Enablers of a Positive Workplace: A Literature Review. Or: Work, be Happy! Bachelor Thesis. Annina Trachsel. Universitäre Fernstudien Schweiz

Transcription

1 Positive Psychology at Work 1 POSITIVE PSYCHOLOGY AT WORK Enablers of a Positive Workplace: A Literature Review Or: Work, be Happy! Bachelor Thesis Annina Trachsel Universitäre Fernstudien Schweiz Bachelor of Science in Psychology Supervised by Dr. phil. Bernhard Sollberger, Universitäre Fernstudien Schweiz 07. April 2012 Address correspondence to: Annina Trachsel Universitäre Fernstudien Schweiz Studiengang BSc Psychology Überlandstrasse Brig annina.trachsel@stu.fernuni.ch Phone:

2 Positive Psychology at Work 2 Abstract This paper provides a literature review of theories and research focusing on what contributes to making the working life a positive experience. It examines the role of the management, of the employees and the job as such in building a positive workplace. The importance of positive emotions in general and gratitude, elevation and engagement in particular are highlighted. The reader will see how certain characteristics of the job can promote well-being and how leaders and employees can elevate each other to make work a positive and enjoyable place. The paper concludes with presenting two programs to increase positivity at the workplace, values in action and appreciative inquiry. In summary, the paper shows ways to promote happiness at the workplace.

3 Positive Psychology at Work 3 Content 1. Introduction Positive Psychology The Relevance of Positive Psychology at Work Enablers of a Positive Workplace The Leaders and Managers: Positive Leadership Concepts Positively Deviant Leadership Transformational Leadership The Role of the Job The Job Characteristics Model Recent Developments on the Job Design Front The Individual Employee Seeing work as a Job, a Career or a Calling Job Crafting: Jobholders as Active Designers of their Work Positive Emotions The General Effects of Positive Emotions Positive Emotions at the Workplace Mood Linkage Gratitude Elevation Employee Engagement.. 37

4 Positive Psychology at Work 4 4. Building on Strengths Values in Action Strengths Development for the Individual Building on the Company s Strengths Appreciative Inquiry Discussion and Conclusion References... 47

5 Positive Psychology at Work 5 1. Introduction Every morning I get to work, the first things I do is to pour myself a cup of tea. And there, on my blue teacup, it reads in bold letters don t work, be happy. Considering the amount of time the average adult spends at work, this is quite a pessimistic statement. This slogan is especially sad looking at the increasing amount of time that is spent at work and how boundaries of work and non-work are becoming increasingly blurred with new technology. Furthermore, for many people, work is the primary social setting. Because the workplace plays such a major role in the average adult s life, it is a very important domain for happiness. Even more, satisfaction with work has the power to influence satisfaction with life in general (see e.g. Judge & Watanabe, 1993). Psychology can help us understand the implication that work has for the individual. In the past, a lot of research has been done to explain phenomena such as burn-out, bullying, workplace harassment, stress etc. These are important subjects, however, they do not explain what is positive about work. The aim of this paper is to show the importance of a positive work environment and means through which it can be achieved. In the past, psychology has neglected positive aspects of life. Therefore, this paper begins with an exploration of the field of positive psychology, which is trying to complement psychology by focusing on the bright side of life Positive Psychology The last fifty years before the millennium, psychology became increasingly focused on curing mental illnesses, defining psychological disorders, studying pathology, weaknesses and damage: in short, placing an emphasis on what is wrong in the lives of people. Looking at the

6 Positive Psychology at Work 6 history of the field of psychology, what is wrong has not always been the exclusive focus of psychology. Before World War II, psychology s three missions were curing mental illnesses, making the lives of people more productive and fulfilling, and identifying and nurturing high talent (Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000). Positive psychology is trying to complement the field of psychology again by focusing on the brighter and more beautiful side, on what is right and good in people s lives. As such, positive psychology is an umbrella term for theories and research about what makes life most worth living (Park & Peterson, 2006, p. 292). Some of the theories and research considered in this paper are predating the birth of positive psychology itself, but are either still of importance for positive psychology at work or have found new wind through positive psychology. Positive psychology is not denying the existence of mental illness, dysfunctional institutions and weaknesses, but it is mainly looking at the positive side and thereby it is completing the picture (Gable & Haidt, 2005). Furthermore, research indicates that positive traits such as different strengths actually help recovery and lessen the damage of disease, stress and disorder (Peterson, Park & Seligman, 2006). This effectively means that focusing research on strength and circumstances that foster resilience may lead to prevention, which accentuates the importance of studying the positive. It is encouraging to note that research found most people across nations are actually above a neutral point on life satisfaction and doing well (Diener & Diener, 1996). But this means that by studying areas of problems, psychology has overlooked the greater part of the average, healthy people. The three pillars of positive psychology are positive subjective experience (positive emotions), positive individual characteristics (strengths and virtues) and positive institutions

