Emerging Positive Organizational Behavior
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Leadership Institute Faculty Publications Leadership Institute 6-2007 Emerging Positive Organizational Behavior Fred Luthans University of Nebraska - Lincoln, [email protected] Carolyn M. Youssef Bellevue University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/leadershipfacpub Part of the Management Sciences and Quantitative Methods Commons Luthans, Fred and Youssef, Carolyn M., "Emerging Positive Organizational Behavior" (2007). Leadership Institute Faculty Publications. 8. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/leadershipfacpub/8 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Leadership Institute at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Leadership Institute Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Published in Journal of Management 33:3 (June 2007), pp. 321-349; doi: 10.1177/0149206307300814 Copyright © 2007 Southern Management Association; published by Sage Publications. Used by permission. Emerging Positive Organizational Behavior Fred Luthans Department of Management, Gallup Leadership Institute, University of Nebraska–Lincoln, Lincoln, NE 68588-0491 Corresponding author: tel 402 472-2324, fax 402 472-5855, email [email protected] Carolyn M. Youssef College of Business, Bellevue University, 1000 Galvin Road South, Bellevue, NE 68005-3098 Abstract Although the value of positivity has been assumed over the years, only recently has it be- come a major focus area for theory building, research, and application in psychology and now organizational behavior. This review article examines, in turn, selected representa- tive positive traits (Big Five personality, core self-evaluations, and character strengths and virtues), positive state-like psychological resource capacities (efficacy, hope, optimism, re- siliency, and psychological capital), positive organizations (drawn from positive organi- zation 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 unnoticed. 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 press), positive organiza- 321 322 L UTHANS & Y OUSSEF IN J OURNAL OF M ANAGE M ENT 33 (2007) tional scholarship (POS; Cameron & Caza, 2004; Cameron, Dutton, & Quinn, 2003; see http://www.bus.umich.edu/Positive/), and, more recently, psychological cap- ital (PsyCap; see Luthans, Avey, & Avolio, 2007; Luthans, Avey, Avolio, Norman, & Combs, 2006; Luthans, Avolio, Avey, & Norman, in press; Luthans, Avolio, Wa- lumbwa, & 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 or- ganizational behavior, organizational leadership, and human resource manage- ment. Following Seligman and Csikszentmihalyi’s (2000) initial conceptualization of positive psychology and Roberts’s (2006) recent recommendations concerning the study of positivity in organizational behavior, our approach in structuring this re- view is to examine positive traits, positive state-like psychological resource capaci- ties, positive organizations, and positive behaviors. Moreover, in line with Kilduff’s (2006) recent proposed guidelines for analysis and review, we position the emerg- ing stream of positivity-oriented theories and research as being complementary and an alternative perspective rather than as a substitute or replacement to the exist- ing 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 empha- sizes 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 suc- cess, necessitates higher-than-average performance (Avolio & Luthans, 2006; Sut- cliffe & 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 en- try 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, straightforward, 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 unfortunately was played out in the ethical meltdowns and the dark side of leadership that have recently plagued many of our former cor- porate icons. To focus only on what is positive may lead to at least implicitly attrib- uting every vice and things that go wrong to the social context within which orga- nizational behavior takes place. However, the social context is largely a creation of the individuals that make up that context and their interactions. In addition, what E MERGING P OSITIVE O RGANIZATIONA L B EHAVIOR 323 is considered positive (or negative) is to a great extent contingent on cultural val- ues. 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 nega- tive 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 nega- tive weaknesses and their interactions and limitations. As examples, overconfidence has been found to hinder subsequent 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 var- ious positively oriented capacities, see Luthans, Youssef, et al., 2007a). As Seligman (2002) points out, the absence of psychopathology does not explain optimal function- ing, excellence, growth, flourishing, and fulfillment. However, positively oriented human traits, states, organizations, and behaviors may have a substantial positive im- pact on performance 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, positive 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 discour- age academic critical thinking or practical prudence. Today’s organizations, and their participants, systems, resources, goals, and strategies, constitute positives to be cele- brated and accelerated and negatives to be avoided, managed, or learned from. An integrative approach is necessary for a fuller understanding of the dynamics of suc- cess and failure in today’s flat-world environment. 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 role and perspective of positivity in the workplace serving as a point of departure, we now turn to a re- view of positive traits, state-like capacities, organizations, and behaviors. Positive Traits The role of enduring, relatively stable, positive traits in enhancing human perfor- mance in the workplace has been traditionally studied in the field