Cjas 191

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 4

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/264300350

Positive Organizational Scholarship

Article in Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences / Revue Canadienne des Sciences de l Administration · March 2011
DOI: 10.1002/cjas.191

CITATIONS READS

12 368

1 author:

Kevin Kelloway
Saint Mary's University
260 PUBLICATIONS 24,148 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Kevin Kelloway on 11 March 2021.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.


Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences
Revue canadienne des sciences de l’administration
28: 1–3 (2011)
Published online in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com). DOI: 10.1002/CJAS.191

Positive Organizational Scholarship


E. Kevin Kelloway
Saint Mary’s University

There has always been a paradox at the centre of our such, positive organizational scholarship is a perspective
understanding of work in organizations. On the one hand that is changing the field of organizational behaviour
we accept that work is beneficial for most people—there is (Nelson & Cooper, 2007).
a large literature documenting the adverse consequences of As in any new field, initial research focus on positive
unemployment (Feather, 1990) that extends back to the time organizational scholarship has been derived from other
of the Industrial Revolution (Burnett, 1994). On the other fields. Topics such as flow (Csikszentmihalyi, 1975, 1990),
hand, in attempting to understand the experiences of indi- positivity (Fredrickson, 1998, 2010), and virtuous behav-
viduals at work, we often focus on negative outcomes such iour (Peterson & Seligman, 2004) have all originated in
as occupational stress (see for example, Kelloway & Day, other domains but have found application in organizations.
2005). For example, researchers have examined organizational pre-
Our focus on the negative aspects of work is not unique dictors and consequences of flow (e.g., Demerouti, 2006;
to the field of organizational behaviour. In making his inau- Eisenberger, Jones, Stinglhamber, Shanock, & Randall,
gural address as president of the American Psychological 2005; Fullagar & Kelloway, 2009) and organizational
Association, Martin Seligman observed that since World virtues (Cameron, 2003; Cameron, Bright, & Caza, 2004).
War II, psychology had become dominated by an emphasis Other research foci in the domain of positive organizational
on pathology and the attempt to “fix” human problems scholarship have emerged from the study of organizational
(Seligman, 1999). Although not denying the benefits of this behaviour.
approach, Seligman argued that by exclusively focusing on Perhaps the most intensely researched of these has been
pathology we ignored the positive or good aspects of life. psychological capital. Consistent with his search for indi-
In his own career, Seligman moved from the study of vidual and malleable strengths and psychological capabili-
depression and learned helplessness (Seligman, 1975) to the ties, Luthans and colleagues (Luthans, Youssef, & Avolio,
study of optimism (Seligman, 1991), and in inaugurating a 2006) defined psychological capital as comprising hope,
field of positive psychology he was encouraging other psy- optimism, resilience, and self-efficacy. Research findings to
chologists to consider a similar shift. date show that psychological capital is related to employee
Sparked by this movement, researchers in organiza- satisfaction and performance (e.g., Luthans, Avolio, Avey,
tional behaviour began thinking and writing about positive & Norman, 2007). Moreover, the effectiveness of a web-
organizational behaviour (e.g., Luthans, 2002; Wright, based intervention for developing psychological capital has
2002). Luthans (2002) began promoting positive organiza- been demonstrated (Luthans, Avey, & Patera, 2008).
tional behaviour, which he defined as “the study and appli- Given that the study of psychological capital is seen by
cation of positively-oriented human resource strengths and some as defining the field of positive organizational behav-
psychological capacities that can be measured, developed, iour, it is not surprising that two of the studies reported in
and effectively managed for performance improvement in this special issue focus on the construct. First, Sweetman,
today’s workplace” (p. 52) Perhaps more broadly, positive Luthans, Avey, and Luthans examine the relationship
organizational scholarship deals with the study of positive between psychological capital and performance on a cre-
“outcomes, processes and attributes of organizations and ative task. This is an important extension in that creativity
their members” (Cameron, Dutton, & Quinn, 2003, p.4). As and innovation are critical to organizational success. Sweet-
man et al. also examine the contribution of overall psycho-
logical capital over and above the constituent elements
Please address correspondence to: E. Kevin Kelloway, Saint Mary’s Uni- (hope, optimism, resilience, and psychological capital),
versity, Sobey School of Business, 923 Robie Street, Halifax, NS, Canada demonstrating that the global construct offers incremental
B3H 3C3. Email: kevin.kelloway@smu.ca prediction.

