Next Article in Journal
The Border Harms of Human Displacement: Harsh Landscapes and Human Rights Violations
Previous Article in Journal
Immigrants’ Experiences on Integration While Attempting to Access the Labour Market: Implications for Social Work Practice
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Social Sciences
Volume 10
Issue 4
10.3390/socsci10040122
socsci-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

A Conceptual Examination about the Correlates of Psychological Capital (PsyCap) among the Saudi Arabian Workforce

by
Nasser Saad Alkahtani
1,†,
M. M. Sulphey
2,*,‡,
Kevin Delany
3 and
Anass Hamad Elneel Adow
2,§
1
Department of HRM, College of Business Administration, Prince Sattam Bin Abdulaziz University, P.O. Box 165, Al-Kharj, Saudi Arabia
2
College of Business Administration, Prince Sattam Bin Abdulaziz University, P.O. Box 165, Al-Kharj, Saudi Arabia
3
Norwich Business School, University of East Anglia, Norwich NR4 7TJ, UK
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
†
Nasser Saad Alkahtani is an Associate Professor of Department of HRM in College of Business Administration.
‡
M. M. Sulphey is a Professor of College of Business Administration in Prince Sattam Bin Abdulaziz University.
§
Anass Hamad Elneel Adow is a Lecturer of College of Business Administration in Prince Sattam Bin Abdulaziz University.
Soc. Sci. 2021, 10(4), 122; https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci10040122
Submission received: 14 February 2021 / Revised: 13 March 2021 / Accepted: 18 March 2021 / Published: 29 March 2021
(This article belongs to the Section Work, Employment and the Labor Market)
Browse Figure
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Psychological capital (PsyCap), which is considered a higher-order construct, is composed of hope, efficacy, optimism, and resilience. The importance of PsyCap stems from the fact that it has the propensity to motivate individuals in their accomplishment of organizational tasks and goals. The concept is related to many behavioral concepts including: subjective well-being, social capital, employee engagement, and emotional intelligence. The majority of the research literature on PsyCap has originated from the West, and limited literature exists about its antecedents and consequences among the Saudi population. Studies undertaken in Saudi Arabia must take into account unique cultural aspects. The present work attempts to identify the contribution that could emerge from the relationship of PsyCap, with constructs like subjective well-being, social capital, and employee engagement, considered through the prism of culture. It also recognizes the influence of, and upon, the external environment. Going beyond the replication of earlier studies, the present work considers the constructs to have a yin-yang relationship. The study presented a model of comprehensive framework emerging from the relevant literature to bring out the complex connections between PsyCap and other constructs. It also emphasized the importance of culture on the identified constructs, and its implication on contribution and performance. The proposed framework needs to be further tested by academics, researchers, and practitioners to confirm its practical implications in industry.

1. Introduction

The concept of psychological capital (PsyCap) is strongly linked to increased well-being (Gautam et al. 2019; Lorenz et al. 2016), job satisfaction (Abbas et al. 2012; Luthans et al. 2007a; Luthans and Youssef 2007; Youssef and Luthans 2007), and life satisfaction (Santisi et al. 2020). Luthans (2002) is seen as the pioneer thinker behind PsyCap, proposing that organizations must address their human capital workforce’s psychological development to establish human capital as a distinct and valuable organizational asset.
This emphasis on human capital’s psychological development is particularly relevant for the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia in the 21st century. Saudi Arabia has seen significant change since it came into existence in 1932. Particularly after the discovery of massive oil reserves and other natural resources. After that, Saudi society moved rapidly towards higher socio-economic standards and adopted more modern lifestyles (Bowen 2008; Ochsenwald and Fisher 2010), while still cherishing their ancient lineage and civilization. The country has a high human development index (HDI) score, and stands 36th globally and second in the Arab Region. In the last three decades, the HDI value increased 22.8% to 0.857 (UNDP 2019).
In 2016, Saudi Arabia embarked on the ambitious “Vision 2030”, with a commitment to enhance human capital efficiency and provide opportunities for all, recognizing the specific need for a highly motivated, engaged, and change-ready national workforce. The total population of the Kingdom is over 27 million, with a critical consideration being that, while two-thirds of the total population are Saudi nationals, a substantial portion are expatriates who are attracted, and often recruited, from countries all around the world (Central Department of Statistics & Information 2010). Development plans for Saudi Arabia, in particular those from Vision 2030, make considerable demands on the human capital. They promote a new emphasis on identifying and developing local talent rather than recruiting expensive expatriates, and this intent is entirely consistent with the rationale of PsyCap. Our research targets the development of an approach and model framework that will help identify and address a broad range of factors that may enable or constrain organizations, and the Kingdom, in meeting key objectives. We believe that learning from the approach and model framework can assist in designing and delivering a broad range of human capital interventions targeted to meet resource needs unique to the Saudi Arabian culture and work environment. Those interventions include manager training and development, emphasizing the importance of employees as individuals, and capturing and mobilizing those individuals’ relative strengths. The research is based around PsyCap and the related elements of well-being, social capital, engagement, and cultural considerations.

2. Literature Review

For the completion of the present work, the authors adopted a conceptual framework. The directions presented by Gilson et al. (2015) were followed in earnest to complete the work. As a conceptual paper, this study seeks to bridge the available and existing theories, link interdisciplinary knowledge, and present multiple insights to broaden the available literature’s scope. The conceptual framework method has been used very widely across various disciplines. It is also widely used as a useful tool in theory building and modeling.
As a conceptual piece of work, the authors also considered theory building, developing of taxonomies, and clarifying issues and propositions associated with hitherto untested relationships (Gilson et al. 2015; Van de Ven and Poole 1989). As proposed by Weick (1989), the conceptual paper can be linked to a testable hypotheses and can offer a bridging link between validation and usefulness. It can also provide a clear understanding of how the different constructs identified in the study interact. In general, the study’s framework ensures a sensible and straightforward discussion in a particular discipline. In this study, the authors achieved this by critically reviewing the related literature on the different constructs from the Saudi digital library (SDL), a single window that provides the latest literature from all major repositories and publishing houses.
The study proposes a theoretical framework that highlights the relationships and effects of the constructs and makes suggestions for further research.

