PSYCHOLOGICAL CAPITAL:

A POSITIVE RESOURCE FOR

COMBATING EMPLOYEE STRESS
AND TURNOVER
J A M E S B . A V E Y, F R E D L U T H A N S , A N D S U S A N M .

F
JENSEN

O
Workplace stress is a growing concern for human resource managers. Although

O
considerable scholarly and practical attention has been devoted to stress man-
agement over the years, the time has come for new perspectives and research.

PR
Drawing from the emerging field of positive organizational behavior, this
study offers research findings with implications for combating occupational
stress. Specifically, data from a large sample of working adults across a vari-
ety of industries suggest that psychological capital (the positive resources of
D
efficacy, hope, optimism, and resilience) may be key to better understanding
TE
the variation in perceived symptoms of stress, as well as intentions to quit
and job search behaviors. The article concludes with practical strategies aimed
at leveraging and developing employees’ psychological capital to help them
better cope with workplace stress. © 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
EC

Keywords: positive psychological capital, stress, turnover intentions

R
R

T
he World Health Organization has long hours (American Psychological Asso-
O

declared occupational stress to be ciation, 2007). Extensive research over the

a worldwide epidemic. Certainly years has focused on identifying stressors
C

the impact of an increasingly pres- (e.g., Colligan & Higgins, 2006), coping
sured work environment is evi- mechanisms (e.g., Nelson & Sutton, 1990),
N

dent throughout American industry. One and ways that both individual employees
recent analysis noted that 20% of payroll and organizations can effectively manage
U

of a typical company goes toward dealing stress (e.g., Kram & Hall, 1989). Yet, despite
with stress-related problems (Riga, 2006), this attention, remedies to combat occupa-
and Americans identify work as their most tional stress remain elusive.
significant source of stress because of heavy Taking a new approach, this study draws
workloads, uncertain job expectations, and from both positive psychology and the

Correspondence to: James B. Avey, Department of Management, College of Business, Central Washington
University, 400 E. University Way, Ellensburg, WA 98926-7485, Phone: (509) 963-3381, Fax: 509-963-2875,
E-mail: [email protected]

Human Resource Management, September–October 2009, Vol. 48, No. 5, Pp. 677– 693
© 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Published online in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com).
DOI: 10.1002/hrm.20294

20294.indd 677 8/13/2009 1:52:13 PM

 678 HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT, SEPTEMBER–OCTOBER 2009

emerging study of positive organizational about a 1 (positive) to 15 (negative) ratio (of

behavior to investigate whether the recently positively to negatively focused articles)
identified core construct of psychological (Schaufeli & Salanova, 2007). Drawing from
capital (Luthans, Avolio, Avey, & Norman, positive psychology (e.g., Seligman & Csik-
2007; Luthans, Youssef, & Avolio, 2007) may szentmihalyi, 2000; Snyder & Lopez, 2002),
be a key factor in better understanding not the emerging positive organizational behav-
only how employees perceive stress symp- ior approach (introduced by Luthans, 2002a,
toms, but also the impact of stress on inten- 2002b; for a recent review article see Luthans
tions to quit and job search behaviors. & Youssef, 2007, and also see Nelson & Coo-
Specifically, we propose that human resource per, 2007; Wright, 2003) provides such a
development (HRD) strategies aimed at positive perspective and serves as the founda-
enhancing the components of employees’ tion for this study. Specifically, positive orga-

F
overall psychological capital or PsyCap nizational behavior (POB) is “the study and

O
(efficacy, optimism, hope, and resilience) application of positively oriented human re-
may reduce their perceptions of the symp- source strengths and psychological capacities

O
toms of stress, as well as limit subsequent that can be measured, developed, and effec-
turnover. tively managed for performance improve-

PR
First, we will review the background of ment” (Luthans, 2002b, p. 59).
positive organizational behavior, specifically Although there are an increasing number
the theoretical underpinnings of the core of approaches associated with POB (e.g.,
construct of psychological capital, and briefly Luthans & Youssef, 2007; Nelson & Cooper,
summarize workplace stress with particular 2007) and positive organizational scholar-
focus on stress-associated intentions to quit
and job search behaviors. Our study specifi-
D
ship (Cameron, Dutton, & Quinn, 2003), this
study uses the core construct of positive
AQ2
TE
cally focuses on physiological, cognitive, and psychological capital (see Luthans, Avolio,
emotive stress symptoms rather than exclu- et al., 2007; Luthans, Youssef, et al., 2007).
sively cognitive appraisals of job demands This PsyCap has been defined as “an individ-
EC

themselves being stressful. After presenting ual’s positive psychological state of develop-
the methodology and results in testing the ment and is characterized by: (1) having
study hypotheses, we conclude with some confidence (self-efficacy) to take on and put
practical implications of the findings, paying in the necessary effort to succeed at challeng-
R

particular attention to HRD guidelines to ing tasks; (2) making a positive attribution
help build and support employees’ PsyCap, (optimism) about succeeding now and in the
R

which will help combat their stress and re- future; (3) persevering toward goals and,
O

duce turnover. when necessary, redirecting paths to goals

(hope) in order to succeed; and (4) when
C

The Emerging Positive Approach beset by problems and adversity, sustaining AQ3
and bouncing back and even beyond (resil-
N

As organizations seek ways to help employees ience) to attain success” (Luthans, Youssef,
navigate the ever-challenging work environ- et al., 2007, p. 3).
U

ment, they increasingly are recognizing the This operational definition differentiates
importance of positivity and concentrating the core construct of PsyCap (efficacy, opti-
on developing employee strengths, rather mism, hope, and resilience) from the widely
than dwelling on the negative and trying to recognized aspects of human capital (what
fix employee vulnerabilities and weaknesses. you know in terms of knowledge, skills, abili-
This approach does not claim to discover the ties, and experience) and social capital (whom
value of positivity but, rather, calls for a more you know, including your network of rela-
positive approach than the dominant nega- tionships). Recent research has empirically
tive perspective regarding occupational stress. supported PsyCap as a higher-order core fac-
For example, a recent survey of the articles in tor (Luthans, Avolio, et al., 2007) that is open
the occupational health literature found to development (Luthans, Avey, Avolio,

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

20294.indd 678 8/13/2009 1:52:20 PM

 PSYCHOLOGICAL CAPITAL 679 AQ12

Norman, & Combs, 2006; Luthans, Avey, & Despite such possible benefits, however,
Patera, 2008) and is associated with higher there is no question that stress can result in
performance (Luthans, Avolio, et al., 2007). health problems, increased accidents, and
As more fully outlined in the development burnout (Bernard & Krupat, 1994). A sub-
of the study hypotheses, overall PsyCap stantial body of research clearly demon-
also may affect employee stress levels and strates the costly connection between
intentions to quit. Before deriving these hy- workplace stress and illness. For example,
potheses and testing them, however, a brief studies show workplace stress to be a con-
overview of the nature of today’s workplace tributing factor in the leading
stress is provided. causes of death in the United
Heavier workloads
States and health-care expendi-
Workplace Stress Relevant to tures are nearly 50% greater for and increased

F
workers who report high levels
Psychological Capital

O
of stress (Goetzel et al., 1998). business travel
A number of factors contribute to workplace Research has shown that job-
also affect stress

O
stress, ranging from technological change related stress is linked with soar-
and global competitive pressures to toxic ing organizational (and societal) levels as more