7 Positive Psychology at Work 7 (Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000). While a lot of research has been produced for the first two areas, the field of positive institutions is lagging behind (Gable & Haidt, 2005). As we will see, not only the field of positive institution itself, but also the pillars of positive emotions and strengths and virtues play an important role in building a happy workplace The Relevance of Positive Psychology at Work People s experiences are embedded in a social context. Therefore, positive psychology needs to take positive communities and positive institutions into account (Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000). The institution that average, employed adults spend most of their waking time in is their workplace. Jobs have the power to affect people s well-being because of the interdependence between work and non-work domains. Job-related well-being translates into employee s life satisfaction. In other words, the workplace not only has the potential to positively or negatively impact on people s work life, but on their lives in general. For example, the results of a cross sectional, longitudinal study conducted by Judge and Watanabe (1993) showed that job satisfaction (often used in studies as an indicator for employee well-being) significantly influenced life satisfaction and vice versa. Psychological well-being at the job, or workplace happiness, occurs when employees subjectively believe themselves to be well or happy. It also involves an emotional component in that employees with high well-being experience more positive emotions than negative ones (Wright & Cropanzano, 2000). Positive psychology at the workplace not only shows the positive effects job related well-being has for the individual worker. Knowledge of positive psychology concepts is also in the best interest of the organizations, as employee well-being affects an organization s bottom line. Harter, Schmidt, and Keyes (2003) examined in a meta-analysis how

8 Positive Psychology at Work 8 well-being in the workplace influences business outcomes. The results of that study show how positive workplace feelings are associated with higher business-unit customer loyalty, higher profitability, higher productivity and lower rates of turn-over among staff. These results are in line with the happy productive worker hypothesis, according to which happy employees exhibit higher levels of job-related performance than do unhappy employees (Wright, Cropanzano, Denney, & Moline, 2002). Similarly, low well-being is not only negative for the employees, but also for organizations. Employees with low career well-being cost organizations money through higher rates of absenteeism, turnover, accidents, thefts and quality defects, and substantially higher healthcare costs, taking a toll on the organizations bottom line (Gallup, 2010). In the recent past, various positive approaches have emerged in the world of work. Going by different names, such as positive organizational scholarship, positive organizational behaviour, applied positive psychology or abundance approach, they all have in common their focus on positive aspects such as strengths, capabilities and on what works. In contrast to traditional approaches, which suggest that fixing problems and erasing weaknesses are the way to high performance, the abundance approach starts from the opposite, positive pole. It begins by identifying peak experiences and what is going well, on the level of employees and organizations. When the enablers of optimal performances are identified and analyzed, they can be reapplied in a proactive manner to sustain the highest potential of what people, individually and collectively, have to offer (Linley, Harrington, & Garcea, 2010).

9 Positive Psychology at Work 9 2. Enablers of a Positive Workplace Organizations are faced with an increasingly difficult and constantly changing environment. As the competition gets tougher, common strategies to reduce costs and increase productivity such as lean production, down-sizing and out-sourcing place great demands on management and remaining employees. We will now look at how with all these challenges, the workplace can remain a positive experience for the organizations, leaders and employees. The workplace is a very complex setting with the various factors dynamically influencing each other. Consequently, the responsibilities and chances to build a positive workplace lie in the hands of all parties involved The Leaders and Managers: Positive Leadership Concepts Organizational leaders have a powerful influence on their employees well-being. In this section we will look at what benefits can be derived from positive leadership and the means through which these benefits can be accomplished. I will present two selected leadership styles which foster positive workplaces: positively deviant leadership and transformational leadership Positively Deviant Leadership How can organizations bear up the ongoing pressure of becoming more successful while at the same time improving employees lives? One difficulty in building a positive organization is that the demands of delivering short-term results impose on thinking about the long-term benefits that a thriving, healthy and happy workforce offers. This is the idea behind Positive Organizational Scholarship (POS). POS seeks to understand the dynamics in organizations that lead to the development of human strengths, foster resilience, restoration and vitality, and produce extraordinary individual and organizational performance. The goal is that both the

10 Positive Psychology at Work 10 organizations and their members are enabled to flourish and prosper in extraordinary ways (see e.g. Fredrickson, 2003; Mroz & Quinn, 2010). One of the core principles of POS it that of positive deviance. While low-performing organizations show inefficiency, ineffectiveness and unprofitability, normal organizations are efficient, effective, profitable and ethical. But what about firms that are better than normal? Positively deviant organizations set value on virtuous, benevolent, flourishing and honoring behavior, they push for quality, safety, profits, seek new and better ways of doing things and developing people. To a business executive faced with the enormous pressure of delivering financial results, profitability, revenues etc, this might sound naive, even impossible, but research has shown that companies which value and foster the above types of behavior are more profitable and more productive than most firms (Cameron, 2003). A positively deviant leader places an emphasis on what elevates people and the company, what goes right in his/her organization, what is experienced as good and on what is inspiring (Wooten & Cameron, 2010). Figure 1 illustrates with some examples how positive deviance is distinct to normal or negative deviance. Figure 1. A deviance continuum. Cameron, K. S., Dutton, J. E. and Quinn, R. E. (2003). Positive organizational scholarship: Foundation of a new Discipline. San Francisco: Barett-Koehler. (From Wooten & Cameron, 2010)

