Next Article in Journal
Fatty Acids Profile, Trans Isomers, and Lipid Quality Indices in Smoked and Unsmoked Cheeses and Cheese-Like Products
Next Article in Special Issue
Prevalence of Vitamin D Deficiency and Its Associated Work-Related Factors among Indoor Workers in a Multi-Ethnic Southeast Asian Country
Previous Article in Journal
The Association between Chronotype and Dietary Pattern among Adults: A Scoping Review
Previous Article in Special Issue
Combined Interventions to Reduce Burnout Complaints and Promote Return to Work: A Systematic Review of Effectiveness and Mediators of Change
Review

Happy-Productive Teams and Work Units: A Systematic Review of the ‘Happy-Productive Worker Thesis’

1
Department of Psychology, University of the Balearic Islands, 07122 Palma de Mallorca, Spain
2
IDOCAL (Institut d’Investigació en Psicologia del RRHH, del Desenvolupament Organitzacional i de la Qualitat de Vida Laboral), University of Valencia, 46010 Valencia, Spain
3
IVIE (Instituto Valenciano de Investigaciones Económicas), 46020 Valencia, Spain
4
Work, Organizational and Personnel Psychology Research Group (WOPP), KU Leuven, 3000 Leuven, Belgium
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17(1), 69; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17010069
Received: 27 November 2019 / Revised: 11 December 2019 / Accepted: 17 December 2019 / Published: 20 December 2019
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Workplace Health and Wellbeing 2019)
The happy-productive worker thesis (HPWT) assumes that happy employees perform better. Given the relevance of teams and work-units in organizations, our aim is to analyze the state of the art on happy-productive work-units (HPWU) through a systematic review and integrate existing research on different collective well-being constructs and collective performance. Research on HPWU (30 studies, 2001–2018) has developed through different constructs of well-being (hedonic: team satisfaction, group affect; and eudaimonic: team engagement) and diverse operationalizations of performance (self-rated team performance, leader-rated team performance, customers’ satisfaction, and objective indicators), thus creating a disintegrated body of knowledge about HPWU. The theoretical frameworks to explain the HPWU relationship are attitude–behavior models, broaden-and-build theory, and the job-demands-resources model. Research models include a variety of antecedents, mediators, and moderating third variables. Most studies are cross-sectional, all propose a causal happy–productive relationship (not the reverse), and generally find positive significant relationships. Scarce but interesting time-lagged evidence supports a causal chain in which collective well-being leads to team performance (organizational citizenship behavior or team creativity), which then leads to objective work-unit performance. To conclude, we identify common issues and challenges across the studies on HPWU, and set out an agenda for future research. View Full-Text
Keywords: happy; productive; performance; satisfaction; affect; engagement; team; work-unit happy; productive; performance; satisfaction; affect; engagement; team; work-unit
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

García-Buades, M.E.; Peiró, J.M.; Montañez-Juan, M.I.; Kozusznik, M.W.; Ortiz-Bonnín, S. Happy-Productive Teams and Work Units: A Systematic Review of the ‘Happy-Productive Worker Thesis’. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 69. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17010069

AMA Style

García-Buades ME, Peiró JM, Montañez-Juan MI, Kozusznik MW, Ortiz-Bonnín S. Happy-Productive Teams and Work Units: A Systematic Review of the ‘Happy-Productive Worker Thesis’. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2020; 17(1):69. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17010069

Chicago/Turabian Style

García-Buades, M. E., José M. Peiró, María I. Montañez-Juan, Malgorzata W. Kozusznik, and Silvia Ortiz-Bonnín. 2020. "Happy-Productive Teams and Work Units: A Systematic Review of the ‘Happy-Productive Worker Thesis’" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 17, no. 1: 69. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17010069

Find Other Styles
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Back to TopTop