satisfaction). In particular, Die- ner and Biswas-Diener point out that happiness is a process (not a place), has an optimal (not linear) level, and is related to health and longevity (the famous nun’s study results), relationships and work. Like PsyCap, there is evidence that happiness is related to desired outcomes in the workplace (and in life) and can be developed.

Emotional intelligence or simply EI is first discussed in terms of its major components of emotion (feelings) and intelligence. Intelligence in particular has played a relatively minor role in organizational behavior. In particular, the multiple intelligences, and specif- ically emotional intelligence, are now receiving attention. Broadly popularized by Gole- man, EI is the capacity for understanding and managing one’s own and others’ emotions. Although there is still some controversy surrounding EI, the popularity, intuitive appeal, and growing supportive research on EI cannot be denied. There is increasing evidence that the characteristics of EI (e.g., self-awareness, self-motivation, empathy, and social skills) may be better than traditional IQ in predicting future life success, and in the future with continued theory-building and research may become a more accepted evidence-based pos- itive construct in POB.Co

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

210 PART 2  COGNITIVE PROCESS OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR

IAP PR

OO FS

QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION AND REVIEW

1. How does positive psychology differ from regular psychology? 2. What are the four criteria for positive organizational behavior? How do the various

POB constructs measure up to these criteria? 3. What is self-efficacy? Why is it important to make the distinction that self-efficacy is

a state rather than a trait? What implications does this have for the workplace? 4. Defend or argue against the statement that the characteristics of a highly efficacious

employee may be “the best profile of a high performer.” Describe this profile and give an example of this in the workplace.

5. What are the four widely recognized sources of self-efficacy? How could each be used to enhance employee efficacy to increase performance?

6. How does optimism in positive psychology go beyond the old “power of positive thinking”? Give an example of where “little optimism” may be different from “big optimism.” Besides sales, give an example of where optimism may be very beneficial to work performance.

7. In positive psychology, how does the concept of hope go beyond “sunny advice”? Why may hope be particularly relevant to entrepreneurship and international human resource management?

8. Why is resiliency so important in recent times? Give a real example. 9. What is psychological capital (PsyCap)? Briefly summarize the research to date on

PsyCap and why might this provide competitive advantage to an organization? 10. What is subjective well-being (SWB)? What were some of the defining characteris-

tics about happiness and how can it be developed and attained? 11. What is an emotion? How do emotions differ from moods? Identify some primary

emotions, and give examples of how they may be expressed in the workplace. 12. What are Gardner’s original seven intelligences? Which two are the most closely

associated with traditional IQ? What are the three “new” intelligences? Which of the 10 do you feel are most relevant and important to an effective manager?

13. Very simply, what is emotional intelligence (EI)? What are the major dimensions of EI that are particularly relevant to the workplace? Why do you think EI may be more important than IQ for an effective manager?

14. Of the POB constructs that are covered in the chapter, which one do you think has the most potential for impacting employee performance? Why?

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

CHAPTER 7  POSITIVE OB AND PSYCHOLOGICAL CAPITAL 211

IAP PR

OO FS

Both the popular and academic press proclaim how wonderful advanced technology is for today’s organizations. For example, B2B (busi- ness to business) processes can dramatically cut a firm’s costs. The other side, the dark side of this high-tech revolution, however, is seldom men- tioned. Although young employees who grew up with computers in their schools and homes may be adaptable and open to IT changes in the work- place, and certainly some middle-age and older employees at all levels welcome and are excited by the IT challenges, a significant number of today’s employees of all ages are not only resis- tant, but downright terrified.

With the dramatic changes brought on by the new technological environment, today’s employ- ees have been thrust into a whole range of emo- tional reactions, from surprise to fear to anger to even shame. Competent, secure employees who were very optimistic and efficacious about their job duties in the old economy have become pessi- mistic and questioning of their abilities and cogni- tive resources necessary to be successful in this new high-tech environment.

Here is a recent list of human problems asso- ciated with the advent of advanced technology in today’s organizations:

1. Feelings of being overwhelmed, intimidated, and ashamed of not being able to keep up with job demands.

2. Some employees’ belief that they are actu- ally being enslaved, not empowered, by new technology.

3. Fears of appearing inept, unintelligent, or resistant to change.

4. A diminished ability to solve problems, fos- tering a sense of hopelessness and worry.

5. Loss of respect by the boss, peers, and subor- dinates.

6. Physiological disturbances brought on by longer hours, time pressures, and even hor- mone shifts brought on by being physically isolated.