11 Positive Psychology at Work 11 Most leaders focus on maintaining performance on the middle, while positive deviant leadership focuses on enabling performance on the right end of the continuum. The concrete enablers to produce extraordinary results differ from companies and situations, but mostly focus on the strengths that a company already has to offer (we will look in detail at the potential that building on strengths bears in Chapter 4). In one instance, it may be key to empower and develop employees to build value creating human capabilities, while in another organization it may be a focus on innovative adaption and futuristic positioning (Wooten & Cameron, 2010). When reaching the state of positive deviance, a company is flourishing at its best functionally and achieving optimal performance (Wooten, 2010, p.10). Implementing positive deviance is a difficult undertaking, as leaving the norm always exposes a leader to potential criticism. Furthermore, the need to act in ways we know, follow the rules and do things the way they have been done in the past is very strong. But positive deviance does not need to be implemented in drastic ways, rather it can be done by many small acts which can then transpire and lead to a positive culture (Mroz & Quinn, 2010). If the leaders of an organization are aligned in portraying positive deviance, an environment and culture of positive behaviour, leading to outstanding success beyond expectations can be created Transformational Leadership A traditional approach to leadership has been transactional leadership: a promise and reward is made to the employee for good performance, or a threat and discipline for poor performance. While leading in such a way may be effective at times, Bass (1990) describes it as prescription for mediocrity (p.20). Disciplinary threats are even likely to be counterproductive.

12 Positive Psychology at Work 12 Transformational leadership, according to Bass (1990), builds on the four following types of behavior: Firstly, idealized influence (sometimes referred to as charisma ) reflects the articulation of a compelling vision of the future, instilling pride and gaining respect through moral actions. Second, inspirational motivation is witnessed when leaders inspire their followers to be at their best. Third, intellectual stimulation promotes problem solving and rationality of the followers. Last, when showing individualized consideration, a leader gives personal attention, acts as a mentor and develops his employees. Leaders displaying such behavior have great power and influence as employees want to identify with them and have a high degree of trust and confidence in them. Transactional and transformational leadership differ not only with regard to the processes by which a leader motivates his subordinates but also with regard to the type of goals he sets (Hater & Bass, 1988). For example, a transactional leader may make the subordinate aware of the reward he gets when achieving set goals while a transformational leader may point out the importance of increased efforts for the organizational mission, which can serve as a motivator itself. Hater and Bass point out that the two models don t have to be viewed as completely unrelated, as a leader may show behavior related to both concepts depending on the specific situation. Transformational leadership can lead to extra efforts and better performance of the employees, as the transformational leader motivates followers to do more than originally expected (Hater & Bass, 1988; Bass 1990). According to Howell and Hell-Merenda (1999), this enhanced employee performance is connected to a better quality of the leader-follower relationship, resulting from transformational leadership. Ultimately, employee performance

13 Positive Psychology at Work 13 influences the organization s performance. The impact that transformational leadership has on organizational effectiveness has been shown in studies with profit-oriented organizations, where managers transformational leadership predicted financial performance (Barling, Weber, & Kelloway, 1996; Howell & Avolio, 1993) as well as in studies with Canadian unions (Kelloway & Barling, 1993). Transformational leadership also has beneficial effects on employees job related wellbeing. Job related well-being includes both physical and psychological health at work and both can be influenced positively through transformational leadership. The former has been shown in a correlational study where safety-specific transformational leadership enhanced employee s safety performance (Barling, Loughlin, & Kelloway, 2002). Transformational leadership has also been linked to positive mental health effects (Arnold, Turner, Barling, Kelloway, & McKee, 2007). Sivanathan, Arnold, Turner, and Barling (2004) suggest that transformational leadership promotes job related well-being through processes related to the four types of behavior of a transformational leader as stated earlier. For example, instilling realistic feelings of self-efficacy (through inspirational motivation) can give employees the strength to tackle challenges. Through attention to an employees need for achievement and development (individual consideration) a leader provides empathy, compassion and guidance that employees may seek for their wellbeing. Sivanathan et al. (2004) also claim that the connection of work to a higher purpose, the meaning of work, which a transformational leader can instill in his followers, contributes to enhanced well-being. Wrzesniewski, Dutton and Debebe (2003) define work meaning as employees understanding of what they do at work as well as the significance of what they do.