2.1. Constructs Used for the Study

2.1.1. Psychological Capital (PsyCap)

PsyCap is a core contributor to positive organizational behavior (POB). In introducing POB, Luthans (2002) challenged the often negative approach and perspective adopted by management researchers and practitioners in “trying to fix what is wrong with managers and employees and concentrating on weaknesses” and argued the case for greater positivity regarding the psychological strength and capabilities of individuals. The emphasis of POB is, therefore, on the strengths of individuals that could contribute towards more positive outcomes (Luthans and Youssef-Morgan 2017).
The constructs identified by Luthans (2002) as representative of POB, and with implications in the workplacem include confidence, self-efficacy, hope, optimism, subjective well-being, and emotional intelligence (Goleman 2004). POB focuses on state-like variables that can be developed within organizational members through workplace interventions and proactive management (Luthans and Youssef 2004; Luthans and Youssef-Morgan 2017). POB approaches have been adopted by human resource (HR) functions in many leading organizations and are represented in a range of HR activities, including learning and development, coaching and mentoring, performance improvement, leadership and followership, and change management. One of the noted practical strengths of PsyCap in POB is that it can be managed and developed, with the scope for objective assessment in terms of enhanced positive psychological capital and securing performance improvement (Luthans and Youssef 2004).
Luthans and Youssef (2004) considered PsyCap as a “higher-order construct”, comprising the constructs of hope, efficacy, optimism, and resilience. Luthans et al. (2007a, p. 3) described PsyCap as “an individual’s positive state of development”, defining PsyCap as:
“an individual’s positive psychological state of development that is characterized by: having confidence (self-efficacy) to take on and put in the necessary effort to succeed at challenging tasks; making a positive attribution (optimism) about succeeding now and in the future; persevering toward goals and, when necessary, redirecting paths to goals (hope) in order to succeed; and when beset by problems and adversity, sustaining and bouncing back and even beyond (resilience) to attain success.”
PsyCap represents the “positive appraisal of circumstances and probability for success based on motivated effort and perseverance” (Luthans et al. 2007a, p. 550). It is seen as relating to the “best self”, going beyond human and social capital (Luthans and Youssef 2004).
The formative constructs of PsyCap are presented in Table 1.
Law et al. (1998) propose that certain multidimensional constructs could have components related to the underlying core element, with the shared variance/commonality between each facet and the main higher-order factor. PsyCap is identified as one such construct (Luthans et al. 2007a). The common underlying link of the four facets of PsyCap is their outstanding contribution towards the propensity to motivate individuals in their accomplishment of organizational tasks and goals.
PsyCap represents a key psychological resource in the workplace. Investments in PsyCap are argued to be capable of yielding more substantial returns than those offered by other traditional subjects of capital investment (Carmona-Halty et al. 2019; Luthans et al. 2007b; Luthans and Youssef-Morgan 2017; Santisi et al. 2020), with a significant positive effect on a host of desirable workplace attitudes and behaviors (Baluku et al. 2020; Choi and Lee 2014; Larson and Luthans 2006; Song et al. 2020). Those attitudes and behaviors include happiness, positive leadership, appraisal of the available circumstances, motivation, organizational commitment, organizational citizenship behavior, and work performance (Avey et al. 2009; Avolio and Luthans 2006; Carmona-Halty et al. 2019; McMurray et al. 2010; Norman et al. 2010; Luthans et al. 2007b; Shahnawaz and Jafri 2009). Employees having higher levels of all the four facets of PsyCap (hope, optimism, efficacy, and resilience) are considered much more likely to be able to “weather the storm” than colleagues with lower levels (Luthans et al. 2007b).
PsyCap is positively related to other constructs, including motivation (Avey et al. 2010c; Choi and Lee 2014; Herdem 2019; Luthans et al. 2007a; Walumbwa et al. 2010), employee efficiency (Avey et al. 2010b; Peterson et al. 2011; Sleator 2020), satisfaction (Larson and Luthans 2006), organizational climate (Luthans et al. 2008; Song et al. 2020), and performance (Carmona-Halty et al. 2019). Given its capability to enhance positive cognition and motivation, PsyCap is recognized as a predictor of employee performance (Avey et al. 2010c; Carmona-Halty et al. 2019; Choi and Lee 2014; Luthans et al. 2007a; Walumbwa et al. 2010), and has also been found to relate to innovative behaviors (Abbas and Raja 2011; Li et al. 2020) and creative performance (Sameer 2018; Sweetman et al. 2011; Wang et al. 2021). A study done among oil and petrochemical employees in Saudi Arabia by Idris and Manganaro (2017) found PsyCap to be related to job satisfaction and organizational commitment.
A further argument in support of PsyCap is that researchers have observed a negative relationship between PsyCap and workplace deviance (Norman et al. 2010; Raza et al. 2019), cynicism, and intention to quit (Avey et al. 2010a; Çelik 2018).

2.1.2. Subjective Well-Being

A significant proportion of employees’ daily lives is spent in the workplace, meaning that employee happiness, or at least satisfaction, reflected in subjective well-being (SWB) is of paramount importance. SWB may be interpreted as individuals’ general “cognitive and affective evaluations of their lives” (Diener 2000, p. 1), with work happiness as “a component in the broad definition of work-related outcomes” (Youssef and Luthans 2007, p. 783).
Early reviews of SWB can be traced to Wilson (1967) and Campbell et al. (1976). Wilson proposed “correlates of avowed happiness,” which has been pathbreaking in the field of SWB. Later, the concept got popularized by Diener (1984), and his work is widely cited and is worth considering even today. The guidance provided by Diener (1984) has helped in triggering multiple empirical examinations about the concept. Theorizing the concept of SWB, Parfit (1984) proposed that well-being theory includes hedonism theory, expectancy theory, and objective list theory. Later, Haybron (2008) proposed five aspects: hedonism, desire, authentic happiness, eudaimonism, and objective theories. Sumner (1996) opines that SWB can be included in the hedonism and desire theories. Eudaimonic well-being is considered to transcend daily life (Kashdan et al. 2008; Sun 2015). Thus, according to Fried (2017), SWB is not merely a scientific concept, but can also be considered a social construct, with philosophical foundations grounded in theoretical sources (Liang et al. 2020).
SWB, considered a multifaceted concept that could lead to greater happiness and meaning, revolves around two traditions, hedonistic and eudaimonic (González et al. 2021; Ryan and Deci 2000). The hedonistic perspective considers well-being as happiness and life satisfaction resulting from the successful pursuit of human desires. Eudaemonic well-being is based on notions of a “life well lived”. Indicators of eudaemonic well-being include a sense of meaning and purpose in life, feelings of autonomy, environmental mastery, personal growth, positive relations with others, and self-acceptance (Ryff 1989; Ryff and Keyes 1995).
SWB is recognized as being domain-specific (Warr 1990; Choi and Lee 2014). Therefore, it is possible to consider work-related aspects of well-being, such as job satisfaction, mood, and broader emotional states related to an individual’s work or work environment, such as anxiety, happiness, enthusiasm, anger, and fatigue (Daniels 2000; Sironi 2019). The extent of employee engagement is reflected in higher energy levels, resilience, and commitment to work (Kašpárková et al. 2018). Drawing on self-determination theory (SDT), Ryan and Deci (2000) proposed that autonomy, competence, and relatedness were the three essential basic psychological needs critical in fostering wellness.
There is a body of research identifying the positive relationship between PsyCap and well-being (Avey et al. 2010b; Choi and Lee 2014; Culbertson et al. 2010; Murray et al. 2010; Sabaitytė and Diržytė 2016; Santisi et al. 2020), and PsyCap and happiness at work (Basinska and Rozkwitalska 2020; Choi and Lee 2014; Youssef and Luthans 2007). Choi and Lee (2014) identified the relationship between PsyCap and a number of variables, including turnover intention, work happiness, and broader SWB.
This body of evidence supports the proposition that PsyCap has a positive relationship with SWB (P1).

2.1.3. Social Capital (SC)

Capital is traditionally considered to exist in three forms: economic, cultural, and social (Bourdieu 1986). Social capital (SC) can be seen as the form of capital that produces goods for a common purpose, in which Milana and Maldaon (2015) identify the form of a favorable image of nobility. SC in the work environment involves trust, norms, and networking among employees and facilitates coordinated and enhanced collective action among employees (Putnam 2001). Lin (2001, p. 29) defines SC as “resources embedded in a social structure that is accessed and mobilized in purposive actions”. Organizational SC is defined by Leana and Van Buren (1999, p. 538) as “a resource reflecting the character of social relations within an organization”. SC in an organization is seen as a product of its different actors and their social interaction. SC provides a resource to support, improve, and change the infrastructure within organizations, and assist those organizations in addressing and accommodating significant change (Chazon 2009; Cirule and Prusis 2018; Wu et al. 2021).
SC has two dimensions and three levels (Islam et al. 2006; Szreter and Woolcock 2004), which are detailed in Table 2.
Baker and Dutton (2006) considered SC to have two dimensions—positive and negative. Positive SC includes the personal relationships and connections that organizational members have and the resultant reciprocity. Negative SC is the relationship that could challenge employee performance. This could include gossip, a lack of collaboration mentality, and a lack of reciprocity. A relatively recent study by Ben-Hador (2019) identified three levels of SC—personal SC, intra-organizational SC, and external SC. Personal SC involves an individual’s profit derived from their particular positioning within the social network. It is the number of social relationships that the member maintains. He empirically proved that simultaneous maintenance of all three is indispensable for the development of social capital within organizations. Intra-organizational SC is the public good (for instance, organizational resource) against a private good (personal resource). This SC develops more cooperative, fecund, and firm relationships in the organization (Kuznetsova and Matveeva 2015), and could contribute to employees and their respective organizations’ development. External SC provides the required support needed to maintain the necessary resources. This SC helps buffer organizations from disruptive environmental influences.
Earlier, SC was an area of study in sociology (Portes 1998). The modern use of SC is attributed to Bourdieu (1983), who suggested that social relationships provided individuals the required quantitative and qualitative access to group members’ resources. There is now increasing interest in SC from management researchers, considering its significance and contributions to organizations (Tantardini and Kroll 2015; Read 2014; Sato 2013; Wagner et al. 2014; Yuwono 2021). As stated above, according to Ben-Hador (2019), SC has three levels: personal, intra-organizational, and external. Each of the three levels has certain unique features, benefits, and risks. He opines that each level strengthens the different components of organizational performance. Personal SC was found to enhance the knowledge and personal power of individuals (Ben-Hador 2016). High levels of SC have been found to offer opportunities for enhanced communication and improved performance in information sharing, teamwork, mutual support, and the judicious allocation of resources, supporting increased levels of job satisfaction and commitment of employees (Cirule and Prusis 2018; Read 2014; Wagner et al. 2014). Some of the benefits of SC include positive reputation, better organizational performance (Leana and Van Buren 1999), and better competitive advantage (Galunic et al. 2012). Nahapiet and Ghoshal (1998) and Parker et al. (2015) proposed that organizations fostering SC by investing in bringing members together would secure and exhibit advantages in performance. Gannon and Roberts (2018) found SC to have a significant association with well-being. Several studies have also found SC to be strongly related to SWB (Helliwell and Putnam 2004; Hommerich and Tiefenbach 2017; Kamarudin et al. 2020).
Based on the established and growing body of evidence, the emerging research proposition is that PsyCap has a positive relationship with SC (P2).

