Journal of Management
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Journal of Management http://jom.sagepub.com Emerging Positive Organizational Behavior Fred Luthans and Carolyn M. Youssef Journal of Management 2007; 33; 321 DOI: 10.1177/0149206307300814 The online version of this article can be found at: http://jom.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/33/3/321 Published by: http://www.sagepublications.com On behalf of: Southern Management Association Additional services and information for Journal of Management can be found at: Email Alerts: http://jom.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Subscriptions: http://jom.sagepub.com/subscriptions Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav Citations (this article cites 150 articles hosted on the SAGE Journals Online and HighWire Press platforms): http://jom.sagepub.com/cgi/content/refs/33/3/321 Downloaded from http://jom.sagepub.com at CLAREMONT COLLEGE on April 13, 2008 © 2007 Southern Management Association. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution. Emerging Positive Organizational Behavior Fred Luthans* Department of Management, Gallup Leadership Institute, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE 68588-0491 Carolyn M. Youssef College of Business, Bellevue University, 1000 Galvin Road South, Bellevue, NE 68005-3098 Although the value of positivity has been assumed over the years, only recently has it become a major focus area for theory building, research, and application in psychology and now organi- zational behavior. This review article examines, in turn, selected representative positive traits (Big Five personality, core self-evaluations, and character strengths and virtues), positive state- like psychological resource capacities (efficacy, hope, optimism, resiliency, and psychological capital), positive organizations (drawn from positive organization scholarship), and positive behaviors (organizational citizenship and courageous principled action). This review concludes with recommendations for future research and effective application. Keywords: positive organizational behavior; psychological capital; positive organizational scholarship; hope; efficacy; resilience; optimism As positive psychology has gained momentum (e.g., Aspinwall & Straudinger, 2003; Carr, 2004; Compton, 2005; Giacalone, Jurkiewicz, & Dunn, 2005; Keyes & Haidt, 2003; Linley & Joseph, 2004; Lopez & Snyder, 2003; C. Peterson, 2006; C. Peterson & Seligman, 2004; Snyder & Lopez, 2002; see also http://www.positivepsychology.org for a continually updated Web site on this body of knowledge), its implications for the workplace have not gone unno- ticed. In particular, several identifiable domains and approaches to positivity in the workplace have recently emerged. These include positive organizational behavior (POB; e.g., see Luthans, 2002a, 2002b, 2003; Nelson & Cooper 2007; T. A. Wright, 2003; Youssef & Luthans, in *Corresponding author. Tel: 402-472-2324; fax: 402-472-5855. E-mail address: [email protected] Journal of Management, Vol. 33 No. 3, June 2007 321-349 DOI: 10.1177/0149206307300814 © 2007 Southern Management Association. All rights reserved. 321 Downloaded from http://jom.sagepub.com at CLAREMONT COLLEGE on April 13, 2008 © 2007 Southern Management Association. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution. 322 Journal of Management / June 2007 press), positive organizational scholarship (POS; Cameron & Caza, 2004; Cameron, Dutton, & Quinn, 2003; see http://www.bus.umich.edu/Positive/), and, more recently, psychological capital (PsyCap; see Luthans, Avey, & Avolio, 2007; Luthans, Avey, Avolio, Norman, & Combs, 2006; Luthans, Avolio, Avey, & Norman, in press; Luthans, Avolio, Walumbwa, & Li, 2005; Luthans, Luthans, & Luthans, 2004; Luthans & Youssef, 2004; Luthans, Youssef, & Avolio, 2007a, 2007b; see http://www.gli.unl.edu for continual updates). There is a general consensus, even among the few dissenting voices (e.g., see Fineman, 2006), that the world in general, and our workplaces in particular, are in need of a more balanced approach that takes into consideration both the positive and the negative, both building on strengths and trying to correct weaknesses. In this article, we review positivity in the workplace literature as it relates to organiza- tional behavior, organizational leadership, and human resource management. Following Seligman and Csikszentmihalyi’s (2000) initial conceptualization of positive psychology and Roberts’s (2006) recent recommendations concerning the study of positivity in organi- zational behavior, our approach in structuring this review is to examine positive traits, posi- tive state-like psychological resource capacities, positive organizations, and positive behaviors. Moreover, in