7. Mood swings, depression, exhaustion, and attention deficits.

Obviously, these feelings, beliefs, fears, and physical/ mental dysfunctions are taking their toll on the people affected, but there also may be an impact on quality, productivity, and retention.

1. What are the trade-offs in today’s organiza- tions between the positives and negatives of advanced technology? Does it really matter if some of the older employees are having a hard time adjusting; aren’t they on their way out anyway and they can be replaced by the technology? On balance, what do you feel about the impact of technology?

2. In the “dark side” of IT presented in this case, there are many implications for self- efficacy, optimism, hope, resiliency, and psy- chological capital. Describe a specific exam- ple of each of these POB constructs.

3. In general, how can the understanding of the POB constructs help overcome the list of problems presented in the case? How can the manager of a unit consisting of mostly older, computer anxious, if not illiterate, employ- ees who were very effective under the old system use positive resources to make a more successful transition to a new, techno- logically sophisticated operating system?

REAL CASE: High Tech—High Fear

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

212 PART 2  COGNITIVE PROCESS OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR

IAP PR

OO FS

After graduating with honors with a management major from State University, Ashley James accepted an entry-level position in the Human Resources Department of Hospital Equipment Inc. (HEI), a medium-sized manufacturer of hos- pital beds and metal furniture (bed-stands, tables, cabinets, etc.). This hospital room product line has been a “cash cow” for HEI since the founding of the firm 35 years ago by James Robinson, Sr. In recent years, however, HEI’s market share has become eroded by some of the big office furniture firms, both in the United States and abroad, who are starting to diversify into the health institution market.

Mr. Robinson has been easing into retirement the last couple of years. His only child, Rob, was made CEO three months ago. Rob came up through product engineering for two years and then headed up operations for the past four years. Rob had been a three-sport star athlete and stu- dent body president in high school. He then went on to State University where he graduated near the top of his class in mechanical engineering.

In his new leadership role at HEI, Rob’s vision is to take the firm from being a low-tech bed and metal furniture manufacturer that is going downhill to become a high-tech medical equip- ment manufacturer. Rob is convinced that even though this would be a dramatic change for HEI, there is enough of a foundation and culture in place to at least start a new division focused ini- tially on operating room equipment.

Rob’s marketing manager had commissioned a study with a marketing research firm that con- cluded operating room equipment supply was not keeping up with demand and was way behind the rest of the health care supply industry in terms of innovative technology for patient comfort and care. The marketing manager, armed with this information, enthusiastically supported Rob’s vision for the future of HEI.

The finance and operations people are another story. The finance manager is very pessi- mistic. HEI is already under a cash flow strain because of decreasing revenues from their exist- ing product line and, although they currently have very little long-term debt, with Robinson Senior

retiring, his contacts and long-term friends in the local lending community were gone. Only the big corporate banks with decision makers in other cit- ies are left. The new head of operations, who has been very close to Robinson Senior over the years and had basically run the show for Rob the past four years, is also very pessimistic. In a recent executive committee meeting where Rob had asked for input on his vision for HEI, this opera- tions head angrily blurted out, “I know we have to do something! But medical equipment? I have absolutely no hope that our engineers or operating people have the capacity to move in this direction. As you know, almost all of our people have been with us at least 15 to 20 years. They are too set in their ways, and the only way we could start a new medical equipment division would be from scratch, and I certainly don’t see the funding for that!”

After weighing his senior management team’s advice, consulting with his dad, doing some research on his own, and tapping his net- work of friends in and outside the industry, Rob decided to go ahead with the planning of a new medical equipment division. He also decided that this new division would have to be run by present people and he would seek no outside funding. At this point, he called in the young Ashley James from the HR department and gave her the follow- ing assignment:

Ashley, I know you haven’t been around here very long, but I think you can handle the chal- lenge that I am going to give you. As you probably know by now, HEI is having some difficulties, and I have decided we need to move in a new direction with a medical equip- ment division. As I see it, we have some real people problems to overcome before this will be a success. Having worked in operations the past several years, I am convinced we have enough raw talent in both engineering and at the operating level to make the transition and pull this off successfully. But I need your help. Did you come across anything in your pro- gram at State U. that had to do with getting people to be more positive, more optimistic, and confident? I really think this is the prob- lem, starting with management and going right

Organizational Behavior Case: People Problems at HEI

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

CHAPTER 7  POSITIVE OB AND PSYCHOLOGICAL CAPITAL 213

IAP PR

OO FS

down the line. I want you to take a week to think about this, talk to everyone involved, do some research, and come back with a specific proposal of what HR can do to help me out on this. The very survival of HEI may depend on what you come up with.