2.1.4. Engagement

How the term ‘‘employee engagement’’ originated is unclear (Bakker and Schaufeli 2015). It is believed to have first been used by the Gallup organization in the early 1990s. Kahn (1990) first conceptualized it as the ‘‘harnessing of organization members’ selves to their work roles: in engagement, people employ and express themselves physically, cognitively, emotionally, and mentally during role performances’’ (p. 694). Work engagement is a complex and dynamic emotional process reflecting an individual’s unique psychological state in a strong association with their work situation (Macey and Schneider 2008). Kahn, who has been described as the founding father of engagement, focused on how people expressed themselves verbally, physically, cognitively, and emotionally with their employment (Kahn 1990). Though many social scientists and HR practitioners have attempted to define the concept (MacLeod and Clarke 2009), the most widely used definition of engagement is that proposed by Schaufeli and Bakker (2004, p.74) of “a positive, fulfilling, work-related state of mind that is characterized by vigor, dedication, and absorption.” Engaged employees are not passive and put considerable effort into their work, as they tend to identify with it, producing positive outcomes at the individual and organizational levels (Bakker and Schaufeli 2015). The formative variables of work engagement are presented in Table 3.
PsyCap has been demonstrated to have a significant positive relationship with work engagement (Avey et al. 2008a; Carmona-Halty et al. 2019). The research literature shows that PsyCap can augment work engagement (Bakker and Oerlemans 2019; Carmona-Halty et al. 2019; Hodges 2010; Qi 2020; Simons and Buitendach 2013; Soni and Rastogi 2019). Adding an extra dimension, Avey et al. (2008a, 2008b) found that positive feelings in the workplace mediate the relationship between PsyCap and attitudes, including work engagement and skepticism. Zhang et al. (2020) found a serial relationship between optimism (a component of PsyCap) and work engagement. The construct was also found to help employees adapt to changes (Parent and Lovelace 2018; Van den Heuvel et al. (2020). Studies by Carmona-Halty et al. (2019) and Datu et al. (2016) found PsyCap to bolster engagement and achievement. Larson et al. (2013) and Xu et al. (2017) reported a positive association between the PsyCap of leaders and their subordinates’ engagement level.
It is thus proposed that there is a positive relationship between PsyCap and work engagement (P3).

2.1.5. Cultural Considerations

Culture may be considered at the national or organizational level. Hofstede describes the national culture in terms of how national societies are built, and the unexamined rules guiding how people think, feel, and act (Hofstede et al. 2010). At the organizational level, culture is generally interpreted as referring to the shared values, attitudes, standards, and beliefs that characterize an organization’s members and define its nature (Benozzo et al. 2019; Schein 1996).
There is substantial evidence that cultural considerations would impact any workforce’s well-being and engagement (Al Shehri et al. 2017; Oishi 2018) and that the impact may be positive or negative (Kotter and Heskett 2011). Hu et al. (2014) found that culture influenced work engagement levels. Further, culture could facilitate economic development depending on which job opportunities are enhanced (Esmail 2019). Research into high-performing organizations references the critical influence of organizational culture on, and from, PsyCap, engagement, well-being, motivation, leadership, and ultimately, performance (de Waal 2007; Boston Consulting Group 2011).
The dimension of culture has not given due importance in most studies. Culture and traditions directly affect a country like Saudi Arabia because of its innumerable uniqueness (Sulphey and Al-Kahtani 2017; Sulphey 2019). Saudi culture is distinctive and has a pivotal role in people’s daily lives (Aljammaz et al. 2019). Some of the Saudi culture’s uniqueness includes the reliance on a state religion—Islam, and the predominantly prevalent tribal social system and identity. In Saudi Arabia, Islam guided by the Holy Quran and Sunnah (the Prophet’s sayings—peace be upon him) dictates the moral and ethical principles and social behaviors (Kabasakal and Bodur 2002). This aligns with Hofstede’s (1998) proposition that morality could originate from religious beliefs.
Many social scientists have identified the propensity of culture and identity exerting considerable influence on the social system (Bagozzi 2007; Hofstede 1998; Kabasakal and Bodur 2002; Sulphey 2019). This is severe among Arab cultures (Agourram 2009; Hill et al. 1998; Saleem et al. 2019; Vörös and Choudrie 2011; Waxin et al. 2020), resulting in conflicts in organizations. Further, a form of strict hierarchical culture has been found to exist in Saudi Arabian organizations (Alkahtani et al. 2013; Sulphey and Al-Kahtani 2018). Several studies have also found that Saudi Arabian leaders adopt duality, which includes both consultation and directive management (Al-Yahya 2008; Saleem et al. 2019; Sagie and Aycan 2003). This uniqueness has prompted researchers (for instance, Al-Shehry et al. (2006); AlSheddi et al. (2020); Bjerke and Al-Meer (1993); etc.) to propose that in countries like Saudi Arabia, while undertaking organizational behavior studies, there is a definite need to provide due consideration to the cultural uniqueness and characteristics. This is because the value system and the general environment would have a profound influence on the workplace. The present work thus proposes viewing organizational behavior research through the prism of cultural dimension. The next proposition is culture has a direct relationship with PsyCap and situational factors (P4).

3. Theoretical Underpinnings

Theoretical support for the listed propositions and the emerging model was provided by drawing from psychological resource theory (PST) (Hobfoll 2002) and key resource theories (KRT) (Thoits 1994). Other theories include social cognitive theory (SCT) and job-demands-resources theory (Bandura 2020; López-Núñez et al. 2020). PST proposes considering individual assets as being formed from a hidden core construct or a set of resources, while KRT views resources as those which are considered as management resources. Resources, as referred to in this theory, are very broad. Initially, they were considered to include anything that holds value to any individual (Hobfoll 1989, 2002). Later on, the definition of resources was further broadened to refer to everything that a person perceives to help them perform, which could include individual goals, personality traits, or even environmental conditions (Bakker and De Vries 2020; Bakker and Demerouti 2017, 2018; Gorgievski et al. 2011a, 2011b; Halbesleben et al. 2014). In a recent study, López-Núñez et al. (2020) attributed the malleability of PsyCap to SCT. According to them, PSyCap emerged because of self-control and self-efficacy concepts presented in SCT.
An additional consideration is that key resource elements, for example, PsyCap, SWB, and engagement, have been empirically found to have an interactive and synergistic effect (Cozzarelli 1993; Rini et al. 1999; Santisi et al. 2020). Multiple resources theories (MRTs) advocate the emergence of synergies, where the outcomes from the interplay of the different contributing resource elements would be greater than the sum of those elements (Antonovsky 1979).