line with Kilduff’s (2006) recent proposed guidelines for analysis and review, we position the emerging stream of positivity-oriented theories and research as being complementary and an alternative perspective rather than as a substitute or replace- ment to the existing positively oriented and/or negatively oriented organizational behavior body of knowledge. Like positive psychology, the recently emerging POB does not proclaim to represent some new discovery of the importance of positivity but rather emphasizes the need for more focused theory building, research, and effective application of positive traits, states, organizations, and behaviors as represented in this review. Positivity: Why? Why Not? The workplace is increasingly becoming a place where survival, let alone success, neces- sitates higher-than-average performance (Avolio & Luthans, 2006; Sutcliffe & Vogus, 2003). Cutthroat competition and unhindered access to information, on a global scale, have created a world that is “flat” (Friedman, 2005). In flat-world competition, a sustainable edge can no longer be just achieved through raising entry barriers or technological breakthroughs. By the same token, success can also no longer be attained by just trying to fix weaknesses. In today’s level playing field, success can be attained by “breaking the rules” (Buckingham & Coffman, 1999) and challenging traditional assumptions and existing paradigms through appreciative inquiry (see Cooperrider & Srivastva, 1987; Thatchenkery & Metzker, 2006) of what is being done right and building on strengths. Similar to a deficits approach, a positive perspective is far from being simple, straightfor- ward, or risk free (for a comprehensive critique, see Fineman, 2006). For example, a positivity approach may promote a more benevolent view of humans than is truly warranted. This unfor- tunately was played out in the ethical meltdowns and the dark side of leadership that have recently plagued many of our former corporate icons. To focus only on what is positive may lead to at least implicitly attributing every vice and things that go wrong to the social context within which organizational behavior takes place. However, the social context is largely a Downloaded from http://jom.sagepub.com at CLAREMONT COLLEGE on April 13, 2008 © 2007 Southern Management Association. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution. Luthans, Youssef / Positive Organizational Behavior 323 creation of the individuals that make up that context and their interactions. In addition, what is considered positive (or negative) is to a great extent contingent on cultural values. Virtues in one culture may not hold true in another culture. Moreover, there seems to be more loss than gain from trying to separate the positive from the negative when they are so tightly entangled. We would argue that much can be gained from utilizing approaches that help scholars and practitioners gain insights into both the positive strengths and the negative weaknesses and their interactions and limitations. As examples, overconfidence has been found to hinder sub- sequent performance (Vancouver, Thompson, Tischner, & Putka, 2002; Vancouver, Thompson, & Williams, 2001), unrealistic optimism can lead to evasion of responsibility (C. Peterson, 2000), and false hope can lead to poor allocation of resources and energies toward ineffective goals, to the detriment of both the individual and the organization (for other potential pitfalls in relation to the various positively oriented capacities, see Luthans, Youssef, et al., 2007a). As Seligman (2002) points out, the absence of psychopathology does not explain optimal func- tioning, excellence, growth, flourishing, and fulfillment. However, positively oriented human traits, states, organizations, and behaviors may have a substantial positive impact on perfor- mance and other desired outcomes beyond what material resources, classic business models, and deficit-oriented approaches can offer (Luthans,Youssef, et al., 2007a). In other words, pos- itive approaches should not be refuted based only on what they may exclude (Roberts, 2006). This review article, and positivity as a domain of inquiry, does not aim to discourage aca- demic critical thinking or practical prudence. Today’s organizations, and their participants, systems, resources, goals, and strategies, constitute positives to be celebrated and accelerated and negatives to be avoided, managed, or learned from. An integrative approach is necessary for a fuller understanding of the dynamics of success and failure in today’s flat-world envi- ronment. We would argue that much is lost when either the positive or the negative is slighted or forgotten, and each in isolation of the other leaves much to be desired. With this framing of the