1. On the basis of the limited information in this case, how would you assess the efficacy, optimism, hope, resiliency, and overall psy- chological capital of Rob? Of the operations manager? Give some specifics to back your

assessment. What implications do these assessments have for the future of HEI?

2. What’s your reaction to the finance man- ager’s pessimism? What about the market manager’s optimism? What implications does this have for Rob and the company?

3. Do you agree with Rob’s decision? Would you like to work for him? Why or why not?

4. If you were Ashley, what specific proposal would you make to Rob? How would you implement such a proposal?

EXPERIENTIAL EXERCISES FOR PART TWO

EXERCISE: Self-Perception and Development of the Self-Concept*

Goals: 1. To enable the students to consider their own self-concepts and to compare this with

how they feel they are perceived by others. 2. To explore how the self-concept in personality is formed largely on the basis of feed-

back received from others (the reality that we “mirror ourselves in others”). 3. To stimulate student thinking about how management of human resources may

involve perception and personality.

Implementation: 1. The students take out a sheet of paper and fold it in half from top to bottom. 2. The students write “How I See Myself” and “How I Think Others See Me.” 3. The students write down 5 one-word descriptions (adjectives) under each designation

that, in their opinion, best describe how they perceive themselves and how others per- ceive them.

4. The students then share their two lists with their classmates (in dyads, triads, or the whole class) and discuss briefly. Each person may communicate what he or she is most proud of.

5. The instructor may participate in the exercise by sharing his or her list of adjectives.

*The exercise “Self-Perception and Development of the Self-Concept” was suggested by Philip Van Auken and is used with his permission.

EXERCISE: Job Design Survey*

Goals: 1. To experience firsthand the job characteristics approach to job design, in this case

through the Hackman-Oldham Job Diagnostic Survey (JDS).Co py ri gh t © 2 01 5. I nf or ma ti on A ge P ub li sh in g. A ll r ig ht s re se rv ed . Ma y no t be r ep ro du ce d in a ny f or m wi th ou t pe rm is si on f ro m th e pu bl is he r, e xc ep t fa ir u se s pe rm it te d un de r

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

214 PART 2  COGNITIVE PROCESS OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR

IAP PR

OO FS

2. To get personal feedback on the motivating potential of your present or past job and to identify and compare its critical characteristics.

Implementation: 1. Please describe your present job (or a job you have held in the past) as objectively as

you can. Circle the number that best reflects the job.

*Source: The “Job Design Survey” is drawn from J. R. Hackman and G. R. Oldham, “Development of the Job Diagnostic Survey,” Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 60, 1975, pp. 159–170.

a. How much variety is there in your job? That is, to what extent does the job require you to do many things at work, using a variety of your skills and talents?

1- - - - - - - - -2- - - - - - - - -3- - - - - - - - - -4- - - - - - - - - -5- - - - - - - - - -6- - - - - - - - -7

b. To what extent does your job involve doing a “whole” and identifiable piece of work? That is, is the job a complete piece of work that has an obvious beginning and end, or is it only a small part of the overall piece of work, which is finished by other people or by machines?

1- - - - - - - - -2- - - - - - - - -3- - - - - - - - - -4- - - - - - - - - -5- - - - - - - - - -6- - - - - - - - -7

c. In general, how significant or important is your job? That is, are the results of your work likely to significantly affect the lives or well-being of other people?

1- - - - - - - - -2- - - - - - - - -3- - - - - - - - - -4- - - - - - - - - -5- - - - - - - - - -6- - - - - - - - -7

d. How much autonomy is there in your job? That is, to what extent does your job permit you to decide on your own how to go about doing the work?

1- - - - - - - - -2- - - - - - - - -3- - - - - - - - - -4- - - - - - - - - -5- - - - - - - - - -6- - - - - - - - -7

Very little; the job  requires me to do the same routine things over and over again.

Moderate variety. Very much; the job requires me to do many different things, using a number of different skills and talents

My job is only a tiny part of the overall piece of work; the results of my activities cannot be seen in the final product or service.

My job is a moderate-sized “chunk” of the overall piece of work; my own contribution can be seen in the final outcome.