14 Positive Psychology at Work 14 (p. 99). This assumption that work meaning is influenced by managers has found evidence through two studies by Arnold et al. (2007), where the meaning found in work mediated the relationship between transformational leadership and psychological well-being. This suggests that followers beliefs in the meaning of work can be transformed by the leader to enhance wellbeing. Transformational leadership behavior can also be directed at teams. Wang and Howell (2010) showed that transformational leadership behavior focused on the individual, such as individual coaching and mentoring, enhanced task performance and personal initiative, while group-focused transformational leadership behaviour, such as emphasizing shared values and the unique characteristics of the group, was positively associated with team performance and helping behavior. The good news is that transformational leadership skills are not something a leader either has or does not have, but they can be trained and learned. In their field experiment, Barling et al. (1996) found that the training of branch managers of a Canadian bank in transformational leadership led to the following: Subordinates found their managers to stimulate them intellectually and that they were more charismatic. They also thought that their managers gave them more individual attention. Furthermore, the training program had a positive effect on subordinates organizational commitment as well as on aspects of branch-level financial performance. As an interesting note to close this subject, Eagly, Johannesen-Schmidt, and van Engen (2003) found in their meta-analysis of 45 studies that women s typical leadership styles tend to be slightly more transformational than those of men.

15 Positive Psychology at Work The Role of the Job An important chance in improving work life lies within the actual jobs. Everything else builds around the core of a job: the tasks which employees have to do. In the scientific management approach, rooted a century ago in the work of Frederick Taylor (1911/2003), it was promoted that tasks done by workers should not exceed performance capabilities. The trend was then towards simplifying jobs and standardizing operations. The idea was that simpler jobs can be carried out more efficiently, less-skilled employees would be needed, and production and ultimately profit would be increased. However, it turned out that non-challenging jobs led to employee dissatisfaction, increased absenteeism and turn-over and the expected increases in profitability did not materialize (see e.g. Hackman 1977; Hackman & Lawler, 1971). This realization resulted in work redesign (also called job enrichment) research in the 1970s. Work redesign refers to activities that involve modification of jobs with the aim to increase both the quality of the employees work experience and their on-the-job productivity (Hackman, 1977). Work design is an important subject to consider in the subject of positive psychology at the workplace because work characteristics have been shown to influence attitudinal, behavioral and cognitive, well-being and organizational outcomes (Humphrey, Nahrgang, & Morgeson, 2007). Also, work design more so then other factors such as culture, structure, relationships etc, can be influenced by the managers (Oldham & Hackman, 1980) and the employees alike, as we will see The Job Characteristics Model The job characteristics model (JCM) by Hackman and Oldham (1975, 1976) shows how work can be designed to maximize employee effectiveness and well-being. It suggests that certain job characteristics have a motivating potential, which in turn leads to various positive

16 Positive Psychology at Work 16 work and personal outcomes by affecting three critical psychological states. These three psychological states are experienced meaningfulness of the work, experienced responsibility for work outcomes and knowledge of the results of the work activities. Motivation is highest if these interplay: The individual learns (knowledge of results) that he personally (responsibility) has performed well on a task that he cares about (experienced meaningfulness) (Hackman & Lawler, 1971). The three psychological states are prompted through five job characteristics: skill variety, task identity and task significance contribute to the experience of meaningfulness; autonomy fosters the feeling of being responsible and feedback contributes to the knowledge of results (Hackman & Oldham, 1975, 1976). A full overview of the psychological states, job characteristics and outcomes for the employee is presented in Fig. 2. Fig 2. The job characteristics model of work motivation. Source: Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1976). Many of the propositions of the JCM yielded empirical support. For example, monotonous, repetitious, non-challenging work as opposed to skill variety leads to undesirable outcomes such as absenteeism, turnover and lower productivity. In their study with blue-collar workers, Melamed, Ben-Avi, Luz, and Green (1995) found that work monotony, when compared

17 Positive Psychology at Work 17 with varied work, was associated with lower job satisfaction and a higher incidence of sickness absence (for additional evidence, see Brief &Aldag, 1975; Loher, Noe, Moeller, & Fitzgerald, 1985). Laboratory findings suggest that repetitive work lowers performance through decreased levels of arousal (Thackray, 1981). However, other studies came to different findings (see e.g. Hulin & Blood, 1968). The reason of the contradictory results might lie within the individual differences of people. So while it is true that some people get bored with repetitive work, others might prosper under the same circumstances. The JCM model is taking this into account by acknowledging that individual differences have a moderating effect on how people react to their work. The prediction is that individuals who value opportunities for personal growth and development (growth need strength) will respond more positively to the right job conditions (Hackman & Oldham, 1976). Meta-analyses provide sound support for the hypotheses that the core job dimensions - mediated through the critical psychological states - are associated with favorable attitudinal (e.g. job satisfaction) and behavioral (e.g. job performance) outcomes (see e.g. Fried & Ferris, 1987; Loher at al. 1985; Humphrey at al., 2007) as well as the even more positive effect on individuals with high growth needs (see e.g. Fried & Ferris, 1987; Loher at al. 1985). The instrument most commonly used to measure the variables of the job characteristics model is the Job Diagnostic Survey (Hackman & Oldham, 1975), which measures the perceptions of the five job characteristics as mentioned above, selected attitudes towards work and the organization and individual growth need strength. Some limitations to the JCM need to be noted. First and foremost, social sources of motivation were neglected as well as the fact that certain job designs might be more appropriate