4. The Case for Further Research

The majority of the research literature on PsyCap has originated from the US and Western world (Choi and Lee 2014; Larson et al. 2013; Luthans et al. 2007a, 2007b; Santisi et al. 2020), South Africa (Simons and Buitendach 2013); China (Luthans et al. 2008), India (Soni and Rastogi 2019), Turkey (Çetin and Basim 2011), and South Korea (Choi and Lee 2014). Scant literature exists about the antecedents and consequences of PsyCap among the Saudi population.
In addition to filling this literature gap, this paper intended to go beyond the replication of earlier studies into PsyCap and related constructs. The intention was to adopt a comprehensive framework model emerging from the relevant literature to confirm the complex connections between PsyCap and other constructs, including culture, and their collective implications on contribution and performance. As stated earlier, the cultural dimension has not been provided the required focus in earlier works. It is proposed that organizational behavior studies conducted in Saudi Arabia need to contribute to the cultural dimension. Further, the demands of Vision 2030 will have considerable implications for the workforce in Saudi Arabia and the institutions engaged in providing essential training and development and broader guidance. The proposed research, guided and underpinned by a relevant model, can assist in informing and supporting initiatives to meet the Vision’s demands. There is substantial research evidence for recognizing that the constructs presented in this paper are culture-dependent (Firouzbakht et al. 2018), and therefore, further research concerning the Saudi workforce should take this into account.
The proposed model (Figure 1) is dynamic in recognizing that PsyCap and its components influence, and in turn, are influenced by other constructs. These constructs influence the culture that enables or constrains those constructs’ contributions at the organizational and national levels. The other consideration in the model is that it is essential to consider the implications and impact of external factors. External factors relate to macro-level events, for example, significant changes in the economy linked to global concerns for climate change have implications for the scale and required competencies of the national and organizational workforces. Thus, it is proposed that “external forces mediate the relationship between PsyCap, situational factors, and contribution/performance outcomes” (P5).
We believe that external factors’ influence has been under-researched in previous studies and may be especially significant for individuals and organizations in particular industries at particular times. Traditional management training and development interventions may provide generic content to participant communities crossing different industries. Our proposed model recognizes that the impact of even top-quality management training and development may be mitigated, or enhanced, by the filter of external factors, with implications for the eventual contribution.

5. Implications

5.1. Theoretical Implications

The present work contributes substantially to management literature as it integrates various aspects—PsyCap and certain situational factors like well-being, social capital, and employee engagement; by drawing inputs from psychological resource theory (PST), key resource theory (KRT), and job-demands-resources theory. These factors are superimposed on the broader backdrop of culture, which scholars have generally ignored. This work also offers further insights into the synergistic probabilities of PsyCap and the situational factors. Taking a cue from several studies, for instance, Abubakar et al. (2019) proposed an implied relationship between employee emotions at work and the cultural underpinnings. The emotions at work need to be viewed through the prism of culture prevalent in each nation or society. Culture is supposed to play a vital role in boosting healthy employee emotions and enhancing PsyCap, resulting in a robust work environment. These could further help achieve a host of desirable employee outcomes, including increased innovative behaviors and resultant employee contribution/performance (Li et al. 2020; Wang et al. 2021). The impact of cultural context on PsyCap could be a fecund area for future research.
As claimed by many social scientists, for instance, White and Bryson (2013), it can be considered that appropriate investments in human capital in general, and in the factors stated in the present work, would manifest as contributions or positive work outcomes. Another proposition is that certain external factors would mediate the impact and magnitude of employee contributions. It has also been posited that there is a definite need to acknowledge the importance of external factors on performance outcomes and contributions. Any failure to accord due priority to external factors would backfire and lead to adverse results on the positive steps initiated to boost employee attitudes and emotions. This could ultimately manifest as psychological exhaustion of employees, resulting in unwanted outcomes. Therefore, there is a need to consider the influence of external factors that were hitherto not provided due importance during conceptualizations.

5.2. Practical Implications

The present paper has immense possibilities for practical contributions. It is argued that the combination of yin and yang (duality of contrary forces acting as both complementary and interdependent) that PsyCap and situational factors would bring in a work environment, which would generate the resources needed for positive work-related contributions/outcomes. This work is consistent with the idea that individuals who have subjective well-being and are engaged are more productive (Huang et al. 2015). Further, the constructs of PsyCap and the situational factors considered in this study are highly effective in counterbalancing undesirable work attitudes (Abubakar et al. 2019). Practitioners need to design programs that support and balance individual emotions at the workplace, with due importance given to the cultural aspects. In addition to other aspects, employees can be hired on the basis of their emotional outlooks and higher levels of PsyCap. They can also be offered “restorative techniques” such as training programs that are culturally sensitive (Baltes et al. 2014; Mostafa 2017).
Though the proposed framework is based on the literature review, it is expected to shed light on the importance of cultural dimension on organizational behavior constructs, especially in the Saudi context. The framework is of deep interest to social scientists, organizational behavior researchers, and practitioners. It needs to be further tested by academics, researchers, and practitioners to identify its practical implications in industry. It is expected that the present work can act as a trigger for further research explorations in this exciting area.
Vision 2030 in Saudi Arabia offers a significant opportunity to capture learning, regarding PsyCap and the broader culture and ways of working, as suggested in our proposed model framework, and to project this learning in the recruitment, training, and development of the national workforce. We propose research projects assessing and comparing experience and outcomes from human capital programs delivered in different industries.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, M.M.S.; resources, N.S.A. and A.H.E.A.; writing—original draft preparation, N.S.A. and M.M.S.; writing—review and editing, K.D.; supervision, N.S.A.; project administration, N.S.A.; funding acquisition, N.S.A. and A.H.E.A. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This project was supported by the Deanship of Scientific Research at Prince Sattam Bin Abdulaziz University under Research project No. 2019/02/10800.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The article is a review and no data have been used for analysis.

Acknowledgments

This project was supported by the Deanship of Scientific Research at Prince Sattam Bin Abdulaziz University under Research project No. 2019/02/10800.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, or in the decision to publish the results.