PR
work environments and managerial bully- health-care costs (e.g., Colligan
ing (Colligan & Higgins, 2006). Heavier & Higgins, 2006; Manning, Jack- than one-fifth of
workloads and increased business travel also son, & Fusilier, 1996).
affect stress levels as more than one-fifth of Beyond its significant impact U.S. managers and
U.S. managers and professionals work at on health care, workplace stress
least 60 hours a week and many are on call
around the clock for clients across the globe
D
is a key human resource man-
agement issue because of the
professionals work

at least 60 hours
TE
(Hymowitz, 2007). Downsizing; rapid apparent connections among
changes in competitive pressures, technol- perceived stress, employee perfor- a week and many
ogy, and work procedures; heightened levels mance (e.g., Motowildo, Packard,
are on call around
EC

of job insecurity; and ever-demanding cus- & Manning, 1986), and undesir-
tomers make today’s workplace arguably able organizational outcomes, the clock for clients
even more stress-laden than it was just a such as job dissatisfaction, burn-
decade ago. A large-scale survey at Princeton out, and organiza-tional with- across the globe
R

(1997) indicated that the majority of drawal (e.g., Bhagat, McQuaid,

(Hymowitz, 2007).
employees at all levels feel “quite a bit or Lindholm, & Segovis, 1985; Bo-
R

extremely stressed” at work. A 2007 study swell, Olson-Buchanan, & LePine,

O

by the American Psychological Association 2004). Too often, the result of these dysfunc-
(APA) noted that 50% of Americans say tions is voluntary turnover. For example,
C

their stress has significantly increased in the the 2007 study by the American Psychologi-
past five years, and that work is the biggest cal Association found that 52% of employees
N

stressor for 74% of Americans, up from 59% had searched for a new job or left a job
in 2006. on the basis of their perceived workplace
U

The classic definition of stress offered by stress. Reducing this detrimental impact
Lazarus (1966) is that it “occurs when an and cost of workplace stress has become a
individual perceives that the demands of an major concern for both organizations and
external situation are beyond his or her per- national economies (Le Fevre & Kolt, 2006).
ceived ability to cope with them.” Although We propose that when combined into the
such stress affects employees today, it is core construct of PsyCap, the positive re-
important to note that not only does it re- sources of efficacy, optimism, hope, and
sult in negative outcomes, but it also can resilience may provide a better understand-
have positive outcomes, such as increased ing of, as well as practical guidelines for
creativity (Le Fevre, Matheny, & Kolt, 2003) managing, the stress epidemic plaguing
and enhanced performance (Marino, 1997). today’s organizations.

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

20294.indd 679 8/13/2009 1:52:20 PM

 680 HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT, SEPTEMBER–OCTOBER 2009

Psychological Capital: A Positive positive approach, our study of positive

Strength for Combating Stress PsyCap addresses the same cognitive capaci-
ties he advocates as instrumental in better
In their widely recognized work, Stress, coping with stress and, thus, reducing related
Appraisal, and Coping, Lazarus and Folkman symptoms. Also, all of the components of
(1984) argued that people suffer stress when PsyCap are open to development (e.g., see
they believe they lack the resources to deal Bandura, 1997; Masten & Reed, 2002;
with difficult events. They also noted the Seligman, 1998; Snyder, 2000), and recent
complex interaction between individuals studies show that overall PsyCap also can be
and their surroundings and emphasized the developed in short training interventions
role of cognitive processes and intervening with employees (Luthans, Avey, et al., 2006;
variables (such as appraisal and coping) that Luthans, Avey, & Patera, 2008). By fostering

F
may appear as “hidden factors,” but that psychological capital, HR managers may pro-

O
greatly affect the outcome of po- vide a new human resource development ap-
tentially stressful events. Other proach to help employees build the critical
PsyCap may turn

O
researchers have recognized addi- resources needed in today’s stress-filled work-
out to be one of the tional factors that may affect place. Each component of the potentially

PR
stress, such as personality dimen- critical resource of psychological capital is
critical resources sions (Costa & McCrae, 1990). first briefly described to help derive the study
PsyCap may turn out to be hypotheses.
that Lazarus and
one of the critical resources that Efficacy is based on Bandura’s (1997)
Folkman (1984) said Lazarus and Folkman (1984) said social cognitive theory. Applied to the work-

were needed for

were needed for employees to
cope with stressful events or con-
D
place, it is defined as “an individual’s convic-
tion about his or her abilities to mobilize
TE
ditions at work, thus minimizing the motivation, cognitive resources, and
employees to cope
symptoms of stress; however, courses of action necessary to successfully
with stressful events Lazarus (2003, p. 94) also cau- execute a specific task within a given con-
EC

tioned researchers against making text” (Stajkovic & Luthans, 1998b, p. 66).
or conditions at a false distinction between “posi- Efficacy beliefs affect how individuals per-
tive” and “negative” human char- ceive and interpret events. Those with low
work. acteristics. For example, he argued efficacy are easily convinced that efforts to
R

that “you can’t separate them and address difficult challenges are futile so are
make good sense” (Lazarus, 2003, p. 94). In more likely to experience negative stress
R

his critique of positive psychology, Lazarus symptoms, while those with higher levels of
O

(2003) asserts that stress and loss are inevi- efficacy are more likely to perceive challenges
table aspects of life that often play a key role as surmountable given sufficient competen-
C

in developing the individual strengths cies and effort (Bandura, 2007).

needed not only to survive, but to flourish. Efficacy has been strongly linked with
N

He argues that considerable value can be work-related performance outcomes (e.g.,

gained by more fully understanding how in- Bandura & Locke, 2003; Stajkovic & Luthans,
U

dividuals might transcend some of the harsh 1998a). Moreover, several approaches have
realities of life and that to ignore negatively been found successful in developing efficacy,
oriented stress and coping in favor of more including mastery experiences, modeling,
“positive” human aspects would be short- social persuasion, and physiological/psycho-
sighted. Yet Lazarus (2003) specifically iden- logical arousal (Bandura, 1997). Consistently
tifies efficacy, optimism, hope, and resilience with Lazarus (2003), Bandura (2007) argues
as relevant avenues of exploration for en- that most human stress is governed by beliefs
hanced understanding of how humans adapt about coping efficacy. For example, research
to stress. by Matsui and Onglatco (1992) found percep-
Although Lazarus (2003) has expressed tions of work overload to be affected by per-
initial reservations regarding an overzealous ceived self-efficacy, with female employees

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

20294.indd 680 8/13/2009 1:52:21 PM

 PSYCHOLOGICAL CAPITAL 681

who had a lower sense of efficacy more endowed with added protection” (p. 80) and
stressed by heavy work demands and respon- less likely to experience symptoms of stress in
sibilities than those with higher self-efficacy. the workplace.
Links between efficacy and workplace stress Hope is commonly used in everyday lan-
also have been demonstrated in recent stud- guage, but within the context of positive
ies of workers in Hong Kong and Beijing psychology has a specific meaning with
(Siu, Spector, & Cooper, 2005) and of nurses substantial theoretical support (see Snyder,
providing cancer care (Fillion et al., 2007). 2000). Hope is defined as a “positive moti-
Efficacy also has been shown to be related to vational state that is based on an interac-
the socialization and retention of new tively derived sense of successful (1) agency
employees (Bauer, Bodner, Erdogan, Truxillo, (goal-directed energy) and (2) pathways
& Tucker, 2007) and the organizational com- (planning to meet goals)” (Snyder, Irving, &

F
mitment and turnover intentions of existing Anderson, 1991, p. 287). In other words,

O
staff (Harris & Cameron, 2005). hope consists of both willpower (individu-
Optimism, as included in PsyCap, is both als’ agency, or determination to achieve

O
realistic and flexible (e.g., see Luthans, their goals) and “waypower” thinking (being
Youssef, et al., 2007; Schneider, 2001). Selig- able to devise alternative pathways and con-
AQ4