18 Positive Psychology at Work 18 in certain contexts than others (Oldham & Hackman, 2010). Furthermore, the role of the employee is a very passive one Recent Developments on the Job Design Front Despite its limitations and although this theory has been originally proposed already in the Seventies, the JCM is continually used by researchers and practitioners as a psychological framework for designing enriched jobs (Humphrey at al., 2007; Turner, Barling, & Zacharatos, 2002). Recent takes on the model define job design more broadly, embedding new job characteristics and moderators. The authors of the JCM state themselves that since developing their theory, the phenomenon of the job itself has changed drastically (Oldham & Hackman, 2010). Well defined-jobs become rarer, people are telecommuting, juggling various activities and responsibilities at the same time, teams are of temporary nature with changing requirements. While a worker for Foxconn putting together the same electronic piece in 1 minute intervals is faced with monotony, boredom and zero latitude, other employees might be faced with quite the opposite phenomenon of jobs which are not well defined, have a high degree of complexity and are characterized by role overload. Conflicting, ambiguous or overloading expectations lead to role stress (for a metaanalytic overview see e.g. Örtqvist & Wincent, 2006). Turner et al. (2002) suggest that the opposites of role clarity, role agreement and role load are important characteristics for a positive work experience. The three terms relate to having enough information and predictability (as opposed to role ambiguity), a restricted set of demands and expectations (as opposed to role conflict) and the balance between challenging yet manageable work (as opposed to overload). Meta-analyses support the importance of these factors. For example, Örtqvist and Wincent

19 Positive Psychology at Work 19 (2006) found that role stress overall is negatively related to job performance, role ambiguity and role conflict are negatively related to job satisfaction, and role ambiguity, role conflict and role overload are significantly negatively related to organizational commitment. In recent studies and papers the importance of the active role of the jobholder in shaping his job has been stressed (see e.g. Ashford & Black, 1996; Frese, Garst, & Fay, 2007; Morrison, 1993; Wrzesniewski & Dutton, 2001). We will look at the role of proactivity in more detail in the next chapter when we consider the possibilities the individual employee has in shaping his work environment The Individual Employee While the role of the job influences how the employee feels and while a leader can have great influence in building a positive workplace, promoting well-being amongst his employees, naturally, there are individual differences between the employees accounting to the way a job and work environment may be perceived. As Warr (in press) puts it, happiness and unhappiness derive from both the environment (jobs and organizations) as well as the worker. A considerable influence whether work is a source of happiness to the worker has been found in the way employees see their work as either a job, a career or a calling Seeing work as a Job, a Career or Calling The word vocation originally stems from the Latin word vocare, to call. In this section we will explore what work as a calling means for the modern worker. Wrzesniewski, McCauley, Rozin, and Schwartz (1997) research gives evidence that the majority of people perceive their work either as a job, a career or a calling. People who see their work as jobs are focused on the financial reward, which allows them to enjoy their time away from the job. Work

20 Positive Psychology at Work 20 is merely a necessity to them. Individuals who describe their work as a career have a deeper personal investment, focusing on their advancement within the organization which brings more power, higher social standing and higher self-esteem. While this group of people basically enjoys their work, they also expect to be moving on to a better job in the future. Lastly, people may view their work as a calling: These individuals work for the fulfillment that work brings them, they see work as one of the most important parts of their life and they may believe that their work contributes to the community or to the greater good. They feel good about their work because they love it. A similar definition of the concept is offered by Steger & Dik (2010), who suggest a calling includes both the sense that one s work is meaningful and purposeful and that it serves a need beyond one s self and one s immediate concern (p. 132). In a study with college students by Duffy & Sedlacek (2010), the majority of the students reported either having a calling (44%) or to be in search of one (30%), showing that this concept is already of importance before young adults enter the workforce. However, not everyone who has a calling may be able to live it out. Obstacles such as a weak economy or reasons within the close environment of a person or within the person itself may hinder someone to live his/her calling and end up pursuing a job or career instead. Wrzesniewski et al. (1997) developed a questionnaire (University of Pennsylvania Work Life Questionnaire) to provide evidence of the distinction between jobs, careers and callings as described above. They found that respondents were clear in expressing how they view their work and nearly equal numbers of respondents viewed work as a job, career or calling. Respondents viewing their work as a calling did work of significantly higher occupational status. This result can be connected to the study of Duffy and Sedlacek (2010), who found that already

