University of Nebraska - Lincoln
DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln
Management Department Faculty Publications Management Department
2008
%e Mediating Role of Psychological Capital in the
Supportive Organizational Climate–Employee
Performance Relationship
Fred Luthans
University of Nebraska-Lincoln, =uthans1@unl.edu
Steven M. Norman
Mesa State College
Bruce J. Avolio
University of Nebraska - Lincoln, bavolio@u.washington.edu
James B. Avey
Central Washington University, aveyj@cwu.edu
Follow this and additional works at: h>p://digitalcommons.unl.edu/managementfacpub
Part of the Business Administration, Management, and Operations Commons, Management
Sciences and Quantitative Methods Commons, and the Strategic Management Policy Commons
<is Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Management Department at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has
been accepted for inclusion in Management Department Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of
Nebraska - Lincoln.
Luthans, Fred; Norman, Steven M.; Avolio, Bruce J.; and Avey, James B., "<e Mediating Role of Psychological Capital in the
Supportive Organizational Climate–Employee Performance Relationship" (2008). Management Department Faculty Publications. 136.
h>p://digitalcommons.unl.edu/managementfacpub/136
Published in Journal of Organizational Behavior 29 (2008), pp. 219–238; doi: 10.1002/job.507
Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Used by permission.
The Mediating Role of Psychological Capital in
the Supportive Organizational Climate–Employee
Performance Relationship
Fred Luthans,
1
Steven M. Norman,
2
Bruce J. Avolio,
1
and James B. Avey
3
1 Department of Management, Gallup Leadership Institute, University of Nebraska-Lincoln,
Lincoln, Nebraska
2 Mesa State College, Grand Junction, Colorado
3 College of Business and Economics, Central Washington University, Ellensburg, Washington
Corresponding author — Fred Luthans, Department of Management, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lin-
coln, NE 68588-0491, USA; email
Summary Although the value of a supportive organizational climate has been recognized over
the years, there is a need for better understanding of its relationship with employee
outcomes. This study investigates whether the recently emerging core construct of
-
cacy) plays a role in mediating the effects of a supportive organizational climate
with employee outcomes. Utilizing three diverse samples, results show that em-
ployees’ psychological capital is positively related to their performance, satisfac-
tion, and commitment and a supportive climate is related to employees’ satisfac-
tion and commitment. The study’s major hypothesis that employees’ psychological
capital mediates the relationship between supportive climate and their performance
Introduction
The thesis of Tom Friedman’s (2005) best-selling book “The World is Flat” is that “it is now possible
for more people than ever to collaborate and compete in real-time with more other people on more differ-
ent kinds of work from more different corners of the planet and on a more equal footing than at any previ-
ous time in the history of the world” (p. 8). Such a new paradigm environment has too often driven today’s
219
digitalcommons.unl.edu
digitalcommons.unl.edu
220 29 (2008)
organizations to compete and even survive on the basis of cutting price and costs through reengineering pro-
cesses and downsizing the number of employees. These stop-gap measures have about run their course in
for organizations to survive and to create sustainable growth and development. As the Chairman and CEO
of The Gallup Organization, Jim Clifton, noted “in the new world of extreme competition, we are all going
down the wrong path unless we discover a new way to manage” (Coffman & Gonzalez-Molina, 2002, p. xii).
The purpose of this article is to propose not only the importance of a supportive organizational climate to
counter the negatively oriented downsizing of recent years, but also the importance of understanding a re-
cently proposed positive perspective and strategy to human resource development and managing for perfor-
mance impact called psychological capital, or simply, PsyCap (Luthans, Avolio, Avey, & Norman, 2007; Lu-
thans, Luthans, & Luthans, 2004; Luthans & Youssef, 2004; Luthans, Youssef, & Avolio, 2007). In endorsing
the recent book on Psychological Capital (Luthans, Youssef et al., 2007), organizational behavior scholar
Denise Rousseau states that it “shows how recent breakthroughs in the positive psychology movement can
related to a supportive organizational climate for employee performance impact.
The Meaning of Positive Organizational Behavior
Positive organizational behavior (Luthans, 2002a, 2002b, 2003; Luthans & Youssef, 2007; also see Nel-
son & Cooper, 2007; Wright, 2003) and its derivative psychological capital or PsyCap (Luthans, Avolio, et
al., 2007; Luthans et al., 2004; Luthans & Youssef, 2004; Luthans, Youssef et al., 2007) is largely drawn from
the theory and research in positive psychology (Peterson & Seligman, 2004; Seligman and Csikszentmihalyi,
2000; Sheldon & King, 2001; Snyder & Lopez, 2002) applied to the workplace (Luthans & Youssef, in press).
Simply put, positive psychology is concerned with people’s strengths (rather than weaknesses and dysfunc-
claim to have discovered the value of positivity, but rather the intent is to simply shift to a more balanced fo-
cus of understanding and developing what is also right with people and how they can thrive.
Positive organizational behavior, or simply POB, takes positive psychology to the workplace (Luthans,
application of positively oriented human resource strengths and psychological capacities that can be mea-
sured, developed, and effectively managed for performance improvement in today’s workplace” (Luthans,
must not only be a positive strength or psychological capacity, but also must be grounded in theory and re-
search, have valid measures, and perhaps most importantly for differentiating from other positively oriented
like) and therefore open to development and management for performance improvement (Luthans, 2002a,
2002b; Luthans & Youssef, 2007; Luthans, Youssef et al., 2007).
development books and the widely recognized largely trait-based positive constructs (such as positive af-
fectivity, conscientiousness, self-esteem, or core self-evaluations) and the University of Michigan’s research
221
group’s work on more macro-oriented positive organizational scholarship (Cameron & Caza, 2004; Cam-
eron, Dutton, & Quinn, 2003; Roberts, 2006). Though there is some overlap with this complementary work,
POB is mainly different in its “state-like” malleability and focus on performance impact at a more micro-
level. For example, in making the distinction between POB and POS Nelson and Cooper (2007, pp. 3–4)
note that “Luthans recommended that POB researchers study psychological states (italics added) that could
be validly measured, and that are malleable in terms of interventions in organizations to improve work per-
formance,” whereas “the POS movement seeks to understand human excellence and exceptional organiza-
human resource development and performance management.
To date, the positive psychological constructs that have been determined to best meet the POB criteria are
Luthans & Youssef, 2007; Luthans, Youssef et al., 2007). However, it should be noted that other positive psy-
chological constructs could and likely will be included in the future. Some representative examples include
positive concepts such as work engagement (Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004; Schaufeli & Salanova, 2007), psy-
chological well-being (Wright & Cropanzano, 2000, 2004), psychological ownership (Avey, Avolio, Cross-
ley, & Luthans, in press), wisdom, courage, and forgiveness (e.g., see Luthans, Youssef et al., 2007, Chap-
ters 6 and 7), and Peterson and Seligman (2004) discuss a variety of positive virtues that could also meet the
meet the POB inclusion criteria at this time and also theoretically and empirically have been shown to make
up the core construct of psychological capital (Luthans, Avolio et al., 2007).
Hope as a positive psychological strength
Hope is widely used in every day language, but as examined here is most closely associated with the theory
and research of positive psychologist C. Rick Snyder. Snyder and colleagues’ hope theory (Snyder, Sympson,
Ybasco, Borders, Babyak, & Higgins, 1996; Snyder, 2000, 2002) is widely recognized in clinical and positive
“positive motivational state that is based on an interactively derived sense of successful (1) agency (goal directed
energy) and (2) pathways (planning to meet goals)” (Snyder et al., 1996). Thus, hope can be viewed as consist-
ing of three distinct but complementary components: agency (will-power), pathways (way-power), and goals.
-
der et al., 1996). Thus, agency includes the motivation or goal-directed energy to succeed at a given task in
a pathway is considered to be the way to accomplish a task or goal. Together, they form the will and the way
to accomplish a given task or goal. Snyder and colleagues’ theory and research suggest having one compo-
to succeed in a given task, as well as a viable means, or way to accomplish that task. In clinical and positive
psychology, hope has been clearly linked to academic and athletic success (Snyder, 2000, 2002), but only re-
cently has it been analyzed in the workplace. In preliminary research in the workplace, hope has been found
to be related to Chinese factory workers’ supervisory rated performance (Luthans, Avolio, Walumbwa, & Li,
employee performance, satisfaction, happiness, and commitment (Youssef & Luthans, 2007).
222 29 (2008)
Resilience as a positive psychological strength
Resilience theory and research is largely drawn from clinical psychology’s work with adolescent chil-
dren that have succeeded despite great adversity (Masten, 2001; Masten & Reed, 2002). Resilience is often
-
increased responsibility” (Luthans, 2002a, p. 702). Therefore, resilience can be characterized by coping re-
sponses not only to adverse events, but also to extreme positive events as well.
As with hope, to date research on resilience has been mainly limited to clinical and positive psychology.
However, similar to the focus on hope, preliminary research has begun to examine the impact of resiliency
-
-
thans et al., 2005). Resiliency has also been found to be related to work attitudes of satisfaction, happiness,
and commitment (Youssef & Luthans, 2007).
Optimism as a positive psychological strength
The theoretical foundation for optimism as a POB strength is largely drawn from the discussions of pos-
-
tively stable, and global attribution regarding positive events such as goal achievement, and an external, rel-
criticism of false optimism, POB tends to emphasize realistic optimism (Luthans, 2002b; Luthans, Youssef
et al., 2007; Schneider, 2001). In other words, optimism is not based on an unchecked process that has no re-
alistic assessment. This realistic optimism as a state (as opposed to a dispositional trait), includes an objec-
and therefore can vary (see Peterson, 2000).
Similar to the other positive psychological capacities, empirical research on optimism in the workplace is
-
mance of insurance sales agents. In addition, in the study of the Chinese factory workers mentioned previ-
-
mance. The study by Youssef and Luthans (2007) found employees’ optimism related to their performance,
satisfaction, and happiness.
based on the comprehensive theory and extensive research of Bandura (1997) with recent emphasis to link-
ing this construct to positive psychology (Bandura, 2007). Applied to the workplace, Stajkovic and Luthans
a given context. In a meta-analysis consisting of 114 studies, they found a strong positive relationship be-