PR
man (1998) defines an optimistic explana- tingency plans to achieve a goal in the face
tory style as one that attributes positive of obstacles).
events to personal, permanent, and pervasive Research suggests that managers with
causes, and negative events to external, tem- higher levels of hope have correspondingly
porary, and situation-specific ones. Optimism higher rates of work unit performance as
as a facet of PsyCap is associated with a posi-
tive outlook but is not an unchecked process
D
well as increased retention rates and more
satisfied employees (Peterson & Luthans,
TE
without realistic evaluation (Luthans, Youssef, 2003). There also appears to be a connec-
et al., 2007). tion between hope and job satisfaction and
As with efficacy, optimism has been organizational commitment (Luthans &
EC

shown to be amenable to development Jensen, 2002; Youssef & Luthans, 2007). To

through such methods as Schneider’s (2001) date, however, the relationship between
three-step process, which includes leniency hope and workplace stress has received lit-
for the past, appreciation for the present, and tle, if any, research attention. Yet there is
R

opportunity seeing for the future. For exam- compelling evidence from hope research in
ple, as employees deal with stressors on other contexts (e.g., clinical psychology and
R

the job, they need to be sensitive in distin- athletics) suggesting that hope may provide
O

guishing facts from perception and allow individuals a positive resource for stressful
themselves the benefit of the doubt for mis- work situations. For example, Snyder and
C

fortunes that were conceivably beyond their colleagues (1991) have shown that hope has
control. Schneider (2001) demonstrates that a significant negative correlation with anxi-
N

employees must carefully assess the utility of ety, and studies demonstrate an individual’s
holding on to feelings of guilt or shame, as hope level protects against perceptions
U

those negative feelings could limit their abil- of vulnerability, uncontrollability, and
ity to appreciate and learn from the positives unpredictability (Snyder, 2000). In addition,
of a situation and even hinder future risk tak- training interventions have proven success-
ing. In their analysis of “portfolio workers” ful in supporting and building individuals’
(self-employed individuals who work for hope (Snyder, 2000).
multiple clients), Totterdell, Wood, and Wall Workplace hope training efforts are just
(2006) found optimism to be a key moderat- beginning to emerge (e.g., see Luthans, Avey,
ing factor in the relationship between job et al., 2006; Luthans et al., 2008; Luthans,
characteristics and job strain. Those portfolio Youssef, et al., 2007). The initial results from
workers with higher levels of optimism were these efforts focusing on goal design, pathways
considered by Totterdell et al. (2006) to “be generation, and overcoming obstacles are

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

20294.indd 681 8/13/2009 1:52:21 PM

 682 HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT, SEPTEMBER–OCTOBER 2009

encouraging and could help HR managers sense of reality (Coutu, 2002), and resiliency
influence employees’ perceptions of challenges development efforts are similarly grounded
versus hindrances in stress management in the realistic assessments and creation of
(Luthans, Avey, et al., 2006; Luthans et al., coping strategies when a setback occurs.
2008). Research indicates that resilient individu-
Resilience, the “developable capacity to als are better equipped to deal with the stress-
rebound or bounce back from adversity, ors in a constantly changing workplace
conflict, failure, or even positive events, environment, as they are open to new experi-
progress, and increased responsibility” (Lu- ences, are flexible to changing demands, and
thans, 2002a, p. 702) is arguably the most show more emotional stability when faced
important positive resource to navigating a with adversity (Tugade & Fredrickson, 2004).
AQ5 turbulent and stressful workplace. Accord- Recent research also demonstrates a positive

F
ing to a recent KPMG poll, more than link between resilience and employee perfor-

O
25,000 mergers, acquisitions, and organiza- mance (Luthans, Avolio, et al. 2007), job
tional restructurings were completed during satisfaction (Youssef & Luthans, 2007), orga-

O
2007, as companies strove for enhanced nizational commitment (Youssef & Luthans,
competitive positioning and greater access 2007), work happiness (Youssef & Luthans,

PR
to world markets. Job redesign, downsizing, 2007), and the ability to deal with massive
and layoffs are increasingly com- corporate downsizing (Maddi, 1987). As stress
monplace as organizations shift is increasingly understood to contribute to
There is focus and form. Career consul- employee turnover (e.g., Coomber & Barrib-
tants urge individuals to be pre- all, 2007), it appears that resilience may be a
considerable

evidence that
pared for “wrenches in one’s
career plan” and develop the
D
key factor in determining how individuals
respond in stressful environments.
TE
ability to adjust, bounce back,
resilience, once and make transitions (Trunk, Psychological Capital: Core
2007). The “survivor” literature
believed to be a rare Construct and Study Hypotheses
EC

also offers compelling evidence

dispositional trait, is of how organizational downsiz- Each of the PsyCap components described
ing and restructuring can create has been shown to be conceptually indepen-
statelike and open to considerable stress and negative dent (Bandura, 1997; Luthans & Jensen,
R

consequences for remaining em- 2002; Luthans, Youssef, & Avolio, 2007;
development.
ployees (Makawatsakul & Kleiner, Snyder, 2000, 2002) and empirically valid
R

2003). More than ever, the de- (Bryant & Cvengros, 2004; Carifio & Rhodes,
O

velopment of resilience is needed to help 2002; Luthans, Avolio, et al., 2007; Magaletta
individuals recover from adversity or per- & Oliver, 1999; Youssef & Luthans, 2007).
C

sonal setbacks—not if they happen, but This research also indicates, however, that
when they happen. the four factors have a common under-
N

There is considerable evidence that resil- lying link representing a core second-order
ience, once believed to be a rare dispositional positive resource called psychological capital
U

trait, is statelike and open to development (Luthans, Avolio, et al., 2007).

(e.g., Bonanno, 2004; Coutu, 2002; Masten & Hobfoll (2002) provides conceptual sup-
Reed, 2002; Youssef & Luthans, 2005). port for this finding of PsyCap as a core con-
Various methods have proven successful in struct. Psychological resources theory posits
building resilience, including using positive that some psychological constructs are best
emotions (Tugade & Fredrickson, 2004), understood as representing a core, underly-
altering the perceived level of risk or personal ing construct. For example, such a theoretical
assets (Masten, 2001), and generally foster- view is also evident in other multidimen-
ing self-enhancement and development sional organizational behavior construct
(Luthans, Vogelgesang, & Lester, 2006). Resil- models, such as Judge and Bono’s (2001)
ient people are characterized by a staunch core self-evaluations or Spreitzer’s (1995)

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

20294.indd 682 8/13/2009 1:52:21 PM

 PSYCHOLOGICAL CAPITAL 683

multifactor empowerment construct. Law, tion, and intentions to quit have been dem-
Wong, and Mobley (1998) also have described onstrated in a number of studies (e.g.,
such multidimensional constructs as we Coomber & Barriball, 2007), and the connec-
propose that fit the description of positive tion between job search behaviors and volun-
PsyCap. For example, Bandura (2007) asserts tary turnover also appears well supported
that our daily realities are fraught with diffi- (e.g., Blau, 1994). As a self-regulatory process,
culties (that is, stressors), and an optimistic, the intensity of job search behav-
hopeful, and resilient sense of efficacy is ior can be expected to change
needed for well-being. PsyCap as a core con- because of feedback from the Research indicates
struct composed of the shared variance of environment (Kanfer, Wanberg,
that resilient
each of the four components empirically has & Kantrowitz, 2001).
been found to predict performance and In addition to a direct effect individuals are

F
satisfaction better than any of the individual between employee PsyCap and
better equipped

O
components (Luthans, Avolio, et al., 2005, both intentions to quit and actual
2007). job search behaviors, a relationship
to deal with

O
On the basis of the existing related theory between job stress and these out-
and research summarized, we derive the first comes is expected. In high-stress the stressors

PR
study hypothesis as follows: environments, employees are not
experiencing homeostasis in terms in a constantly
Hypothesis 1: Employees’ PsyCap will have a of normal levels of experienced
changing workplace
negative relationship with their symptoms of stress. When symptoms are stron-
stress. gest, employees would be expected environment, as they