21 Positive Psychology at Work 21 students planning on pursuing post-master degrees (e.g. doctoral, medical or law), were modestly more likely to report having a calling than students pursuing only a bachelor s degree. However, Wrzesniewski et al. (1997) also analyzed a subset of administrative assistants, this group producing an equal distribution of work orientation as the whole sample. This suggests that the job, career and calling distinction can also be made within a group of a homogenous background and is not necessarily dependent solely upon occupational status. Seeing work as a calling and work as meaning are difficult to differentiate and somewhat overlapping concepts. There is research supporting that work as a calling is associated with greater work meaning (Bunderson & Thompson, 2009), other research suggests that calling and job satisfaction are related via work meaning and career commitment (Duffy, Bott, Allan, Torrey, & Dik, 2011). Although most authors seem to view meaningfulness, or work as meaning, as part of calling (Bunderson & Thompson, 2009; Duffy et al., 2011, Steger & Dik, 2010), there is no unanimously accepted model for which other factors account to the concept of calling; it seems that further research is needed on the subject. For the purpose of this paper, it is sufficient to say that meaningfulness of the work and viewing work as a calling are strongly related. Meaningfulness itself can be explained as a sense that work matters, makes sense, is significant and is worth engaging (Steger & Dik, 2010, p. 132). Another important question is whether the attitude towards work can be influenced. Some research suggests that the way individuals view their work may be a function of dispositional traits related to job attitudes, and as such cannot be influenced (Staw, Bell, & Clausen, 1986; Staw, & Ross, 1985). Others found situational factors, like job complexity and pay (Gerhart, 1987) or job enrichment and work-redesign (Hackman & Oldham, 1976; Turner et al., 2002), to

22 Positive Psychology at Work 22 be of relevance. Overall, it seems that both factors within the individual as well as factors in the environment and the job role can influence an individual s attitude to work. Assuming that work attitude can change over time and with the derived link between work as meaning and work as calling, we can now make the connection to the role that leadership has in this subject. As outlined in the chapter on transformational leadership, evidence has been found that a leader can influence the meaning a worker finds in work (Arnold et al. 2007; Sivanathan et al. 2004). As such, further work on this subject could investigate the relationship between leadership styles and the way employees view their work as meaningful and as jobs, careers or callings. What does perceiving work as a calling or meaningfulness of one s work, mean for the individual and the company? It is intuitive to think that meaningful work has positive effects for the individual and indeed research does give support to this claim. Studies have shown a link to well-being (Arnold et al., 2007) and a self report study of Wrzesniewski et al. (1997) showed that people experiencing work as a calling were associated with greater life and job satisfaction. It was also associated with better health (measured through less missed working days) which naturally also benefits the company. Overall, meaningful work appears to be beneficial for the individual. However, there is a potential downside. Bunderson and Thompson (2009) conducted an in-depth study with zookeepers. Although commitment is generally a positive effect, taken to the extreme, the downside for the workers are the willingness to sacrifice money, time and even physical comfort and well-being for their work. Similarly, Wrzesniewski et al. (1997) have shown that adults who see work as a calling report spending more time working, whether or not

23 Positive Psychology at Work 23 they are paid for that work. As such, living a calling bears a certain risk of being exploited. Leaders should be aware of this tendency and use their power for the mutual benefit of employer and employee, not as a means to exploit the workforce. Yet it is of course exactly that extra commitment which is of benefit for the company. Steger and Dik (2010) even suggest that apart from more time spent at work meaningful work may have more organizational benefits such as enhanced performance, greater efficiency and motivation. While it sounds intuitive, further empirical support is needed for this notion Job Crafting: Jobholders as Active Designers of their Work Past research has put an emphasis on how jobs and environments influence the well-being of the worker. We have already looked in detail at the JCM. A similar approach is taken by person-environment fit and person-job fit theories, which put the focus on whether an employee has the opportunity to do what he does best in his role (see e.g. Bretz & Judge, 1994). It has been shown by these authors that fit between individual and organizational characteristics and between individual and job is an indicator for job satisfaction and tenure. Recent research is placing an increasing emphasis on the active role of the employee to make his job fit, take initiative and shape their own jobs. Berg, Wrzesniewski and Dutton (2010) argue that in contemporary organizations, employees often have considerable latitude to modify, influence and craft their jobs. One does not necessarily have to wait until an approach from the manager to engage in a discussion about how work might be restructured. Frese et al. (2007) suggest that employees can actively affect their work characteristics through personal initiative, which is proactive rather than reactive behavior. Their longitudinal study has yielded

24 Positive Psychology at Work 24 reciprocal relationships between personal initiative and certain work characteristics. For example, personal initiative increased felt control at work and vice versa. A study by Horning, Rousseau and Glaser (2008) illustrates that workers frequently engage in what they call idiosyncratic deals. These i-deals, arrangements negotiated between the worker and the manager, are mediated through personal initiative, and related to flexibility in hours of work and developmental opportunities. The importance of proactive behavior has also been shown in studies concerning newcomers. Morrison (1993) illustrated how newcomers can take an active role in the socialization process by seeking specific types of information. The active information seeking resulted not only in better social integration but also influenced how well newcomers mastered their job and defined their role 6 months later. Similar findings are reported by Bauer, Bodner, Erdogan, Truxillo, and Tucker (2007) who demonstrate with their meta-analysis that proactive information seeking is related to role clarity and social acceptance, which in turn positively influenced job satisfaction and intention to remain. The focus on the active role of the employee is the core of Wrzesniewski and Duttons (2001) theoretical model of job crafting (Fig. 3). Compared to the JCM of Hackman and Oldham (1975, 1976), which takes the perspective of how job design influences the employee, the model of job crafting looks at how the employee can customize the design of his job. Wrzesniewski and Dutton (2001, p. 179) define job crafting as the physical and cognitive changes individuals make in the task or relational boundaries of their work.