Can J Adm Sci


Copyright © 2011 ASAC. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 1 28(1), 1–3 (2011)
POSITIVE ORGANIZATIONAL SCHOLARSHIP KELLOWAY

In this issue, Saks and Gruman also deal with the notion can only be good for our understanding of organizational
of psychological capital. In their article they re-examined behaviour.
the socialization process in light of job demands-resource
theory. They propose a model of socialization, which they
label Socialization Resource Theory, aimed at enhancing References
psychological capital. Their model identifies three central
socialization processes (orientation and training, task char- Amabile, T. (1983). Brilliant but Cruel: Perceptions of Negative
acteristics, and social support), and shows how these Evaluators. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 19,
resources and psychological capital contribute to employee 146–156.
engagement. Burnett, J. (1994). Idle hands: The experience of unemployment,
One link between positive organizational scholarship 1790–1990. New York: Routledge.
and traditional organizational behaviour is the attempt to Cameron, K.S., Dutton, J.E., & Quinn, R.E. (2003, Eds). Positive
understand employee affective and motivational responses OrganizationalScholarship. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-
to the work environment. Recognizing that constructs such Koehler, Ltd.
as job satisfaction offer only a limited sampling of affective Cameron, K.S., Bright, D., & Caza, A. (2004). Exploring the rela-
tionships between virtuousness and performance. American
response (see for example, VanKatwyk, Fox, Spector, &
Behavioral Scientist, 47, 766–790.
Kelloway, 2000), researchers have expanded their focus to Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1975). Beyond boredom and anxiety:
topics such as employee engagement (Harter, Schmidt, & Experiencing flow in work and play. San Fransisco:
Hayes, 2002; Macey & Schneider, 2010) or employees’ love Jossey-Bass.
of the job (Kelloway, Innes, Barling, Francis, & Turner, Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal
2010). Underlying both constructs is the notion of employ- experience. New York: Harper & Row.
ees’ passion for the work and this is the focus of the third Demerouti, E. (2006). Job characteristics, flow, and performance:
paper by Forest, Mageau, Sarrazin, and Morin. They draw The moderating role of conscientiousness. Journal of Occu-
on Vallerand et al’s (2003) theory to define and contrast the pational Health Psychology, 11, 266–280.
effects of obsessive and harmonious passion—showing that Feather, N.T. (1990). The psychological impact of unemployment.
they are differentially related to outcomes such as mental New York: Springer-Verlag.
Eisenberger, R., Jones, J.R., Stinglhamber, F., Shanock, L., &
health and flow and appear to operate through different
Randall, A.T. (2005). Flow experiences at work: for high need
mechanisms. achievers alone? Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26,
Finally, Strickland and Towler also consider a tradi- 755–775.
tional, albeit “positive,” topic in organizational behaviour Fredrickson, B.L. (1998). What good are positive emotions?
with their focus on charismatic leadership. They show that Review of General Psychology, 2, 300–319.
respondents’ openness to experience moderates the relation- Fredrickson, B.L. (2001). The role of positive emotions in positive
ship between charismatic leadership and creativity. Their psychology: The broaden and build theory. American Psy-
use of a multisource data and mixed modelling techniques chologist, 56, 218–226.
provides a rigorous test of their hypotheses. The focus on Fredrickson, B.L. (2010). Positivity: Top notch research reveals
creativity as an outcome is, as in the Sweetman et al. article the 3 to 1 ratio that will change your life. New York: Crown
(this issue), characteristic of a positive view of organiza- Publishing.
Fullagar, C., & Kelloway, E.K. (2009). “Flow” at Work: An
tional behaviour and consistent with the “broaden and
Experience Sampling Approach. Journal of Occupational
build” theory of positive emotions in the workplace and Organizational Psychology, 82, 595–615.
(Frederickson, 2001). Harter, J.K., Schmidt, F.L., & Hayes, T.L. (2002). Business-unit-
The advent of “positive” perspective in organizational level relationship between employee satisfaction, employee
scholarship and psychology is often accompanied by engagement, and business outcomes: A meta-analysis. Journal
considerable cynicism. Skeptics express concern about of Applied Psychology, 87(2), 268–279.
whether there is any substance to the “positive movement” Kelloway, E.K., & Day, A.L. (2005). Building healthy organiza-
and proponents of a more positive orientation are seen as tions: What we know so far. Canadian Journal of Behav-
lacking in scientific rigour. Although such views may ioural Science, 37, 223–236.
benefit the individual skeptics (Amabile, 1983), they do Kelloway, E.K., Inness, M., Barling, J., Francis, L., & Turner, N.
not stand up to the available data. As the papers in this (in press). Loving one’s job: Construct development and
implications for individual well-being. In D. Ganster & P.L.
special issue illustrate, those working in the field of posi-
Perrewe (Eds.), Research in organizational stress and well-
tive organizational scholarship are willing to subject their being. Greenwich, CT: JAI.
ideas to empirical examination. Although the focus of the Luthans, F. (2002). The need and meaning of positive organiza-
researchers may be on the “positive,” the use of well- tional behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23,
developed theory and rigorous research methodology is 695–706.
becoming characteristic of research in the field. Positive Luthans, F., Avey, J.B., & Patera, J.L. (2008). Experimental analy-
organizational scholarship is rich in theory and data that sis of a web-based training intervention to develop positive