In addition to the relationship with stress

D
to attempt to relieve the discon-
nect between current levels of stress are open to new
TE
symptoms, the role that PsyCap may play in and desired levels of stress. There-
both intentions to quit and job search behav- fore, removal from the job and, experiences, are
iors is examined. Although both may be con- hence, the source of the job stress flexible to changing
EC

sidered proxies for actual turnover, they each might follow. This conclusion is
reflect unique cognitive and behavioral mani- grounded in the literature discussed demands, and show
festations. For example, following Ajzen’s previously and is supported by
(1991) theory of planned behavior, intentions empirical evidence. For example, more emotional
R

to quit reflect an attitude about leaving the Saks and Ashforth (1997) found a
stability when faced
organization (behavioral intentions), whereas strong relationship between stress
R

job search behaviors reflect actual behaviors symptoms and intentions to with adversity.
O

contributing toward turnover. Given the weak quit, as well as actual turnover, in
relation often found between behavioral in- a 10-month longitudinal study.
C

tentions and actual behavior, both outcomes Thus, it is expected that the effects of
were deemed unique and appropriate. Draw- PsyCap on intentions to quit and job search
N

ing from related research findings for each behaviors will be partially mediated by stress
component of PsyCap, as well as studies that symptoms.
U

suggest individuals in stressful occupations On the basis of this related theoretical

who have higher levels of psychological capital and empirical literature, the remaining study
may be more likely to stick it out rather than hypotheses are:
quit (e.g., Luthans & Jensen, 2005), this study
explored the link between PsyCap and both Hypothesis 2a: Employees’ PsyCap will have a
intentions to quit and job search behaviors. negative relationship with their reported inten-
Over the years, work attitudes and per- tions to quit.
ceived available opportunities have been
shown to affect turnover intentions (Bretz, Hypothesis 2b: Employees’ stress symptoms par-
Boudreau, & Judge, 1994). Moreover, various tially mediate the relationship between their Psy-
links among workplace stress, job satisfac- Cap and intentions to quit.

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

20294.indd 683 8/13/2009 1:52:21 PM

 684 HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT, SEPTEMBER–OCTOBER 2009

Hypothesis 3a: Employees’ PsyCap will have All measures used in this study have been
a negative relationship with their reported job psychometrically validated in previous re-
search behaviors. search and demonstrated adequate internal
reliability in this study. The anchors for all
Hypothesis 3b: Employees’ stress symptoms par- measures were from 1 to 6, with 6 being the
tially mediate the relationship between their Psy- highest (most frequently or strongly agree).
Cap and job search behaviors. Specifically, PsyCap was measured with the
24-item Psychological Capital Questionnaire
(PCQ; see Luthans, Youssef, et al., 2007, for
Methods and Measures
the complete questionnaire). Containing six
AQ6
Under the auspices of a large midwestern uni- items for each of the four components (effi-
versity research study, we solicited volunteers cacy, hope, resilience, optimism), the PCQ

F
for a research study on motivation in the work- demonstrated adequate confirmatory factor

O
place. A heterogeneous sample of 416 working analytic structure across multiple samples
adults from a wide variety of jobs and indus- (e.g., Luthans, Avolio, et al., 2007) and had

O
tries responded. They completed an online in- strong internal reliability in this study (a =
formed consent form and Survey 1, which .92). As indicated earlier, there is considerable

PR
measured their level of PsyCap and collected conceptual and empirical support for exam-
demographic information. The demographic ining PsyCap at the core construct level
profile included 203 males and 204 females rather than according to each component
and 9 others who did not list gen- (Luthans, Youssef, et al., 2007; Luthans, Avo-
der. The participants had 1 to 35 lio, et al., 2007; Luthans, Norman, Avolio, &
A heterogeneous

sample of 416
(SD, 7.5) years of tenure in their
current organization. A week to
D
Avey, 2008). Specifically, confirmatory factor
analytic comparisons have demonstrated that
TE
two weeks later, they were con- the optimal fitting measurement model across
working adults from tacted via e-mail to complete multiple samples includes analysis with the
a wide variety of Survey 2, which included the out- core construct of PsyCap. This suggests that
EC

come variables of stress symptoms, although the components have distinct prop-
jobs and industries intentions to quit, and job search erties, they have more in common than not
behaviors. This temporal separa- (Luthans, Avolio, et al., 2007). Sample items
responded. tion between collecting the data on the PCQ address efficacy (“I am confident
R

for the independent and depen- helping to set targets/goals in my work area”),
dent study variables follows the recommenda- hope (“I can think of many ways to reach my
R

tions of Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Lee, and Pod- current work goals”), resilience (“I usually
O

sakoff (2003) to reduce potential problems take stressful things at work in stride”), and
with common method variance. As they noted, optimism (“When things are uncertain for
C

“The advantage of this procedure is that it me at work I usually expect the best”).
makes it impossible for the mind-set of the The measure for intentions to quit and
N

source or rater to bias the observed relation- job search behaviors was used by Crossley and
ship between the predictor and criterion vari- colleagues (in press) and demonstrated ade- AQ10
U

able, thus eliminating the effects of consistency quate internal alphas in this study (a = .92 and
motifs, implicit theories, social desirability ten- .94, respectively). An example of an intention
dencies, dispositional and transient mood to quit scale item is “I will quit this organiza-
states, and any tendencies on the part of the tion as soon as possible” and was set on an-
rater to acquiesce or respond in a lenient chors from 1 (strongly disagree) to 6 (strongly
manner” (p. 887). Of the 416 participants who agree). The job search behaviors instrument
initially completed Survey 1, 360 (86.5%) developed by Crossley and colleagues (in AQ10
also completed Survey 2. This represented a press) asks participants to rate the frequency
total of 360 data points for hypotheses testing. with which they have engaged in each of 13
Survey 1 and Survey 2 data were aligned using behaviors. This instrument also demonstrated
the participants’ e-mail addresses. adequate internal reliability in this study

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

20294.indd 684 8/13/2009 1:52:22 PM

 PSYCHOLOGICAL CAPITAL 685

(a = .94). Sample items include “Prepared/re- there was support for both as PsyCap was
vised your resume,” “Spoke with previous significantly and negatively related to em-
employers or business acquaintances about ployee intentions to quit (b = –.24; p < .01)
their knowing of potential job leads,” and and job search behaviors (b = –.16; p < .01).
“Used the Worldwide Web or other computer Hypothesis 2b and Hypothesis 3b pre-
services to locate job openings.” This instru- dicted symptoms of stress would partially
ment was set on anchors from 1 (almost mediate the relationship between PsyCap
never, if ever) to 6 (frequently, if not always). and both intentions to quit and job search
Finally, stress symptoms were measured behaviors. According to guidelines by Baron
with 7 stress items from the Depression, and Kenny (1986), partial mediation is said
Anxiety, Stress Scale (DASS; Lovibond & to exist when several conditions are satisfied.
Lovibond, 1995). This instrument, which First, the independent variable (PsyCap) must

F
describes several symptoms of stress, asks be related to the dependent variables (inten-

O
participants to rate the frequency with which tions to quit and job search behaviors). Evi-
they experience these sensations at work and dence of meeting this condition can be seen

O
was set on anchors from 1 (almost never, if in Table I, as PsyCap is significantly related to
ever) to 6 (frequently, if not always). It dem- both outcome variables. Next, the indepen-

PR
onstrated adequate internal reliability in this dent variable (PsyCap) must be related to the
study (a = .86). A sample item is “I found it mediating variable (stress symptoms). This
difficult to relax.” condition was met, as seen in Table I and in
In addition to bivariate correlations, we the testing of Hypothesis 1. The third condi-
conducted path analyses using regression for tion of partial mediation as prescribed by
all hypotheses tests. The means, standard de-
viations, and results of the bivariate correla-
D
Baron and Kenny (1986) is that the mediat-
ing variable (stress symptoms) must be re-
TE
tions can be seen in Table I. All study variables lated to the dependent variable(s) (intentions
demonstrated skewness and kurtosis values to quit and job search behaviors). This condi-
that were well within the normal ranges, sug- tion was met, as seen in Table I and Figure 1.
EC

gesting the data had a normal distribution. Finally, for partial mediation to exist, the
strength of the relationship between the in-
dependent variable and the outcome
Results of Hypotheses Tests
variable(s) should be reduced when the medi-
R