25 Positive Psychology at Work 25 Crafting a job: Revisioning employees as active crafting of their work. Source Wrzesniewski, W., & Dutton, J. E. (2001). At the left side of the model, we see the motivations for job crafting, which may vary from employee to employee due to individual differences. Similar to the growth-need strengths suggested by Hackman and Oldham (1976), the authors of the model acknowledge that not all employees may be motivated to change anything in their job, be it that they are content with their job already or that they find their needs are met elsewhere rather than at work. Moderating the likeliness of whether an employee might engage in job crafting or not are the perceived opportunities to job craft. Naturally, not all jobs offer the same number of opportunities to craft a job, either because of the tasks itself or because of close monitoring and restrictions by management. Further moderating variables are individuals orientation toward the work (e.g. whether they see their work as a job, career or calling) and general motivational orientations (e.g. intrinsic vs. extrinsic motivation). Together, job and individual features may create more or less favorable conditions for job crafting to occur.

26 Positive Psychology at Work 26 The resulting forms of job crafting may vary between three elements: The first form of change involves changing the job s task boundaries, by changing the scope, number or type of tasks done at work. This is probably the most difficult concept to grasp. Taking on more tasks will rarely be a problem from a management and team perspective, but it will be difficult for employees to take on fewer tasks. Wrzesniewski, Berg, and Dutton (2010) argue that there might always be someone who does like the task which another person most dreads doing. For example, one assistant might volunteer to take care of all organizational matters for marketing events while her colleague prefers preparing the marketing brochures needed. The third assistant in the team may decide not to get involved in those projects, thus taking on fewer tasks. However, that person may be the one that helps out her colleagues when they face a technical problem and enjoys explaining the technical tools to her colleagues and newcomers. On paper however, all three employees might have exactly the same job description. Ashford and Black (1996) even detected that already during organizational entry some newcomers engage in negotiating job changes to create a better fit with their skills and abilities and actively try to frame the new situation. These negotiations were related to performance and satisfaction of the newcomers after the entry period. The second opportunity to craft one s job lies within the relational boundaries. An employee can steer to a certain degree who they come in contact with on the job and how they contact that person. For example, an employee might have the freedom to either pick up the phone and call her customers or decide to communicate primarily through s. A jobholder can also decide to communicate more with one of his supervisors, while having a more distant rapport with another one.

27 Positive Psychology at Work 27 The third opportunity to job craft is changing the cognitive boundaries of a job. A study with hospital cleaners (Wrzesniewski et al., 2003) showed how some cleaners viewed their job as discrete tasks of cleaning room after room while others saw it as an integrated whole and as part of the larger picture, i.e. integrating themselves in the workflow of the hospital. At the same time they changed relational and task boundaries by talking to the patients whose rooms they were cleaning, showing visitors the way etc. With regards to effects of job crafting, the model suggests changes relating to the design of the job and the social environment at work. As general effects, Wrzesniewski and Dutton (2001) argue that job crafting can increase feelings of propose, which again increases the felt meaning of work (which, as we have seen in previous chapters, has various positive effect such as enhanced well-being and higher satisfaction). Job crafters seek relationships which support and validate desirable work identity images (Wrzesniewski & Dutton, 2001). That, in turn, ties into the model of interpersonal sense-making (Wrzesniewski at al., 2003), which highlights the importance of others in constructing the meaning of work by valuing or devaluing the work that an employee does. An employee reads the signs of appraisal of his own or his job s worth and composes meaning and identity through this. When engaging in job crafting, the employee seeks relationships with others who reinforce a desirable work identity image; for example more frequent interaction with a supportive supervisor, while holding interaction with a disapproving colleague to the necessary minimum. Job crafting is by no means easily accomplished, it involves many challenges. In a recent qualitative study, Berg et al. (2010) have put an emphasis on the adaptive action that might be necessary for job crafting to occur, additionally to the proactivity of the employee. They