Can J Adm Sci


Copyright © 2011 ASAC. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 2 28(1), 1–3 (2011)
POSITIVE ORGANIZATIONAL SCHOLARSHIP KELLOWAY

psychological capital. Academy of Management Learning and Seligman, M.E.P. (1975). Helplessness: On Depression, Develop-
Education, 7(2), 209–221. ment, and Death. San Francisco: W.H. Freeman.
Luthans, F.B., Avolio, B.J., Avey, J.B., & Norman, S.M. (2007). Seligman, M.E.P. (1991). Learned optimism. New York: Kopf.
Positive psychological capital: Measurement and relationship Seligman, M.E.P. (1999). The president’s address. American
with performance and satisfaction. Personnel Psychology. Psychology, 54, 559–562.
60(3), 541–572. Vallerand, R.J., Blanchard, C., Magneau, G.A., Koestner, R.,
Luthans, F.B., Youssef, C.M., & Avolio, B.J. (2006). Psychological Ratelle, C., Leonard, M., Gagne, M., & Marsolais, G. (2003).
Capital: Developing the Human Competitive Edge. New Les passions des le Ames: On obsessive and harmonious
York: Oxford University Press. passion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85,
Macey, W.M., & Schneider, B. (2008). The meaning of employee 756–767.
engagement. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 1, VanKatwyk, P., Fox, S., Spector, P., & Kelloway, E.K. (2000).
3–30. Using the Job-Related Affective Well-Being Scale (JAWS) to
Nelson, D., & Cooper, C.L. (2007). Positive organizational behav- investigate affective response to work stressors. Journal of
ior. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications. Occupational Health Psychology, 5, 219–230.
Peterson, C., & Seligman, S. Character strengths and virtues: A Wright, T.A. (2003). Positive organizational behavior: An idea
handbook and classification. Oxford: Oxford University whose time has truly come. Journal of Organizational Psy-
Press. chology, 24, 437–442.

Can J Adm Sci


Copyright © 2011 ASAC. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 3 28(1), 1–3 (2011)

View publication stats

You might also like