My job involves doing the whole piece of work, from start to finish; the results of my activities are easily seen in the final product or service.

Not very significant; the outcomes of my work are not likely to have important effects on other people.

Moderately significant Highly significant; the out- comes of my work can affect other people in very important ways.

Very little; the job gives me almost no personal “say” about how and when the work is done.

Moderate autonomy; many things are standardized and not under my control, but I can make some decisions.

Very much; the job gives me almost complete responsibility for deciding how and when the work is done.

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

CHAPTER 7  POSITIVE OB AND PSYCHOLOGICAL CAPITAL 215

IAP PR

OO FS

e. To what extent does doing the job itself provide you with information about your work performance? That is, does the actual work itself provide clues about how well you are doing—aside from any feedback coworkers or supervisors may provide?

1- - - - - - - - -2- - - - - - - - -3- - - - - - - - - -4- - - - - - - - - -5- - - - - - - - - -6- - - - - - - - -7

2. The five questions above measure your perceived skill variety, task identity, task sig- nificance, autonomy, and feedback in your job. The complete JDS uses several ques- tions to measure these dimensions. But to get some idea of the motivating potential, use your scores (1 to 7) for each job dimension and calculate as follows:

Next, plot your job design profile and mps score on the following graphs. These show the national averages for all jobs. Analyze how you compare and suggest ways to redesign your job.

Very little; the job itself is set up so that I could work here forever without find- ing out how well I am doing.

Moderately; sometimes doing the job provides feedback to me; sometimes it does not.

Very much; the job is set up so that I get almost constant feedback as I work about how well I am doing.

MPS skill variety task identity task significance+ + 3

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- autonomy feedback=

M o d e r a t e

High 7

Low 1

Skill

variety

Task

identity

Task

significance

National average

for all jobs

Autonomy Feedback

from the job

320

280

240

200

160

120

National

average

for all

jobs

Motivating

potential

scores

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

216 PART 2  COGNITIVE PROCESS OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR

IAP PR

OO FS

EXERCISE: Motivation Questionnaire*

Goals: 1. To experience firsthand the concepts of one of the work-motivation theories—in this

case, the popular Maslow hierarchy of needs. 2. To get personal feedback on your opinions of the use of motivational techniques in

human resource management.

Implementation: The following questions for the Motivation Questionnaire on the next page have seven pos- sible responses:

1. Please mark one of the seven responses by circling the number that corresponds to the response that fits your opinion. For example, if you “strongly agree,” circle the num- ber “+3.”

2. Complete every item. You have about 10 minutes to do so.

*The “Motivation Questionnaire” is reprinted from “Motivation: A Feedback Exercise,” in John E. Jones and J. William Pfeiffer (Eds.), The Annual Handbook for Group Facilitators, University Associates, San Diego, Calif., 1973, pp. 43–45, and is used with permission.

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

CHAPTER 7  POSITIVE OB AND PSYCHOLOGICAL CAPITAL 217

IAP PR

OO FS

St ro

ng ly

Ag re

e Ag

re e

Sl ig

ht ly

Ag re

e Do

n’ t

Kn ow

Sl ig

ht ly

Di sa

gr ee

Di sa

gr ee

St ro

ng ly

Di sa

gr ee

3 2

1 0

1 2

3 1

. Sp

ec ial

w ag

e i nc

re as

es sh

ou ld

be g

ive n

to em

plo ye

es w

ho d

o the

ir j ob

s v er

y w ell

. 3

2 1

0 1

2 3

2 .

Be tte

r jo b

de sc

rip tio

ns w

ou ld

be h

elp ful

so th

at em

plo ye

es w

ill kn

ow e

xa ctl

y w ha

t is e

xp ec

te d

of th

em .

3 2

1 0

1 2

3 3

. Em

plo ye

es n

ee d t

o be

re m

ind ed

th at

th eir

jo bs

ar e d

ep en

de nt

on th

e co

m pa

ny ’s

ab ilit

y t o

co m

pe te

ef fe

cti ve

ly. 3

2 1

0 1

2 3

4 .

Su pe

rvi so

rs sh

ou ld

giv e a

go od

d ea

l o f a

tte nti

on to

th e p

hy sic

al wo

rki ng

co nd

itio ns

o f t

he ir e

m plo

ye es

. 3

2 1

0 1

2 3

5 .

Su pe

rvi so

rs ou

gh t to

w or

k h ar

d t o d

ev elo

p a f

rie nd

ly wo

rk ing

at mo

sp he

re am

on g

th eir

p eo

ple .