The results of the hypotheses tests can be ating variable is in the model. In this case,
seen in Figure 1. Hypothesis 1 predicted a when adding stress symptoms to the model,
R

negative relationship between positive the strength of the relationship between

O

PsyCap and stress symptoms. There was full PsyCap and intentions to quit diminished
support for this hypothesis, as PsyCap was from b = –.29 (p < .01) to b = –.24 (p < .01).
C

positively related to stress symptoms (b = –.35; Likewise, when the variable of stress symp-
p < .01). Next, Hypothesis 2a and Hypothesis toms was included in the path model, the
N

3a predicted a negative relationship between strength of the relationship between PsyCap

PsyCap and intentions to quit and job search and job search behaviors decreased from
U

behaviors, respectively. As seen in Figure 1, b = –.20 (p < .01) to b = –.16 (p < .01). Thus,

TABLE I Means, Standard Deviations, and Bivariate Correlations of Study Variables

Mean SD 1 2 3 4
1. Psychological Capital 4.77 .57 1.00
2. Intentions to Quit 2.59 1.22 [.29* 1.00
3. Stress Symptoms 2.17 .86 [.35* .22* 1.00
4. Job Search Behaviors 1.91 .78 [.20* .52* .22* 1.00
* p < .001; n = 416.

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

20294.indd 685 8/13/2009 1:52:22 PM

 686 HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT, SEPTEMBER–OCTOBER 2009

Intentions to
-.24** Quit

Positive .13*
-.35** Stress
Psychological
Symptoms .17**
Capital

-.16**
Job Search
Behaviors

F
FIGURE 1. Theoretical Model of PsyCap and Stress

O
*p < .05
**p < .01

O
having met all the conditions for partial me- sors and coworkers also are offered to help

PR
diation, we found support for both Hypoth- buffer employees from stress. Participation in
esis 2b and Hypothesis 3b. recreational sports is still another avenue that
allows employees to release stress and inter-
act with one another in positive ways, and
Discussion and Implications
recent studies suggest that organization-spon-
As hypothesized, this study found a signifi-
cant negative relationship between the newly
D
sored play can have a positive impact on
employee stress levels (Nel & Spies, 2007).
TE
recognized PsyCap of employees and their Although stress management programs
perceived symptoms of job stress. This find- that focus on the organizational context can
ing contributes to the understanding that be effective, Nelson and Sutton’s (1990) longi-
EC

today’s employees need to draw from hereto- tudinal study indicates the importance of
fore unrecognized and largely untapped posi- recognizing dispositional as well as situational
tive resources, such as psychological capital, effects on work stress. Their findings suggest
to help them combat the dysfunctional ef- personal characteristics may predispose a per-
R

fects of stress, such as turnover. Supporting son to stress, thereby limiting the effective-
this impact on turnover, the study findings ness of such environmental interventions as
R

also indicate that employees’ PsyCap has a job redesign and company programs. Re-
O

significant negative relationship with both search has shown that certain personality
their intentions to quit and job search behav- variables do relate to the appraisal and effects
C

iors, both indicators of voluntary turnover. of stressful events, negative affectivity (Brief,
Armed with the implications of this empiri- Burke, George, Robinson, & Webster, 1988),
N

cal evidence, we propose that HR training neuroticism (McRae, 1990), and conscien-
and development efforts that recognize and tiousness (O’Brien & DeLongis, 1996). Type A
U

enhance the underemphasized positive re- and Type B personality differences also have
sources of efficacy, hope, optimism, and resil- been correlated to work stress, with the impa-
ience and the core construct of psychological tient and overly aggressive Type A personality
capital may help employees combat stress particularly susceptible to dissatisfaction and
and, in turn, reduce voluntary turnover. stress (Mathews, 1982). This research has
Workplace stress management programs prompted personality testing to become a
often focus on working conditions, such as common (albeit somewhat controversial) HR
providing flexible work schedules, creating selection tool. Although the use of personal-
employee assistance and wellness programs, ity testing for selection must have predictive
and redesigning jobs. Organizational policies validity for performance on the job, it could
that encourage social support from supervi- also potentially be used to help ensure a bet-

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

20294.indd 686 8/13/2009 1:52:23 PM

 PSYCHOLOGICAL CAPITAL 687

ter fit between the employee and the demands success, (2) an approach (rather than avoid-
of a job and, thus, may subsequently help re- ance) framework that allows participants to
duce stress. work toward goal accomplishment as op-
The results of the present study on the role posed to away from desired goals (for exam-
of positive resources in combating stress go ple, move toward a quality target, rather than
beyond the use of personality traits. Although avoiding product rejects), and (3) using what
personality dimensions may influence an em- Snyder (2000) calls a “stepping” method of
ployee’s ability to cope with stress (Costa & identifying subgoals as a way to reap the ben-
McRae, 1990), these traits (for example, nega- efits of even modest achievements. Then
tive affectivity) are recognized to be relatively participants are instructed to generate multi-
fixed and stable over time (Watson, Clark, & ple proactive pathways to the goal and reflect
Tellegen, 1988). This dispositional, stable on and discuss the realistic (and unrealistic)

F
nature of personality traits makes them useful options identified. This is consistent with the

O
for employee selection, but not for employee stress coping approach described
development. On the other hand, positive re- by Taylor, Pham, Rivkin, & Armor
PsyCap short

O
sources, such as those represented by PsyCap, (1998), who describe mental sim-
are defined and empirically determined (Lu- ulation as providing a “window training

PR
thans et al., 2008; Luthans, Avolio, et al., 2007) on the future” by enabling people
to be statelike (rather than relatively fixed trait- to envision possibilities and craft interventions
like personality dimensions) and, thus, are plans for realizing those possibili-
open to development and HR management. ties. (which typically
Meta-analyses indicate that cognitive-behav- At the completion of this di-
ioral approaches, which seek to change
employee cognitions and reinforce active
D
mension of the PsyCap training
intervention, participants have
last one to three

hours, depending
TE
coping skills, may be the most effective in taken ownership of a personally
reducing anxiety symptoms, enhancing cop- valuable and realistically challeng- on the number of
ing strategies, and improving the perceived ing goal, are prepared for obsta-
participants) include
EC

quality of work life (Van der Hek & Plomp, cles, and are ready to implement
1997; Van der Klink, Blonk, Schene, & van multiple contingency plans—that activities designed
Dijk, 2001). This related research suggests that is, alternate paths to attain their
HR managers who recognize positive PsyCap goals. The facilitator and other to enhance the
R

as an important individual difference that can participants serve as role models

components of
be developed (through the cognitive-behav- for the realistic optimism and ef-
R

ioral approaches used in PsyCap training ficacy-building processes that efficacy, optimism,
O

interventions discussed later) may use this elicit these positive states and
development for stress management. build employees’ confidence to hope, and resilience,
C

PsyCap short training interventions generate and implement plans to

attain goals. As participants fore- as well as overall
(which typically last one to three hours, de-
N

pending on the number of participants) in- cast “bad events” by anticipating PsyCap.
clude activities designed to enhance the potential obstacles (and then cre-
AQ8
U

components of efficacy, optimism, hope, and ate alternative paths to minimize

resilience, as well as overall PsyCap (Luthans, their impact), pessimists lose more options
AQ9 Avey, et al., 2006; Luthans et al., 2008; for expecting bad things to happen. The pro-
Luthans, Youssef, et al., 2007). For example, cess of counteracting pessimism supports the
in the hope component of the PsyCap train- development of realistic and optimistic ex-
ing module (see the graphic model and ver- pectations. Participants also have the oppor-
bal summary in Luthans, Youssef, et al., 2007, tunity to experience and model success, and
pp. 214–215), participants begin by delineat- social persuasion, arousal, and positive self-
ing key goals they will use throughout the talks are used to support the development of
session. The facilitator then explains the efficacy and optimism further. Through visu-
need for (1) concrete end points to measure alization, participants gain “imaginal” task