28 Positive Psychology at Work 28 discovered that between higher and lower rank employees, there was no difference in the prevalence or types of proactive actions they took in the job crafting effort. But there were differences in the adaptive moves that they made to overcome challenges. For example, lowerrank employees focused more on others, trying to win support for their crafting intentions, creating and seizing new opportunities to job craft. Higher-rank employees saw the challenges related to job crafting more in their own expectations on how they and others should spend their time at work. Thus they engaged in adaptive moves focusing on adjusting their own expectations and behavior. The model of job crafting does not claim that job crafting necessarily has beneficial effects for the company (Wrzesniewski & Dutton, 2001). It can be positive if aligned with organizational perspectives, but might well be harmful if it is at odds with organizational goals. Wrzesniewski at al. (2010) suggest that in order to be beneficial, job crafting should create value for others, be aligned with one s role and the employee should be aware of who is likely to accommodate and support his crafting effort. Oldham and Hackman (2010) acknowledge the proactive role the employees can take on, but point out that it might in the end be the job characteristics they proposed in the JCM which are effectively being shaped, in that jobholders create more complex, challenging and meaningful work. 3. Positive Emotions To date, there is no consensus for the definition of the term emotion. For the purpose of this paper, it is enough to note that emotions label the inner facet of an experience (Galliker, 2009) and trigger a multi-component response, in that they involve behavioral, cognitive and

29 Positive Psychology at Work 29 physiological reactions (Fredrickson, 2001). In the past, particularly negative emotions and their importance for the evolutionary development and survival of human beings have called for a lot of interest. Seligman and Csikszentmihalyi (2000) suggested that because negative emotions may be more urgent and override positive ones, they are more salient than the positive ones to people as well as to research. No one would argue that negative emotions aren t important, as they are signs of danger or threat to the organism and help our bodies mobilize the energy needed to react in these situations. But what role do positive emotions play in our lives? Do they just exist to make our lives more pleasurable and enhance our well-being, or do they serve specific functions as well? 3.1. The General Effects of Positive Emotions To capture the effects of positive emotions in a model, Fredrickson (1998, 2001) put forward the broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions. The author suggests that negative emotions lead to a narrow thought-action repertoire, thus enabling quick and decisive actions as needed in threatening situations (e.g. flight, attack). In everyday life, the narrow focus of negative emotions helps us concentrate on the problems at hand. In contrast to this, positive emotions broaden the momentary thought-action repertoire, giving way to creative and novel thoughts and actions (e.g. explore, play). There is a large body of evidence for the broadening function of positive affect. It has been shown in experiments measuring creativity (Isen, Daubman, & Nowicki, 1987) and the scope of attention (Fredrickson & Branigan, 2005). Another example is a study measuring behavioral repertoires (Fredrickson & Branigan), where participants having watched a positive sequence of a film listed more statements of what they

30 Positive Psychology at Work 30 feel like doing than participants being shown either a neutral or an anger or fear-eliciting sequence. The broaden-and-build theory further states that positive emotions help an individual build enduring physical, intellectual, social and psychological resources. For example, a new solution found to a problem becomes an intellectual resource. Shared experience of positive emotions helps create friendship, which is a social resource. As such, in contrast to the more direct effects of negative emotions, positive emotions lead to indirect and long-term benefits. The resources built will be available to the individual in later situations, even when in a different emotional state. Concerning physiological reactions, Fredrickson (1998, 2001) argues that positive emotions fasten recovery from the heightened cardiovascular activity triggered by negative emotions. The broaden-and-build theory thus further suggests that positive emotions have an undoing effect on the momentarily narrowed psychological and physiological repertoire resulting from negative emotions. This notion found support in empirical studies measuring how positive emotions accelerate cardiovascular recovery after negative emotional arousal (see e.g. Fredrickson, Mancuso, Branigan, & Tugade, 2000). Hence positive emotions seem to play an important role in regulating the negative ones. The undoing effects of positive emotions might even protect health through their influence on cardiovascular activity. Fredrickson (1998, 2003) predicts an upward spiral of positive emotions and broadened thinking as they engender each other reciprocally, leading to increased emotional well-being.

31 Positive Psychology at Work Positive Emotions at the Workplace The findings around Fredrickson s broadened-and-build theory have important implications for the work setting. All of the described effects above can also lead to positive work outcomes in that positive emotions enlarge people s capacity to generate ideas, foster creative problem solving, promote social connections and involvement or facilitate recovery after a stressful situation. Higgs (2010) argues that facilitating a climate of positive emotions is particularly important during organizational change, as they can result in seeing the big picture and fuel innovation and flexibility, while negative emotions such as fear may lead to resistance and lack of openness. However, there is a minor caveat: a balance between both is important, as experiencing only positive emotions may lead to ceasing efforts. People frequently experiencing positive emotions - happy people - have been found to have benefits in the work, love and health domains. For example, some of the characteristics related to happy people are confidence, energy, physical well-being and likability. At the workplace, happy individuals are more likely to find a job, to be evaluated more positively by supervisors, to cope better with distress and to be more likely to keep their job (for a meta analytic review see Lyubomirsky, King, & Diener, 2005). So it seems not only does success make people happy, which is a common assumption, but happiness itself can foster success. Taken together, findings suggest that organizational settings eliciting positive emotions may not only lead to positive outcomes for the individuals, but may also contribute to growth and performance related outcomes. As Fredrickson (2003) puts it, an individual s positive emotion may not only lead to optimal functioning of the individual, but of the whole organization.