References

  1. Abbas, Muhammad, and Usman Raja. 2011. Impact of Psychological Capital Innovative Performance and Job stress. In 15th International Business Research Conference (Ref No. 449). Melbourne: World Business Institute. [Google Scholar]
  2. Abbas, Muhammad, Usman Raja, Wendy Darr, and Dave Bouckenooghe. 2012. Combined effects of perceived politics and psychological capital on job satisfaction, turnover intentions, and performance. Journal of Management 40: 1813–30. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206312455243 (accessed on 20 March 2021). [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  3. Abubakar, Mohammed A., Taraneh Foroutan, and Khaled Jamal Megdadi. 2019. An integrative review: High-performance work systems, psychological capital and future time perspective. International Journal of Organizational Analysis 27: 1093–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Agourram, Hafid. 2009. The quest for Information Systems success in Saudi Arabia. A case study. Journal of Global Management Research, 51–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Al Shehri, M., P. McLaughlin, A. Al-Ashaab, and R. Hamad. 2017. The impact of organizational culture on employee engagement in Saudi banks. Journal of Human Resources Management Research 1: 1–23. Available online: https://doi.org/10.5171/2017.761672 (accessed on 20 March 2021). [CrossRef]
  6. Aljammaz, Mohammed, Tsung-Hsien Wang, and Chengzhi Peng. 2019. Understanding occupant behaviour in Islamic homes to close the gap in building performance simulation: A case study of houses in Riyadh. In Proceedings of the Building Simulation 2019: 16th Conference of IBPSA, Rome, Italy, September 2–4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Alkahtani, Hend K., Ray Dawson, and Russel Lock. 2013. The impact of culture on Saudi Arabian information systems security. In Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Software Quality Management (SQM 2013). Edited by E. Georgiadou, M. Ross and G. Staples. Southampton: Quality Comes of Age, pp. 201–10. [Google Scholar]
  8. AlSheddi, Mona, Sophie Russell, and Peter Hegarty. 2020. How does culture shape our moral identity? Moral foundations in Saudi Arabia and Britain. European Journal of Social Psychology 50: 97–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Al-Shehry, Abdullah, Simon Rogerson, N. Ben Fairweather, and Mary Prior. 2006. The motivations for change towards e-government adoption: Case studies from Saudi Arabia. Paper presented at the eGovernment Workshop 06 (eGOV06), Brunel University, Uxbridge, London, September 11. [Google Scholar]
  10. Al-Yahya, Khalid O. 2008. Power-Influence in Decision Making, Competence Utilization, and Organizational Culture in Public Organizations: The Arab World in Comparative Perspective. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 19: 385–407. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Antonovsky, Aaron. 1979. Health, Stress, and Coping. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Inc. [Google Scholar]
  12. Avey, James B., Tara S. Wernsing, and Fred Luthans. 2008a. Can positive employees help positive organizational change? Impact of psychological capital and emotions on relevant attitudes and behaviors. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science 44: 48–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  13. Avey, J.B., L.W. Hughes, S.M. Norman, and K.W. Luthans. 2008b. Using positivity, transformational leadership and empowerment to combat employee negativity. Leadership & Organization Development Journal 29: 110–26. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1108/01437730810852470 (accessed on 20 March 2021).
  14. Avey, J.B., B.J. Avolio, C.D. Crossley, and F. Luthans. 2009. Psychological ownership: Theoretical extensions, measurement and relation to work outcomes. Journal of Organizational Behavior 30: 173–91. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1002/job.583 (accessed on 20 March 2021). [CrossRef]
  15. Avey, James B., Fred Luthans, and Carolyn M. Youssef. 2010a. The additive value of positive psychological capital in predicting work attitudes and behaviors. Journal of Management 36: 430–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  16. Avey, James B., Fred Luthans, Ronda M. Smith, and Noel F. Palmer. 2010b. Impact of positive psychological capital on employee well-being over time. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology 15: 17–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  17. Avey, James B., James L. Nimnicht, and Nancy G. Pigeon. 2010c. Two field studies examining the association between positive psychological capital and employee performance. Leadership & Organization Developmental Journal 31: 384–401. [Google Scholar]
  18. Avolio, Bruce J., and Fred Luthans. 2006. The High Impact Leader: Moments Matter for Accelerating Authentic Leadership Development. New York: McGraw-Hill. [Google Scholar]
  19. Bagozzi, Richard P. 2007. The Legacy of the Technology Acceptance Model and a Proposal for a Paradigm Shift. Journal of the Association for Information Systems 8: 244–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Baker, Wane E., and Jane E. Dutton. 2006. Enabling positive social capital in organizations. In Exploring Positive Relationship at Work: Building a Theoretical and Research Foundation. Edited by J. Dutton and F. Ragins. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Inc., pp. 325–45. [Google Scholar]
  21. Bakker, A.B., and J.D. De Vries. 2020. Job demands–resources theory and self-regulation: New explanations and remedies for job burnout. Anxiety Stress Coping 34: 1–21. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1080/10615806.2020.1797695 (accessed on 20 March 2021). [CrossRef]
  22. Bakker, Arnold B., and Evangelia Demerouti. 2017. Job demands–resources theory: Taking stock and looking forward. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology 22: 273–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Bakker, A.B., and E. Demerouti. 2018. Multiple levels in job demands-resources theory: Implications for employee well-being and performance. In Handbook of Wellbeing. Edited by E. Diener, S. Oishi and L. Tay. Salt Lake City: DEF Publishers. [Google Scholar]
  24. Bakker, A.B., and W.G.M. Oerlemans. 2019. Daily job crafting and momentary work engagement: A self-determination and self-regulation perspective. Journal of Vocational Behavior 112: 417–30. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2018.12.005 (accessed on 20 March 2021). [CrossRef]
  25. Bakker, Arnold B., and Wilmar B. Schaufeli. 2015. Work engagement. In Wiley Encyclopedia of Management. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., pp. 1–5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Baltes, Boris B., Kevin Wynne, Mgrdich Sirabian, Daniel Krenn, and Annet Lange. 2014. Future time perspective, regulatory focus, and selection, optimization, and compensation: Testing a longitudinal model. Journal of Organizational Behavior 35: 1120–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Baluku, Martin M., Eriphase N. Mugabi, Joyce Nansamba, Leonsio Matagi, Peter Onderi, and Kathleen Otto. 2020. Psychological capital and career outcomes among final year University students: The mediating role of career engagement and perceived employability. International Journal of Applied Positive Psychology 6: 55–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Bandura, Albert. 2020. Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Psychology: The Journal of the Hellenic Psychological Society 12: 313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Basinska, B. A., and Malgorzata Rozkwitalska. 2020. Psychological capital and happiness at work: The mediating role of employee thriving in multinational corporations. Current Psychology. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Ben-Hador, B. 2016. Coaching executives as tacit performance evaluation: A multiple case study. Journal of Management Development 35: 75–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Ben-Hador, Batia. 2019. Social capital levels, gossip and employee performance in aviation and shipping companies in Israel. International Journal of Manpower 40: 1036–55. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1108/ijm-12-2017-0321 (accessed on 25 March 2021). [CrossRef]
  32. Benozzo, Angelo, Mirka Koro-Ljungberg, and Adamo Ssergia. 2019. Would you prefer not to? Resetting/resistance across literature, culture, and organizations. Culture and Organization 25: 131–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Bjerke, Bjorn, and Abdulraheem Al-Meer. 1993. Culture’s consequences: Management in Saudi Arabia. Leadership and Organization Development Journal 14: 30–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Boston Consulting Group. 2011. High-performance organizations: The Secrets of their Success. [Google Scholar]
  35. Bourdieu, Pierre. 1983. Forms of social capital. In Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education. Edited by J. C. Richards. New York: Greenwood Press. [Google Scholar]
  36. Bourdieu, Pierre. 1986. Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education. Edited by J. Richardson. Westport: Greenwood. [Google Scholar]
  37. Bowen, Wayen H. 2008. The History of Saudi Arabia. Westport: Greenwood Press. [Google Scholar]
  38. Campbell, Angus, Philip E. Converse, and Willard L. Rodgers. 1976. The Quality of American Life: Perceptions, Evaluations, and Satisfactions. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. [Google Scholar]
  39. Carmona-Halty, Marcos, Marisa Salanova, and Wilmar B. Schaufeli. 2019. Good relations, good performance: The mediating role of psychological capital: A three-wave study among students. Frontiers in Psychology: Section Organizational Psychology 10: 306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  40. Çelik, Mazlum. 2018. The Effect of Psychological Capital Level of Employees on Workplace Stress and Employee Turnover Intention. Innovar 28: 67–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  41. Central Department of Statistics & Information. 2010. Available online: https://www.stats.gov.sa/en/73 (accessed on 15 January 2021).
  42. Çetin, F., and N. Basim. 2011. The role of resilience in the attitudes of job satisfaction and organizational commitment. ISGUC, The Journal of Industrial Relations and Human Resources 13: 79–94. Available online: https://doi.org/10.4026/1303-2860.2011.0184.x (accessed on 20 March 2021).
  43. Chazon, Timothy L. 2009. Social Capital: Relationship Between Social Capital and Teacher Job Satisfaction Within a Learning Organization. Boiling Springs: GardnerWebb University. [Google Scholar]