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

20294.indd 687 8/13/2009 1:52:24 PM

 688 HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT, SEPTEMBER–OCTOBER 2009

mastery experience to enhance their effi- of job stress, and measures of intentions of
cacy. voluntary turnover. As in any study, how-
Finally, the PsyCap training intervention ever, there are research design limitations
helps build resilience by having participants that need to be noted. First, self-reported
identify recent personal setbacks within their levels of stress have been found to be differ-
work domain, which might include major entially related (positively and negatively) to
setbacks (such as pending layoffs) or minor attitudinal and behavioral work outcomes,
ones (such as a missed project deadline). depending on the stressor being evaluated
After participants identify their immediate (Podsokoff, LePine, & LePine, 2007). As indi-
reactions to the setbacks, the fa- cated in the foundational discussion for this
cilitator elaborates on a staunch study, challenge stressors (those that people
In particular, the view of reality and an ideal resil- appraise as potentially promoting their per-

F
ient process for framing a setback, sonal growth and achievement, such as
findings suggest

O
consistently with the broaden and workload or time urgency) are negatively re-
the need to focus build positivity approach advo- lated to job search behaviors. Alternatively,

O
cated by Fredrickson (2001). The hindrance stressors (those that are viewed as
future research and participants then assess the realis- constraining a person’s work-related accom-

PR
tic impact of the setbacks, includ- plishment, such as inadequate resources or
practice on how
ing what is in (and out of) their role overload) are positively related to turn-
PsyCap training may control, and options for taking ac- over intentions and withdrawal behavior.
tion. Participants practice learned Such findings indicate that stressors are not
be a valuable part of cognitive processes that perpetu- created equal, and future research needs to
organizational stress
ate the development of both resil-
iency and realistic optimism by
D
investigate whether the use of scales that
treat stress as a single, unidimensional con-
TE
management. anticipating and addressing addi- struct may mask important effects. Further
tional setbacks. Overall, this research also is needed to analyze more fully
PsyCap training appears to have how PsyCap training interventions may af-
EC

the potential to provide participants with fect both individuals’ appraisal of events and
that “added protection” suggested by Totter- the actual workplace stress symptoms experi-
dell et al. (2006) needed to help shield one enced by participants.
from negative stress symptoms. Besides the stress measurement limita-
R

The overall objective of the PsyCap train- tion of the present study, there is also
ing intervention includes an integrated de- the potential for inflated relationships
R

velopmental strategy for all four Psy-Cap because of common-method bias. In the data
O

statelike capacities. Although each compo- collection for this study, participants re-
nent is affected by the design of the interven- sponded to questionnaire instruments that
C

tion, research to date indicates that PsyCap is had been validated in previous research. This
synergistic and that the participants experi- common method generates a concern of ar-
N

ence an overall result greater than the sum tificially increased relationships. We did
AQ7 of the four components of the training try to minimize this potential problem by
U

(Luthans, Avey, et al., 2006; Luthans et al., following Podsakoff et al.’s (2003) recom-
2008). Future research is needed to investi- mendation of temporally separating data
gate how well PsyCap training interventions gathering on independent and dependent
reduce stress and lower turnover. variables. Another limitation, however, was
that this study was cross-sectional and, thus,
cannot account for alternative explanations
Limitations and Conclusion
in terms of the order of variables. For exam-
Although it was exploratory rather than ple, it is possible that those who engage in
causal experimental in nature, this study more job search behaviors could identify
did find significant inverse relationships ideal employment opportunities, which may
between employees’ PsyCap, their symptoms lead to intentions to quit, rather than vice

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

20294.indd 688 8/13/2009 1:52:24 PM

 PSYCHOLOGICAL CAPITAL 689

versa. This is unlikely, however, given the tial outcomes of workplace stress. In par-
fact that a certain threshold of intentions to ticular, the findings suggest the need to
quit generates job search behaviors in the focus future research and practice on how
first place. Nonetheless, causal ordering can- PsyCap training may be a valuable part of
not be concluded from the research design organizational stress management. Com-
used. pletely eliminating workplace stress is not
Despite these limitations, the results a realistic, nor even desired, organizational
from the study can still initially support outcome. Helping employees effectively
the concept that the newly recognized core manage stress, however, is (and will con-
positive resource of psychological capital tinue to be) a critical objective for effective
relates to both the perception and poten- HRM.

F
O
JAMES B. AVEY is an assistant professor of management at Central Washington Univer-
sity. Before attaining his Ph.D.; he was a human resource manager at The Boeing Com-

O
pany in Seattle, Washington. Since obtaining his Ph.D. at the University of Nebraska, Dr.
Avey has consulted with companies such as Kelloggs, ANZ Financial Group, The Boeing

PR
Company, and Lincoln Plating. His consulting and research interests include positive
psychological capital, psychological ownership, and ethical leadership.

FRED LUTHANS is University and George Holmes Distinguished Professor of Manage-

ment at the University of Nebraska. The former President of the Academy of Manage-
D
ment, he received the Academy’s Distinguished Educator Award and is currently editor
of Journal of World Business, Organizational Dynamics, and Journal of Leadership and
TE
Organization Studies. He is the author of several well-known books and numerous re-
search articles. His textbook Organizational Behavior is now in its 12th edition and his
latest book is Psychological Capital (Oxford University Press). His research in recent
EC

years has been focused on the theory building, measurement, and performance impact
of this positive approach.

SUSAN M. JENSEN is an assistant professor of management at the University of

R

Nebraska-Kearney. She holds a bachelor’s degree in business administration from the

University of Kansas, an MBA from Washington University in St. Louis, and a Ph.D. in
R

organizational behavior from the University of Nebraska. She has published and contin-
ues to do research on psychological capital, leadership, and the link between positive
O

organizational behavior and corporate performance.

C
N

References Baron, R. A., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-

mediator variable distinction in social psychologi-
U

Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. cal research: Conceptual, strategic and statistical
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision considerations. Journal of Personality and Social
Processes, 50(2), 179–211. Psychology, 51(6), 1173–1182.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of con- Bauer, T. N., Bodner, T., Erdogan, B., Truxillo, D. M., &
trol. New York: Freeman. Tucker, J. S. (2007). Newcomer adjustment during
Bandura, A. (2007). An agentic perspective on positive organizational socialization: A meta-analytic review
psychology. In S. J. Lopez (Ed.), The science of of antecedents, outcomes, and methods. Journal of
human flourishing. New York: Praeger. Applied Psychology, 92(3), 707–721.

Bandura, A., & Locke, E. A. (2003). Negative self- Bernard, L. C., & Krupat, E. (1994). Health psychology:
efficacy and goal effects revisited. Journal of Biopsychosocial factors in health and illness. New
Applied Psychology, 88(1), 87–99. York: Harcourt Brace College Publishers.