3 2

1 0

1 2

3 6

. In

div idu

al re

co gn

itio n f

or a

bo ve

-st an

da rd

p er

fo rm

an ce

m ea

ns a

lo t t

o em

plo ye

es .

3 2

1 0

1 2

3 7

. In

dif fe

re nt

s up

er vis

ion c

an o

fte n

br uis

e fe

eli ng

s. 3

2 1

0 1

2 3

8 .

Em plo

ye es

w an

t to

fee l t

ha t th

eir re

al sk

ills a

nd c

ap ac

itie s

ar e

pu t t

o us

e on

th eir

jo bs

. 3

2 1

0 1

2 3

9 .

Th e c

om pa

ny re

tir em

en t b

en efi

ts an

d sto

ck p

ro gr

am s a

re im

po rta

nt fa

cto rs

in ke

ep ing

e mp

loy ee

s on

th eir

job

s. 3

2 1

0 1

2 3

10 .

Al mo

st ev

er y j

ob c

an b

e m

ad e

m or

e sti

m ula

tin g

a n d

ch all

en gin

g. 3

2 1

0 1

2 3

11 .

Ma ny

e mp

loy ee

s wa

nt to

g ive

th eir

b es

t i n

ev er

yth ing

th ey

d o.

3 2

1 0

1 2

3 12

. M

an ag

em en

t c ou

ld sh

ow m

or e

int er

es t

in the

e m

plo ye

es b

y s po

ns or

ing so

cia l e

ve nt

s af

te r

ho ur

s. 3

2 1

0 1

2 3

13 .

Pr ide

in o

ne ’s

wo rk

is ac

tua lly

a n

im po

rta nt

re wa

rd .

3 2

1 0

1 2

3 14

. Em

plo ye

es w

an t

to be

a ble

to th

ink o

f t he

ms elv

es a

s “ th

e b es

t” at

th eir

o wn

jo bs

. 3

2 1

0 1

2 3

15 .

Th e

qu ali

ty of

the re

lat ion

sh ips

in th

e inf

or m

al wo

rk gr

ou p

is qu

ite im

po rta

nt .

3 2

1 0

1 2

3 16

. In

div idu

al inc

en tiv

e bo

nu se

s w ou

ld im

pr ov

e the

p er

fo rm

an ce

o f e

m plo

ye es

. 3

2 1

0 1

2 3

17 .

Vis ibi

lity w

ith u

pp er

m an

ag em

en t is

im po

rta nt

to e

m plo

ye es

. 3

2 1

0 1

2 3

18 .

Em plo

ye es

g en

er all

y lik

e t o

sc he

du le

the ir

ow n

wo rk

a nd

to m

ak e

job -re

lat ed

de cis

ion s

wi th

a m

ini m

um o

f su

pe rv

isi on

. 3

2 1

0 1

2 3

19 .

Jo b

se cu

rity is

im po

rta nt

to e

m plo

ye es

. 3

2 1

0 1

2 3

20 .

Ha vin

g go

od e

qu ip

m en

t t o

wo rk

w ith

is im

po rta

nt to

e m

plo ye

es .

3 2

1 0

1 2

3

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .

218 PART 2  COGNITIVE PROCESS OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR

IAP PR

OO FS

Scoring:

1. Transfer the numbers you circled in the questionnaire to the appropriate places in the following chart.

2. Record your total scores in the following chart by marking an X in each row below the number of your total score for that area of needs motivation.

By examining the chart, you can see the relative strength you attach to each of the needs in Maslow’s hierarchy. There are no right answers here, but most work-motivation theorists imply that most people are concerned mainly with the upper-level needs (that is, belong- ingness, esteem, and self-actualization).

Statement No. Score Statement No. Score

10 ______________ 2 ______________

11 ______________ 3 ______________

13 ______________ 9 ______________

18 ______________ 19 ______________

Total ______________ Total ______________

(Self-actualization needs) (Safety needs)

6 ______________ 1 ______________

8 ______________ 4 ______________

14 ______________ 16 ______________

17 ______________ 20 ______________

Total ______________ Total

(Esteem needs) (Basic needs)

5 ______________

7 ______________

12 ______________

15 ______________

Total ______________

(Belongingness needs)

12 10 8 6 4 2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 Self-actualization

Esteem

Belongingness

Safety

Basic

Low use

High use

U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le c op yr ig ht l aw .