  44. Choi, Yongduk, and Dongseop Lee. 2014. Psychological capital, Big Five traits, and employee outcomes. Journal of Managerial Psychology 29: 122–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Cirule, Iveta, and Janis Prusis. 2018. Social capital and social support. 19th International Scientific Conference “Economic Science for Rural Development 2018”. Rural Development and Entrepreneurship Production and Co-operation in Agriculture. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Cozzarelli, Catherine. 1993. Personality and self-efficacy as predictors of coping with abortion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 65: 1224–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. Culbertson, Satoris S., Clive J. Fullagar, and Maura J. Mills. 2010. Feeling good and doing great: The relationship between psychological capital and well-being. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology 15: 421–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Daniels, Kevin. 2000. Measures of five aspects of affective well-being at work. Human Relations 53: 275–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Datu, Jesus A., Ronnel B. King, and Jana P. Valdez. 2016. Psychological capital bolsters motivation, engagement, and achievement: Cross-sectional and longitudinal studies. The Journal of Positive Psychology 13: 260–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. de Waal, Andre. 2007. The characteristics of a high-performance organization. Business Strategy Series 8: 179–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  51. Diener, Ed. 1984. Subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin 95: 542–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  52. Diener, Ed. 2000. Subjective well-being: The science of happiness and a proposal for a national index. American Psychologist 55: 34–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Esmail, Hanaa. A. 2019. The impact of cultural diversity on economic development in Saudi Arabia—Empirical study. Journal of Sustainable Development 12: 70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Firouzbakht, Mozhgan, Aram Tirgar, Abbas Ebadi, Hamid S. Nia, Tuula Oksanen, Anne Kouvonen, and Mohammed E. Riahi. 2018. Psychometric properties of Persian version of the short-form workplace social capital questionnaire for female health workers. International Journal of Occupational & Environmental Medicine 9: 184–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Fried, Eiko I. 2017. What are psychological constructs? On the nature and statistical modelling of emotions, intelligence, personality traits and mental disorders. Health Psychology Review 11: 130–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Galunic, Charles, Gokhan Ertug, and Martin Gargiulo. 2012. The positive externalities of social capital: Benefiting from senior brokers. Academy of Management Journal 55: 1213–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Gannon, Brenda, and Jennifer Roberts. 2018. Social capital: Exploring the theory and empirical divide. Empirical Economics 58: 899–919. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  58. Gautam, Vikas, Sombala Ningthoujam, and Teena Singh. 2019. Impact of Psychological Capital on Well-Being of Management Students. Theoretical Economics Letters 9: 1246–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  59. Gilson, L.L., M.T. Maynard, N.C.J. Young, M. Vartiainen, and M. Hakonen. 2015. Virtual teams research: 10 Years, 10 themes, and 10 opportunities. Journal of Management 41: 1313–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  60. Goleman, Daniel. 2004. What makes a leader? Harvard Business Review 82: 82–91. [Google Scholar]
  61. González, Pablo A., Francisca Dussaillant, and Esteban Calvo. 2021. Social and individual subjective wellbeing and capabilities in Chile. Frontiers in Psychology 11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Gorgievski, Marjan Jonathan, Jonathon R. B. Halbesleben, and Arnold B. Bakker. 2011a. Expanding the Boundaries of Psychological Resource Theories. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology 84: 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Gorgievski, M.J., M.E. Ascalon, and U. Stephan. 2011b. Small business owners’ success criteria, a values approach to personal differences. Journal of Small Business Management 49: 207–32. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-627x.2011.00322.x (accessed on 20 March 2021). [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  64. Halbesleben, Jonathan R. B., Neveu Jean-Pierre, C. Paustain-Underdahl Samantha, and Westman Mina. 2014. Getting to the ‘COR’: Understanding the Role of Resources in Conservation of Resources Theory. Journal of Management 40: 1334–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Haybron, Daniel M. 2008. Philosophy and the science of subjective well-being. In The Science of Subjective Well-Being. Edited by M. Eid and R. J. Larsen. New York: The Guilford Press, pp. 17–43. [Google Scholar]
  66. Helliwell, John F., and Robert D. Putnam. 2004. The social context of well-being. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 359: 1435–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Herdem, Dilek Ö. 2019. The effect of psychological capital on motivation for individual instrument: A study on University students. Universal Journal of Educational Research 7: 1402–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Hill, Carole E., Karen D. Loch, Detmar W. Straub, and Kamal El-Sheshai. 1998. A qualitative assessment of Arab culture and information technology transfer. Journal of Global Information Management 6: 29–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Hobfoll, Stevan E. 1989. Conservation of resources: A new attempt at conceptualizing stress. American Psychologist 44: 513–24. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066x.44.3.513 (accessed on 20 March 2021). [CrossRef]
  70. Hobfoll, Stevan E. 2002. Social and psychological resources and adaptation. Review of General Psychology 6: 307–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Hodges, Timothy D. 2010. An experimental Study of the Impact of Psychological Capital on Performance, Engagement, and the Contagion Effect. Dissertations thesis, College of Business Administration, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE, USA. [Google Scholar]
  72. Hofstede, Geert. 1998. Masculinity and Femininity: The Taboo Dimension of National Cultures. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, Inc. [Google Scholar]
  73. Hofstede, Geet, Gert J. Hofstede, and Michael Minkov. 2010. Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind: Intercultural Cooperation and Its Importance for Survival. New York: McGraw-Hill. [Google Scholar]
  74. Hommerich, Carola, and Tim Tiefenbach. 2017. Analyzing the relationship between social capital and subjective well-being: The mediating role of social affiliation. Journal of Happiness Studies 19: 1091–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Hu, Qiao, Wilmar B. Schaufeli, T. W. Taris, van David. J. Hessen, J. Hakanen, Marisa Salanova, and Akihitao Shimazu. 2014. “East is East and West is West and never the twain shall meet” Work engagement and workaholism across Eastern and Western cultures. Journal Behavioral and Social Science 1: 6–24. [Google Scholar]
  76. Huang, Xiaoyu, K. Jiang, and Anil Verma. 2015. Do changes in high-performance work systems pay off? A longitudinal investigation of dynamic fit. In Academy of Management Proceedings. New York: Briarcliff Manor, vol. 2015, p. 12181. [Google Scholar]
  77. Idris, Abdallah M., and Michelle Manganaro. 2017. Relationships between psychological capital, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment in the Saudi oil and petrochemical industries. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment 27: 251–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Islam, M. Kamrul, Juan Merlo, Ichiro Kawachi, Martin Lindström, and Ulf-G Gerdtham. 2006. Social capital and health: Does egalitarianism matter? A literature review. International Journal for Equity in Health, 5. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1186/1475-9276-5-3 (accessed on 20 March 2021). [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  79. Kabasakal, Hayat, and Muzaffer Bodur. 2002. Arabic cluster: A bridge between East and West. Journal of World Business 37: 40–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Kahn, William A. 1990. Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at work. Academy of Management Journal 33: 692–724. [Google Scholar]
  81. Kamarudin, N Norafisha, Siew H. Yen, and Kok F. See. 2020. Social capital and subjective well-being in Malaysia. Malaysian Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities (MJSSH) 5: 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Kashdan, Todd B., Robert Biswas-Diener, and Laura A. King. 2008. Reconsidering happiness: The costs of distinguishing between hedonics and Eudaimonia. The Journal of Positive Psychology 3: 219–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Kašpárková, Ludmila, Martin Vaculík, Jakub Procházka, and Wilmar B. Schaufeli. 2018. Why resilient workers perform better: The roles of job satisfaction and work engagement. Journal of Workplace Behavioral Health 33: 43–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Kotter, John P., and James L. Heskett. 2011. Corporate Culture and Performance. New York: Free Press. [Google Scholar]
  85. Kuznetsova, Natalia V., and Elena V. Matveeva. 2015. Accumulation of social capital as a competitive advantage of companies which are loyal to the principles of corporate citizenship. International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues 5: 68–72. [Google Scholar]
  86. Larson, Milan, and Fred Luthans. 2006. Potential added value of psychological capital in predicting work attitudes. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies 13: 44–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Larson, Milan D., Steven M. Norman, Larry W. Hughes, and James B. Avey. 2013. Psychological capital: A new lens for understanding employee fit and attitudes. International Journal of Leadership Studies 8: 28–43. [Google Scholar]
  88. Law, Kenneth S., Chi-Sum Wong, and William H. Mobley. 1998. Toward a taxonomy of multidimensional constructs. Academy of Management Review 23: 741–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Leana, Carrie R., and Harry J. Van Buren. 1999. Organizational Social Capital and Employment Practices. Academy of Management Review 24: 538–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Li, Tingyi, Wei Liang, Zhijian Yu, and Xin Dang. 2020. Analysis of the influence of entrepreneur’s psychological capital on employee’s innovation behavior under leader-member exchange relationship. Frontiers in Psychology, 11. Available online: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01853 (accessed on 20 March 2021). [CrossRef]