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

20294.indd 689 8/13/2009 1:52:24 PM

 690 HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT, SEPTEMBER–OCTOBER 2009

Bethune, S., & Panlener, J. (2007, October 24). Stress Crossley, C. D., Bennett, R. J., Jex, S. M., & Burnfield,
a major health problem in the U.S., warns APA. J. L. (in press). Development of a global measure of AQ10
New York: American Psychological Association. job embeddedness and integration into a tradition-
Bhagat, R. S., McQuaid, S. J., Lindholm, H., & al model of voluntary turnover. Journal of Applied
Segovis, J. (1985). Total life stress: A multimethod Psychology.
validation of the construct and its effects on Fillion, L., Tremblay, I., Manon, T., Cote, D., Struthers,
organizational valued outcomes and withdrawal C. W., & Dupuis, R. (2007). Job satisfaction and
behaviors. Journal of Applied Psychology, 70(1), emotional distress among nurses providing
203–214. palliative care: Empirical evidence for an integra-
Blau, G. (1994). Testing a two-dimensional measure of tive occupational stress-model. International
job search behavior. Organizational Behavior and Journal of Stress Management, 14(1), 1–25.
Human Decision Processes, 59(2), 288–312. Fredrickson, B. L. (2001). The role of positive emotions

F
in positive psychology: The broaden-and-build
Bonanno, G. A. (2004). Loss, trauma and human
theory of positive emotions. American Psycholo-
resilience: Have we underestimated the human

O
gist, 56(3), 218–226.
capacity to thrive after extremely adverse events?
American Psychologist, 59(1), 20–28. Goetzel, R. Z., Anderson, D. R., Whitmer, R. W.,

O
Ozminkowski, R. J., Dunn, R. L., & Wasserman, J.
Boswell, W. R., Olson-Buchanan, J. B., & LePine,
(1998). The relationship between modifiable health
M. A. (2004). The relationship between work-related
risks and health care expenditures: An analysis of

PR
stress and work outcomes: The role of felt-chal-
the multi-employer HERO health risk and cost data-
lenge and psychological strain. Journal of Voca-
base. Journal of Occupational and Environmental
tional Behavior, 64(1), 165–181.
Medicine, 40(10), 843–854.
Bretz, R. D., Boudreau, J. W., & Judge, T. A. (1994). Job
Harris, G. E., & Cameron, J. E. (2005). Multiple dimen-
search behavior of employed managers. Personnel
Psychology, 47(2), 275–301. D sions of organizational identification and com-
mitment as predictors of turnover intentions and
TE
Brief, A. P., Burke, M. J., George, J. M., Robinson, psychological well-being. Canadian Journal of
B. S., & Webster, J. M. (1988). Should negative Behavioural Science, 37(3), 159–169.
affectivity remain an unmeasured variable in the
Hobfoll, S. (2002). Social and psychological resources
study of job stress? Journal of Applied Psychology,
and adaptation. Review of General Psychology,
EC

73(2), 193–198.
6(4), 307–324.
Bryant, F. B., & Cvengros, J. A. (2004). Distinguishing
Hymowitz, C. (2007, April 20). Executive’s motto for
hope and optimism. Journal of Social and Clinical
reducing job stress: Work hard, be nice. The Wall
Psychology, 23(2), 273–302.
R

Street Journal Online. Retrieved April 28, 2008,

Cameron, K. S., Dutton, J. E., & Quinn, R. E. (Eds.). from ABI/Inform Global database.
(2003). Positive organizational scholarship. San
R

Judge, T. A., & Bono, J. E. (2001). Relationship of core

Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.
self-evaluations traits—self-esteem, generalized
Carifio, J., & Rhodes, L. (2002). Construct validities
O

self-efficacy, locus of control, and emotional

and the empirical relationships between optimism, stability—with job satisfaction and job perform-
hope, self-efficacy, and locus of control. Work, ance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied
C

19(2), 125–136. Psychology, 86(1), 80–92.

Colligan, T. W., & Higgins, E. M. (2006). Workplace
N

Kanfer, R., Wanberg, C. R., & Kantrowitz, T. M. (2001).

stress etiology and consequences. Journal of Job search and employment: A personality-motiva-
Workplace Behavioral Health, 21(2), 89–97. tional analysis and meta-analytic review. Journal of
U

Coomber, B., & Barriball, K. L. (2007). Impact of job Applied Psychology, 86(5), 837–855.
satisfaction components on intent to leave and Kram, K. E., & Hall, D. T. (1989). Mentoring as an
turnover for hospital-based nurses: A review of the antidote to stress during corporate trauma. Human
research literature. International Journal of Nursing Resource Management, 28(1), 493–510.
Studies, 44(2), 297–314.
Law, K. S., Wong, C., & Mobley, W. H. (1998).
Costa, P. T., Jr., & McCrae, R. R. (1990). Personality: Toward a taxonomy of multidimensional
Another “hidden factor” in stress research. Psycho- constructs. Academy of Management Review,
logical Inquiry, 1(1), 22–24. 23(4), 741–755.
Coutu, D. L. (2002). How resilience works. Harvard Lazarus, R. S. (1966). Psychological stress and the
Business Review, 80(5), 46–55. coping process. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

20294.indd 690 8/13/2009 1:52:24 PM

 PSYCHOLOGICAL CAPITAL 691

Lazarus, R. S. (2003). Does the positive psychology Human Resource Development Review, 1(3),
movement have legs? Psychological Inquiry, 14(2), 304–322.
93–109.
Luthans, F., & Jensen, S. M. (2005). The linkage be-
Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal, tween psychological capital and commitment to
AQ11
and coping. New York: Springer. organizational mission: A study of nurses. Journal
Le Fevre, M., & Kolt, G. S. (2006). Eustress, distress of Nursing Administration, 35(6), 304–310.
and their interpretation in primary and secondary Luthans, F., Norman, S. M., Avolio, B. J., & Avey, J. B.
occupational stress management interventions: (2008). Supportive climate and organizational
Which way first? Journal of Managerial Psychol- success: The mediating role of psychological
ogy, 21(6), 547–565. capital. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 29(2),
Le Fevre, M., Matheny, J., & Kolt, G. S. (2003). Eus- 219–238.
tress, distress, and interpretation in occupational Luthans, F., Vogelgesang, G. R., & Lester, P. B. (2006).

F
stress. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 18(7), Developing the psychological capital of resiliency.
726–744. Human Resource Development Review, 5(1),

O
Lee, T. W., & Mitchell, T. R. (1994). An alternative 25–44.
approach: The unfolding model of voluntary Luthans, F., & Youssef, C. M. (2007). Emerging positive

O
employee turnover. Academy of Management organizational behavior. Journal of Management,
Review, 19(1), 51–89. 33(5), 321–349.

PR
Lovibond, P. F., & Lovibond, S. H. (1995). The structure Luthans, F., Youssef, C. M., & Avolio, B. J. (2007).
of negative emotional stress: Comparison of the Psychological capital: Developing the human com-
Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS) with the petitive edge. New York: Oxford University Press.
Beck depression and anxiety inventories. Behav-
Maddi, S. R. (1987). Hardiness training at Illinois Bell
iour, Research and Therapy, 33(3), 335–343.
Luthans, F. (2002a). The need for and meaning of posi-
D
Telephone. In P. Opatz (Ed.), Health promotion
evaluation (pp. 101–115). Stevens Point, WI:
TE
tive organizational behavior. Journal of Organiza- National Wellness Institute.
tional Behavior, 23(6), 695–706.
Magaletta, P. R., & Oliver, J. M. (1999). The hope
Luthans, F. (2002b). Positive organizational behavior: construct, will and ways: Their relations with
Developing and managing psychological strengths. self-efficacy, optimism, and well being. Journal of
EC

Academy of Management Executive, 16(1), 57–72. Clinical Psychology, 55(5), 539–551.

Luthans, F. (2002c). The impact of hope in the entre- Makawatsakul, N., & Kleiner, B. H. (2003). The effect of
preneurial process: Exploratory research findings. downsizing on morale and attrition. Management
Decision Sciences Institute Conference Proceed-
R

Research News, 26(23–24), 52–62.

ings, San Diego, CA.
Maki, N., Moore, S., Grunberg, L., & Greenburg, E.
R

Luthans, F., Avey, J. B., Avolio, B. J., Norman, S. M., &

(2005). The responses of male and female manag-
Combs, G. M. (2006). Psychological capital devel-
ers to workplace stress and downsizing. North
opment: Toward a micro-intervention. Journal of
O

American Journal of Psychology, 7(2), 295–312.

Organizational Behavior, 27(3), 387–393.
Manning, M. R., Jackson, C., & Fusilier, M. R. (1996).
Luthans, F., Avey, J. B., & Patera, J. L. (2008). Experi-
C

Occupational stress, social support, and the costs

mental analysis of a Web-based intervention to
of health care. Academy of Management Journal,
develop positive psychological capital. Academy
N

33(3), 738–750.
of Management Learning and Education, 7(2),
209–221. Marino, S. (1997). The stress epidemic. Industry Week,
U

246(7), 14.
Luthans, F., Avolio, B., Avey, J. B., & Norman, S. M.
(2007). Psychological capital: Measurement and Masten, A. S. (2001). Ordinary magic: Resilience
relationship with performance and job satisfaction. processes in development. American Psychologist,
Personnel Psychology, 60(3), 541–572. 56(3), 227–238.

Luthans, F., Avolio, B. J., Walumbwa, F. O., & Li, W. Masten, A. S., & Reed, M. G. J. (2002). Resilience in
(2005). The psychological capital of Chinese workers: development. In C. R. Snyder & S. Lopez (Eds.),
Exploring the relationship with performance. Handbook of positive psychology (pp. 74–88).
Management and Organization Review, 1(2), Oxford: Oxford University Press.
249–271. Mathews, K. A. (1982). Psychological perspectives on
Luthans, F., & Jensen, S. M. (2002). Hope: A new posi- the Type A behavior pattern. Psychological Bulletin,
tive strength for human resource development. 91(2), 293–323.

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

20294.indd 691 8/13/2009 1:52:25 PM

 692 HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT, SEPTEMBER–OCTOBER 2009

Matsui, T., & Onglatco, M. L. (1992). Career self-efficacy D. D. Steiner, & D. P. Skarlicki (Eds.), Research
of the relation between occupational stress and in social issues in management: Vol. 5. Managing
strain. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 41(1), 79–88. social and ethical issues in organizations
McRae, R. R. (1990). Controlling neuroticism in the (pp. 135–177). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
measurement of stress. Stress Medicine, 6(3), Schneider, S. L. (2001). In search of realistic optimism.
237–241. American Psychologist, 56(3), 250–263.
Motowildo, S. J., Packard, J. S., & Manning, M. R. Seligman, M. E. P. (1998). Learned optimism.
(1986). Occupational stress: Its causes and conse- New York: Pocket Books.
quences for job performance. Journal of Applied Seligman, M. E. P., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000).
Psychology, 71(4), 618–629. Positive psychology. American Psychologist, 55(1),
Neil, D., & Spies, G. M. (2007). The use of play therapy 5–14.
mediums in a stress management program with Siu, O., Spector, P. E., & Cooper, C. J. (2005). Work

F
corporate employees. Journal of Workplace Behav- stress, self-efficacy, Chinese work values, and work
ioral Health, 22(1), 33–51. well-being in Hong Kong and Beijing. International

O
Nelson, D., & Cooper, C. L. (Eds.). (2007). Positive Journal of Stress Management, 12(3), 274–288.
organizational behavior: Accentuating the positive Snyder, C. R. (2000). Handbook of hope. San Diego:

O
at work. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Academic Press.
Nelson, D. R., & Sutton, C. (1990). Chronic work stress Snyder, C. R. (2002). Hope theory: Rainbows in the

PR
and coping: A longitudinal study and suggested mind. Psychological Inquiry, 13(4), 249–276.
new directions. Academy of Management Journal, Snyder, C. R., Irving, L. M., & Anderson, J. R. (1991).
33(4), 859–869. Hope and health. In C. R. Snyder (Ed.), Handbook
O’Brien, T. B., & DeLongis, A. (1996). The interactional of social and clinical psychology (pp. 295–305).
context of problem-, emotion-, and relationship-
focused coping: The role of the big five personality
D Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Snyder, C. R., & Lopez, S. (2002). Handbook of positive
TE
factors. Journal of Personality, 64(4), 775–813. psychology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Peterson, S., & Luthans, F. (2003). The positive impact Spielberger, C., & Vagg, P. (1991). Professional manual
and development of hopeful leaders. Leadership and for the job stress survey. Tampa, FL: Center for
Organization Development Journal, 24(1), 26–31. Research in Behavioral Medicine & Health Psychol-
EC

Podsakoff, N. P., LePine, J. A., & LePine, M. A. (2007). ogy, University of Southern Florida.
Differential challenge stressor-hindrance stressor Spreitzer, G. M. (1995). Psychological empowerment
relationships with job attitudes, turnover inten- in the workplace: Dimensions, measurement, and
tions, turnover, and withdrawal behavior: A meta- validation. Academy of Management Journal,
R

analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(2), 38(5), 1442–1465.

438–454. Stajkovic, A. D., & Luthans, F. (1998a). Self-efficacy
R

Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. C., Lee, J., & Podsakoff, and work-related performance: A meta-analysis.
N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral Psychological Bulletin, 124(2), 240–261.
O

research: A critical review of the literature and Stajkovic, A. D., & Luthans, F. (1998b). Social cognitive
recommended remedies. Journal of Applied theory and self efficacy: Going beyond traditional
C

Psychology, 88(5), 879–903. motivational and behavioral approaches. Organiza-

Princeton Survey Research Associates. (1997). Labor tional Dynamics, 26(4), 62–74.
N

Day survey: State of workers. Princeton, NJ: Taylor, S. E., Pham, L. B., Rivkin, I. D., & Armor, D. A.
Princeton Survey Research. (1998). Harnessing the imagination: Mental
U

Riga, A. (2006, February 27). Business awakes to cost simulation, self-regulation, and coping. American
of stress. The Gazette. Retrieved May 1, 2008, from Psychologist, 53(4), 429–439.
ABI/Inform Global database Totterdell, P., Wood, S., & Wall, T. (2006). An intra-indi-
Saks, A. M., & Ashforth, B. E. (1997). A longitudinal vidual test of the demands-control model. Journal
investigation of the relationship between job of Occupational and Organizational Psychology,
information sources, applicants’ perceptions of fit 79(12), 63–85.
and work outcomes. Personnel Psychology, 50(2), Trunk, P. (2007). Brazen careerist: The new rules for
395–426. success. New York: Warner Business Books.
Schaufeli, W. B., & Salanova, M. (2007). Work engage- Tugade, M. M., & Fredrickson, B. L. (2004). Resilient
ment: An emerging psychological concept and its individuals use positive emotions to bounce back
implications for organizations. In S. W. Gilliland, from negative emotional experiences. Journal of

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

20294.indd 692 8/13/2009 1:52:25 PM

 PSYCHOLOGICAL CAPITAL 693

Personality and Social Psychology, 86(2), Wright, T. A. (2003). Positive organizational behavior:
320–333. An idea whose time has truly come. Journal of
Van der Hek, H., & Plomp, H. N. (1997). Occupational Organizational Behavior, 24(4), 437–442.
stress management programmes: A practical Youssef, C. M., & Luthans, F. (2007). Positive organi-
overview of published effect studies. Occupational zational behavior in the workplace: The impact of
Medicine, 47(3), 133–141. hope, optimism, and resilience. Journal of Manage-
Van der Klink, J., Blonk, R., Schene, A., & van Dijk, F. ment, 33(5), 774–800.
(2001). The benefits of interventions for work- Youssef, C. M., & Luthans, F. (2005). Resiliency devel-
related stress. American Journal of Public Health, opment of organizations, leaders and employees:
91(2), 270–276. Multi-level theory building for sustained perform-
Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Develop- ance. In W. Gardner, B. J. Avolio, & F .O. Walumbwa
ment and validation of brief measures of positive (Eds.), Authentic leadership theory and practice:

F
and negative affect. Journal of Personality and Origins, effects, and development (pp. 303–343).
Social Psychology, 54(6), 1063–1070. Oxford: Elsevier.

O
O
PR
D
TE
EC
R
R
O
C
N
U

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

The author has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. All in-text references underlined in blue are linked to publications on ResearchGate.
20294.indd 693 8/13/2009 1:52:25 PM