  91. Liang, Zengxian, Hui Luo, and Chenxi Liu. 2020. The concept of subjective well-being: Its origins an application in tourism research: A critical review with reference to China. Tourism Critiques: Practice and Theory. ahead-of-print. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Lin, Nan. 2001. Social Capital: A Theory of Social Structure and Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar]
  93. López-Núñez, M. Inmaculada, Susana Rubio-Valdehita, Eva M. Diaz-Ramiro, and Marta E. Aparicio-García. 2020. Psychological capital, workload, and burnout: What’s new? The impact of personal accomplishment to promote sustainable working conditions. Sustainability 12: 8124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Lorenz Timo, Clemens Beer, Jan Pütz, and Kathrin Heinitz. 2016. Measuring Psychological Capital: Construction and Validation of the Compound PsyCap Scale (CPC-12). PLoS ONE 11: e0152892. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0152892 (accessed on 20 March 2021). [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  95. Luthans, Fred. 2002. Positive organizational behavior: Developing and managing psychological strengths. Academy of Management Executive 16: 57–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Luthans, Fred, and Carolyn M. Youssef. 2004. Human, Social, and Now Positive Psychological Capital Management: Investing in People for Competitive Advantage. Organizational Dynamics 33: 143–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Luthans, Fred, and Carolyn M. Youssef. 2007. Emerging positive organizational behavior. Journal of Management 33: 321–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  98. Luthans, Fred, and Carolyn M. Youssef-Morgan. 2017. Psychological capital: An evidence-based positive approach. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior 4: 339–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  99. Luthans, Fred, Carolyn M. Youssef, and Bruce J. Avolio. 2007a. Psychological Capital: Developing the Human Competitive Edge. New York: Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar]
  100. Luthans, Fred, Bruce J. Avolio, James B. Avey, and Steven M. Norman. 2007b. Positive Psychological Capital: Measurement and Relationship with Performance and Satisfaction. Personnel Psychology 60: 541–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  101. Luthans, Fred, James B. Avey, Rachel C. Smith, and Weixing Li. 2008. More evidence on the value of Chinese workers’ psychological capital: A potentially unlimited competitive resource? International Journal of Human Resource Management 19: 818–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  102. Macey, William H., and Benjamin Schneider. 2008. The meaning of employee engagement. Industrial and Organizational Psychology 1: 3–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. MacLeod, David, and Nita Clarke. 2009. Engaging for Success: Enhancing Performance through Employee Engagement. London: Office of Public Sector Information. [Google Scholar]
  104. McMurray, Adela J., Andrew Pirola-Merlo, James C. Sarros, and Mohammed M. Islam. 2010. Leadership, climate, psychological capital, commitment and well-being in a non-profit organization. Leadership & Organization Development Journal 31: 436–57. [Google Scholar]
  105. Milana, Elias, and Issa Maldaon. 2015. Social Capital: A Comprehensive Overview at Organizational Context. Periodica Polytechnica Social and Management Sciences 23: 133–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Mostafa, A. Mohammed Sayed. 2017. High-performance HR practices, positive affect and employee outcomes. Journal of Managerial Psychology 32: 163–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  107. Nahapiet, Janine, and Sumantra Ghoshal. 1998. Social Capital, Intellectual Capital, and The Organizational Advantage. Academy of Management Review 23: 242–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Norman, Steven M., Bruce J. Avolio, and Fred Luthans. 2010. The impact of positivity and transparency on trust in leaders and their perceived effectiveness. The Leadership Quarterly 21: 350–364. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2010.03.002 (accessed on 20 March 2021). [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  109. Ochsenwald, William, and Sydney N. Fisher. 2010. The Middle East: A History. Boston: McGraw Hill. [Google Scholar]
  110. Oishi, Shigehiro. 2018. Culture and subjective well-being: Conceptual and measurement issues. In Handbook of Well-Being. Edited by E. Diener, S. Oishi and L. Tay. Salt Lake City: DEF Publishers. [Google Scholar]
  111. Parent, Jane D., and Kathi J. Lovelace. 2018. Employee engagement, positive organizational culture and individual adaptability. On the Horizon 26: 206–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Parfit, Derek. 1984. Reasons and Persons. New York: Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar]
  113. Parker, Andrew, Daniel S. Halgin, and Stephen P. Borgatti. 2015. Dynamics of social capital: Effects of performance feedback on network change. Organization Studies 37: 375–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  114. Peterson, A. Townsend, Jorge Soberón, Richard G. Pearson, Robert P. Anderson, Enrique Martínez-Meyer, Miguel Nakamura, and Miguel B. Araújo. 2011. Ecological Niches and Geographic Distributions. Princeton: Princeton University Press, p. 314. [Google Scholar]
  115. Portes, Alejandro. 1998. Social capital: Its origins and applications in modern sociology. Annual Review of Sociology 24: 1–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  116. Putnam, Robert D. 2001. Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community. New York: Simon and Schuster Paperbacks. [Google Scholar]
  117. Qi, Yaning. 2020. Influence of psychological capital construction on human resource management from the perspective of employee engagement. Revista Argentina De Clinica Psicologica 29: 530–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Raza, Basharat, Alia Ahmed, Sabahat Zubair, and Abdul Moueed. 2019. Linking workplace deviance and abusive supervision: Moderating role of positive psychological capital. International Journal of Organizational Leadership 8: 95–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Read, Emily A. 2014. Workplace social capital in nursing: An evolutionary concept analysis. Journal of Advances in Nursing 70: 997–1007. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  120. Rini, Christine K., Christine Dunkel-Schetter, Pathik D. Wadhwa, and Curt A. Sandman. 1999. Psychological adaptation and birth outcomes: The role of personal resources, stress, and sociocultural context in pregnancy. Health Psychology 18: 333–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. Ryan, Richard M., and Edward L. Deci. 2000. Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist 55: 68–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  122. Ryff, Carol D. 1989. Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning of psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 57: 1069–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  123. Ryff, Carol. D., and Corey Lee M. Keyes. 1995. The structure of psychological well-being revisited. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 69: 719–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  124. Sabaitytė, Eglė, and Aistė Diržytė. 2016. Psychological Capital, Self-Compassion, and Life Satisfaction of Unemployed Youth. International Journal of Psychology: A Biopsychosocial Approach 19: 49–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  125. Sagie, Abraham, and Zeynep Aycan. 2003. A cross-cultural analysis of participative decision-making in organizations. Human Relations 56: 453–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  126. Saleem, Muniba, M.E. Wojcieszak, I. Hawkins, M. Li, and S. Ramasubramanian. 2019. Social identity threats: How media and discrimination affect Muslim Americans’ identification as Americans and trust in the U.S. government. Journal of Communication 69: 214–236. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqz001 (accessed on 20 March 2021). [CrossRef]
  127. Sameer, Yomna M. 2018. Innovative behavior and psychological capital: Does positivity make any difference? Journal of Economics and Management 32: 75–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  128. Santisi, Giuseppe, Ernesto Lodi, Paola Magnano, Rita Zarbo, and Andrea Zammitti. 2020. Relationship between psychological capital and quality of life: The role of courage. Sustainability 12: 5238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  129. Sato, Yoshimichi. 2013. Social capital. Sociopedia.isa, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  130. Schaufeli, Wilmar B., and Arnold B. Bakker. 2004. Job demands, job resources, and their relationship with burnout and engagement. Journal of Organizational Behavior 25: 293–315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  131. Schein, Edgar H. 1996. Culture: The Missing Concept in Organization Studies. Administrative Science Quarterly 41: 229–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  132. Shahnawaz, Ghazi M., and Mohammed H. Jafri. 2009. Psychological Capital as Predictors of Organizational Commitment and Organizational Citizenship Behaviour. Journal of the Indian Academy of Applied Psychology 35: 78–84. [Google Scholar]
  133. Simons, Janet C., and Johanna H. Buitendach. 2013. Psychological capital, work engagement and organizational commitment amongst call center employees in South Africa. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology 39: 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  134. Sironi, Emiliano. 2019. Job satisfaction as a determinant of employees’ optimal well-being in an instrumental variable approach. Quality & Quantity 53: 1721–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  135. Sleator, Roy D. 2020. An alternative viewpoint—Comment on Prescott and bland Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 1407. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 17: 5004. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  136. Snyder, Charles R., Cheri Harris, John R. Anderson, Sharon A. Holleran, Lori M. Irving, Sandra T. Sigmon, Lauren Yoshinobu, June Gibb, Charyle Langelle, and Pat Harney. 1991. The will and the ways: Development and validation of an individual-differences measure of hope. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 60: 570–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  137. Song, Yu, Peng Peng, and Guangtao Yu. 2020. I would speak up to live up to your trust: The role of psychological safety and regulatory focus. Frontiers in Psychology 10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  138. Soni, Kumari, and Ravi Rastogi. 2019. Psychological Capital Augments Employee Engagement. Psychological Studies 64: 465–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  139. Stajkovic, Alexander D., and Fred Luthans. 1998. Social cognitive theory and self-efficacy: going beyond traditional motivational and behavioral approaches. Organizational Dynamics 26: 62–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  140. Sulphey, M. MohammedIsmail. 2019. The Concept of Workplace Identity, its evolution, antecedents and development, International Journal of Environment. Workplace and Employment 5: 151–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  141. Sulphey, M. MohammedIsamil, and Nasser S. Al-Kahtani. 2017. Economic security and sustainability through social entrepreneurship: The current Saudi scenario. Journal of Security and Sustainability Issues 6: 479–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  142. Sulphey, M. MohammedIsmail, and Nasser S. Al-Kahtani. 2018. Academic Excellence of Business Graduates through Nudging: Prospects in Saudi Arabia. International Journal of Innovation and Learning 24: 98–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  143. Sumner, L. Wayne. 1996. Welfare, Happiness, and Ethics. New York: Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar]
  144. Sun, W. 2015. Dao and eudaimonia: Another dialogue between Aristotle and Xunzi’s ethics. Fudan Journal (Social Sciences) 6: 86–95. [Google Scholar]
  145. Sweetman, David S., Fred Luthans, James B. Avey, and Brett C. Luthans. 2011. Relationship between positive psychological capital and creative performance. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences 28: 4–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  146. Szreter, Simon, and Michael Woolcock. 2004. Health by association? Social capital, social theory, and the political economy of public health. International Journal of Epidemiology 33: 650–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  147. Tantardini, Michele, and Alexadner Kroll. 2015. The role of organizational social capital in performance management. Public Performance & Management Review 39: 83–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  148. Thoits, Paggy A. 1994. Stressors and problem solving: The individual as a psychological activist. Journal of Health and Social Behavior 35: 143–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  149. UNDP. 2019. Inequalities in Human Development in the 21st Century Briefing Note for Countries on the 2019 Human Development Report Saudi Arabia, Human Development Report 2019. Available online: http://www.hdr.undp.org/sites/all/themes/hdr_theme/country-notes/SAU.pdf (accessed on 12 March 2021).
  150. Uphoff, Norman. 1999. Understanding social capital: Learning from the analysis and experience of participation. In Social Capital: A Multi-faceted Perspective. Edited by P. Dasgaputa and I. Serageldin. Washington: The World Bank. [Google Scholar]
  151. Van de Ven, Andrew H., and Marshall Scott Poole. 1989. Methods for Studying Innovation Processes. Edited by Andrew H. Van de Ven, H.L. Angle and Marshall Scott Poole. New York: Research on the Management of Innovation, Harper & Row, pp. 31–54. [Google Scholar]
  152. Van den Heuvel, M., E. Demerouti, A. B. Bakker, J. Hetland, and W. B. Schaufeli. 2020. How do employees adapt to organizational change? The role of meaning-making and work engagement. Spanish Journal of Psychology 23: e56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  153. Vörös, Tiber, and J. Choudrie. 2011. Uncertainty Avoidance and Technology Acceptance in Emerging Economies: A Comparative Study. Paper presented at the SIG Globdev 4th Annual Conference, Shanghai, China, December 3. [Google Scholar]
  154. Wagner, Heinz-Theo, Daniel Beimborn, and Tim Weitzel. 2014. How social capital among information technology and business units drives operational alignment and IT business value. Journal of Management Information Systems 13: 241–72. Available online: https://doi.org/10.2753/mis0742-1222310110 (accessed on 20 March 2021). [CrossRef]
  155. Walumbwa, Fred O., Suzanne J. Peterson, Bruce J. Avolio, and Chad A. Hartnell. 2010. An investigation of the relationships among leader and follower psychological capital, service climate, and job performance. Personnel Psychology 63: 937–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  156. Wang, Yanfei, Yi Chen, and Yu Zhu. 2021. Promoting innovative behavior in employees: The mechanism of leader psychological capital. Frontiers in Psychology 11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  157. Warr, Peter. 1990. The measurement of well-being and other aspects of mental health. Journal of Occupational Psychology 63: 193–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  158. Waxin, Marie-France, Sandra L. Knuteson, and Aaron Bartholomew. 2020. Outcomes and Key Factors of Success for ISO 14001 Certification: Evidence from an Emerging Arab Gulf Country. Sustainability 12: 258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  159. Weick, Karl E. 1989. Theory construction as disciplined imagination. Academy of Management Review 14: 516–31. Available online: https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1989.4308376 (accessed on 20 March 2021). [CrossRef]
  160. White, Michael, and Alex Bryson. 2013. Positive employee attitudes: How much human resource management do you need? Human Relations 66: 385–406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  161. Wilson, Warner R. 1967. Correlates of avowed happiness. Psychological Bulletin 67: 294–306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  162. Wu, Meling, Xing Gao, Mengqiu Cao, and Enrica Papa. 2021. Large-scale enterprises, social capital and the post-disaster development of community tourism: The case of Taoping, China. International Journal of Tourism Research. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  163. Xu, Jia, Yan Liu, and Beth Chung. 2017. Leader psychological capital and employee work engagement. Leadership & Organization Development Journal 38: 969–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  164. Youssef, Carolyn M., and Fred Luthans. 2007. Positive organizational behavior in the workplace: The impact of hope, optimism, and resilience. Journal of Management 33: 774–800. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  165. Yuwono, Wisnu. 2021. Empirical analysis of intellectual capital, potential absorptive capacity, realized absorptive capacity and cultural intelligence on innovation. Management Science Letters, 1399–406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  166. Zhang, Hui, Yi Zhao, Ping Zou, Yang Liu, Shuanghong Lin, Zhihong Ye, Leiwen Tang, Jing Shao, and Dandan Chen. 2020. The relationship between autonomy, optimism, work engagement and organisational citizenship behaviour among nurses fighting COVID-19 in Wuhan: A serial multiple mediation. BMJ Open 10: e039711. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Socsci 10 00122 g001 550
Figure 1. Proposed model.
Figure 1. Proposed model.
Socsci 10 00122 g001
Table
Table 1. Formative constructs of psychological capital (PsyCap).
Table 1. Formative constructs of psychological capital (PsyCap).
NoConstructsDefinitionAuthor
1Hope“Positive motivational state that is based on an interactively derived sense of successful (a) agency (goal-directed energy) and (b) pathways (planning to meet goals).”Snyder et al. (1991, p. 287)
2Efficacy“The employee’s conviction or confidence about his or her abilities to mobilize the motivation, cognitive resources, or courses of action needed to successfully execute a specific task within a given context.”Stajkovic and Luthans (1998, p. 66)
3Optimism“A positive outcome outlook or attribution of events, which includes positive emotions and motivation, and has the caveat of being realistic”.(Luthans 2002a)
4Resilience“Positive psychological capacity to rebound, to ‘bounce back’ from adversity, uncertainty, conflict, failure, or even positive change, progress, and increased responsibility.” (Luthans 2002a, p. 702)
Table
Table 2. Constituents of social capital (SC).
Table 2. Constituents of social capital (SC).
ParticularsDescription
SCDimensions (Uphoff 1999)StructuralInvolves the various roles of individuals and the rules, precedents, and procedures followed
Cognitive Beliefs, attitudes, values, and norms that could affect participation in social activities
Levels (Szreter and Woolcock 2004)Bonding SCInvolves the interactions of different individuals having similar personal/social characteristics, like similar job positions
Bridging SCInvolves interactions of individuals who are different with respect to social and individual aspects, like occupational differences
Linking SCExchanges between individuals of various levels of power, like interactions between employees and employers
Table
Table 3. Formative variables of work engagement.
Table 3. Formative variables of work engagement.
NoVariableDescription
1VigorThe inner power of an individual, which motivates energetic action within the workplace.
2DedicationWillingness to discharge individual obligations and duties, understanding their significance with a sense of enthusiasm.
3AbsorptionEnthusiasm of individuals to be involved and get happily engrossed in their respective works.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Alkahtani, N.S.; Sulphey, M.M.; Delany, K.; Elneel Adow, A.H. A Conceptual Examination about the Correlates of Psychological Capital (PsyCap) among the Saudi Arabian Workforce. Soc. Sci. 2021, 10, 122. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci10040122

AMA Style

Alkahtani NS, Sulphey MM, Delany K, Elneel Adow AH. A Conceptual Examination about the Correlates of Psychological Capital (PsyCap) among the Saudi Arabian Workforce. Social Sciences. 2021; 10(4):122. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci10040122

Chicago/Turabian Style

Alkahtani, Nasser Saad, M. M. Sulphey, Kevin Delany, and Anass Hamad Elneel Adow. 2021. "A Conceptual Examination about the Correlates of Psychological Capital (PsyCap) among the Saudi Arabian Workforce" Social Sciences 10, no. 4: 122. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci10040122

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop