Next Article in Journal
Management of Railway Power System Peaks with Demand-Side Resources: An Application to Periodic Timetables
Previous Article in Journal
Promoting or Inhibiting? Digital Inclusive Finance and Cultural Consumption of Rural Residents
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 15
Issue 3
10.3390/su15032720
sustainability-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:
Article

The Influence of Psychological Capital on Individual’s Social Responsibility through the Pivotal Role of Psychological Empowerment: A Study Towards a Sustainable Workplace Environment

by
Hadi Dhafer Hassan Kariri
1,* and
Omaymah Abdulwahab Radwan
2
1
Department of Psychology, College of Education, Jazan University, Jazan 45142, Saudi Arabia
2
Department of Education, College of Education, Aldarb College, Jazan University, Jazan 45142, Saudi Arabia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2023, 15(3), 2720; https://doi.org/10.3390/su15032720
Submission received: 2 January 2023 / Revised: 25 January 2023 / Accepted: 1 February 2023 / Published: 2 February 2023
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The study aimed to examine the influence of psychological capital on an individual’s social responsibility via the mediating function of psychological empowerment. In order to conduct this applied study, a random sample (N = 813) was chosen. Male and female employees in the Jazan region of Saudi Arabia were surveyed to collect data that was analyzed using descriptive statistics and structural equation modeling (path analysis). The study instrument was a structured questionnaire, the validity of which was evaluated by an expert panel for facial and content-based validity. In addition, Cronbach’s alpha coefficients (0.743–0.929) were utilized to confirm the instrument’s reliability. To examine the three proposed hypotheses, path analysis was applied. Favorable and statistically significant (p < 0.05) results suggested that the direct influence of psychological capital on social responsibility is positive. In addition, psychological empowerment considerably and favorably mediated the relationship between psychological capital and social responsibility. The research on indirect effects revealed that psychological capital has a substantial indirect influence on social responsibility. Finally, it should be noted that both the direct and indirect impacts of psychological capital on social responsibility are considerable and that the model’s fitness indices were satisfactory.

1. Introduction

The well-being of individuals is seriously at stake due to rapid economic development and ongoing issues like globalization and insecure labor markets. The interest in sustainability and sustainable development is growing due to this complexity. The well-being of the individual, the environment, and the individual’s background are the main emphases of the psychology of sustainability and sustainable development [1]. The concept of corporate social responsibility has been at the center of attention for quite some time. In comparison, Bowen defines corporate social responsibility as the duty of corporations to make their policies and actions compatible with society’s ideals [2]. In general, the expectations of social responsibility place a requirement on companies, mandating that they meet specific public standards and safeguard the welfare of the general public [3]. Since the social responsibility of the body is an extension of the individual’s social responsibility, it differs from it as to the individual’s role as an independent entity in society [4,5]. The concept of individual social responsibility refers to an ethical theory in which people are held accountable for performing their civic duties and holding that their acts must be directed toward the betterment of society as a whole [6].
The research provides insight and helps educators and professionals understand how psychological empowerment and psychological capital can affect social responsibility. Further, the contributions show that psychological empowerment plays a significant role in improving the social responsibility of corporations. This is of the utmost significance in the private and public sectors and underscores that leaders should think more about strategies to enhance psychological capital. The investigation of this research will directly or indirectly test the psychological factors and how they impact the employee’s interaction with their functional society and the public society in which they operate [7].

Theory and Hypotheses

Sustainability in the workplace is becoming an increasingly important issue for human resource management [1]. Even though sustainable workplaces have received substantial scholarly and practical attention over the years, the time has come for new insights and study [8]. This study offers findings with implications for combating professional success, drawing from the relatively new topic of positive organizational behavior. Data collected from a large sample of working adults employed by various companies suggests that psychological capital and empowerment may be the keys to a greater understanding of the variability in perceived indicators of success as well as of the intention to quit a job. Specifically, the data suggest that psychological capital and empowerment may be the key to better understanding the variation in apparent indicators of success [1,7,8].
The value of the possessions and resources that are at hand to meet a particular demand is referred to as “capital.” When considering an entrepreneurial endeavor, “capital”—fixed, working, or growing capital—often comes to mind. However, it’s also crucial to consider other forms of capital. These comprise the intangible assets and resources provided by individuals working in an entrepreneurial enterprise, most significantly, the senior management team. Most recently, psychological capital has also been included in these categories [9]. In contrast to human capital, which is defined as “what you know,” and social capital, which is defined as “who you know,” a person’s psychological capital is reflected in how they consider themselves or how highly they regard themselves [10]. Knowledge, skills, and experience gained via financial investment in education and training are referred to as “human capital” [11]. The interpersonal network created by relationship investment is known as “social capital” [12]. Researchers in social science, economics, finance, political science, psychology, human resource management, and organizational behavior have focused on human and social capital to address a growing number of concerns in their respective domains. Human resources and their interrelationships are vital to the functioning of any institution, whether it be a corporation, a nation, an economy, or the global economy. Based on this concept of economic capital, human capital is an investment in knowledge and skills with market returns. Social capital is a market-return investment in social interactions. Contextual performance highlights how employees contribute to the psychological and social makeup of the firm even when they are not directly involved in its production or service operations. The three fundamental vocational competencies for employees to be competent for their jobs and obtain the core competitive advantages for their careers are human capital, social capital, and psychological capital, according to intelligent career theory. Human capital, social capital, and psychological capital can all contribute to excellent work performance as individual competitive advantages [13].
As a result, psychological capital is a person’s feeling or view of their capacity to successfully employ the financial, human, and/or social capital that they provide to an organization productively [14]. The concept of psychological capital arose from the positive psychology movement [7]. It signified the significance of research into what is well with individuals and what adds to flourishing and development potential, including succeeding at work. Researchers expanded positive attention to the workplace several decades ago by emphasizing the benefits of micro-oriented positivity in people and macro-oriented happiness in organizations. Once believed to be the property of brilliant people, positive psychological resources such as hope and resilience now have a factual basis for their development [7,8,9].
A construct of psychological capital (PsyCap) is defined as an individual’s positive state of development, characterized by (1) having confidence (self-efficacy) to take on and put forth the necessary effort to succeed at challenging tasks; (2) making positive attributions (optimism) about succeeding now and in the future; (3) persevering toward goals and, when necessary, transmitting paths to goals (hope); and (4) when beset by problems and adversity, sustaining a positive attitude. In other words, psychological capital implies a positive assessment of an individual’s capacity to overcome obstacles via persistent effort, and this assessment reflects four dimensions: self-efficacy, hope, resilience, and optimism [10,14,15]. Furthermore, psychological capital outnumbers both human capital (expertise, knowledge, skills, and capacities) and social capital (relationships, networks). It focuses on “who you are today” and “who you may become” if your psychological resources are cultivated and fostered in the job [16,17].
Numerous studies have demonstrated that psychological capital and its dealings are associated with fewer work-related issues and improved well-being and work-related results. Innumerable benefits of psychological capital in the public sector have been demonstrated through research [18,19]. Similarly, the research on psychological capital in business, social responsibilities, entrepreneurship, and marketing has shown the significance of psychological capital and its treatments for private and public sector firms [18,19]. Psychological capital was reported to be positively or negatively associated with various factors such as organizational improvisation, entrepreneurial behavior, job satisfaction, work turnover, job burnout, professional burnout, belonging to organizational behaviors, job creation, and job performance [15,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34].
According to Abubakar’s study, there is a considerable link between entrepreneurial behavior, organizational improvisation, and positive psychological capital [35]. According to Liao’s research, psychological capital and work happiness are positively correlated, whereas turnover and job satisfaction are negatively correlated [36]. According to Karimi’s (2018) research, there is no link between professional burnout and efficiency, hope, or optimism. Instead, an inverse relationship between psychological capital and burnout was discovered [16].
According to Amin’s study from 2019, there is a statistically significant positive association between psychological capital and job creation. It has also been demonstrated that psychological capital positively influences both job creation and its many aspects [17]. According to a previous study, there is a significant association between psychological capital in all of its dimensions, the job performance of university employees, and a positive and significant relationship between psychological capital and job satisfaction [18].
Even though psychological capital and social responsibility may be conceptually related, the linkages between psychological capital and social responsibility still need to be adequately investigated. Also, the research done before should have looked for differences between the public and private sectors.
Psychological empowerment manifests internal motivation concerning four cognitive factors: meaning, competence, self-determination, and impact [37,38]. Meaning represents how well employees’ values and beliefs fit job demands [37,39]. Competence (self-efficacy) reflects how confident individuals are that their skills will help them succeed in the job [37,40]. Impact describes how individuals believe their abilities can affect work activities and outcomes [41]. Self-determination reflects the individual’s perception of the choice to initiate and regulate work processes [42] autonomously. In summary, the four cognitive factors reflect an active orientation and feeling of control toward work. Psychological empowerment theory holds that empowered employees have a more positive orientation toward their work [19]. This demonstrates the direction in which employees want confidence in shaping their work roles and context [38]. Therefore, experiencing empowerment can result in positive work performance. Many studies have demonstrated that psychological empowerment can affect psychological capital, acting as a potential protective factor [20]. Employees will therefore experience psychological empowerment at a greater level and think they are more valuable to the company when an organization uses empowerment as an incentive. They will approach their work in the company with a positive outlook and anticipation for the future. In the process, they will also provide more to the organization. Because of this, psychological empowerment can raise the level of psychological capital [43,44].
Additionally, prior research has shown that psychological empowerment might favor psychological capital [44,45,46]. The relationship between social responsibility and psychological empowerment has been investigated previously. These investigations were only performed for corporate social responsibility [47,48].
Corporate social responsibility, often known as CSR, has evolved into a topic that is not only vitally important for businesses but also important for communities and public policy as a whole. This is because there is a growing awareness of the need for sustainable development. In addition, a discussion of corporate social responsibility is only worthwhile if one grasps the concept that for companies to be socially responsible, individuals must first be socially responsible in their many roles [49,50,51]. Studies have been done on employees views of the employer’s corporate social responsibility [51,52,53,54], which have been shown to have a favorable relationship with employee engagement in work. On the other hand, no studies have been conducted on individual responsibility and its connection to the workplace or society.
The moral principle of individual social responsibility holds that each of us has to contribute to the common good. To act in a “socially responsibly” manner, one must show concern for others and care for the world around them. Everyone should support social issues. Individual social responsibility can only operate if individuals rise above self-interest and choose solutions that benefit many others. Every person may contribute to society by saving resources, volunteering, and in other ways. Individual social responsibility includes positive social relationships, community service, the preservation of public assets, friendliness toward neighbors, a sense of contentment when helping others, participation in social events, and respect for legal rights. Accordingly, it is necessary to research the relationship between the social responsibility of individuals and its relationship to psychological capital and empowerment. A significant number of studies have also been done on the connection between corporate social responsibility and psychological capital and empowerment [54,55,56]. The intended theoretical framework and the respective hypotheses of the study are depicted in Figure 1.
Hypothesis 1 (H1).
Psychological empowerment is positively related to an individual’s social responsibility.
Hypothesis 2 (H2).
Psychological capital is positively related to an individual’s social responsibility.
Hypothesis 3 (H3).
Psychological empowerment has a pivotal role in the relationship between an individual’s social responsibility and psychological capital.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Area and Population

This study is both quantitative and practical. Southwest Saudi Arabia, in the Jazan region, was the research site. One million seven hundred thousand people live in the area. The “active population” was defined as everyone between the ages of 25 and 65 who worked either in the private or public sector.

2.2. Sample Size and Sampling Technique

Based on the sampling table created by Krejcie and Morgan, the sample size was calculated to be 813 [57]. The samples were chosen using random sampling technique.

2.3. Selection Criteria and Study Period

All employees who lived in the Jazan region were included in the study population. This study included all personnel, of both sexes, working at various hours in the public and private sectors. The study did not include individuals with special needs, minors, or self-employed people. All employees who could not read or who declined to participate in the study were also not included. The study was conducted between March and October 2022.

2.4. Data Collection and Tools

A four-section questionnaire served as the study’s data collection tool. The first section dealt with the respondents’ backgrounds (gender, marital status, shift, and sector). The second section (Table 1) was comprised of the variable psychological capital, whose questions were taken directly from the Luthans et al. scale [13,20,58,59]. This variable had four parts (hope, resilience, optimism, and self-efficacy). The questions in this scale revolve around subscales, for example: “I feel confident in contributing to the development of strategies for important goals in my life”; “There are many ways to solve any problem I face in my life”; and “If I encounter failure in anything, I do not find it difficult to overcome it and move forward.” The items for the third section’s variable, psychological empowerment, were created using Spritzer’s questionnaire [38]. This variable also had four constituents (meaningfulness, self-determination, impact, and competence). Questions on this scale revolve around subscales such as “The work (job) I am doing now is very important to me”; “I have a lot of autonomy in determining how I do my job”; and “I have a significant influence on what happens to me in my work.”
Individual social responsibility was the focus of the fourth section of the questionnaire, which included sixteen items (including: self-sufficiency in the workplace, specialization, the environment at work, coworkers’ quality, positive social relationships, community service, the preservation of public assets, friendliness toward neighbors, feeling content to assist others, participation in social events, and respecting legal rights). The researcher produced the materials used in this section. After creating the study instrument, a group of specialists validated the measures’ facial and content-based validity. Each of the three key variables’ components was measured using a scale of five items. Each of the items was evaluated using a Likert scale with a maximum of five points.

2.5. Pilot Study

A pilot study was carried out to verify the validity and reliability of the research instruments. After applying it to the survey sample, the correlation coefficients between the individual score and the scales’ overall scores were determined. The three scales’ overall degree is statistically significant at 0.01, demonstrating the scale’s internal consistency. The Cronbach’s alpha values for all the scales and their constructs are greater than 0.7, which indicates reliability [60].

2.6. Data Analysis and Path Analysis

SPSS version 23 and AMOS version 24 were used to analyze the data. Descriptive statistics, correlation coefficients, and structural equation modeling were also employed. The significance level was set at 0.05. Model fit indices and direct and indirect effects were obtained from the AMOS output.

3. Results

The results revealed that out of 813 respondents, 491 (60.4%) were female. Analyzing the marital status showed that 68.8% of the participants were married. Regarding the types of shifts, most of the study’s participants had a dayshift (68.4%) and worked in the government sector (71.2%). The demographic characteristics of the respondents are shown in Table 2.
Table 3 displays the descriptive data for the participants’ psychological capital, psychological empowerment, and social responsibility. Self-efficacy had the highest rating (4.12 ± 0.72), with psychological capital having a mean score of 4.06 (SD = 0.58). In general, individuals’ psychological capital ranged from modest to high. Social responsibility had a mean score of 4.5 (SD = 0.54) and psychological empowerment had a mean score of 4.32 (SD = 0.56), respectively. The reliability statistics (Cronbach’s alpha) are higher than the permitted level for psychological capital, psychological empowerment, and social responsibility.
A bivariate correlation was performed using Pearson’s coefficients to assess the relationship between the study variables (Table 4). The results of the correlation analysis revealed that two variables, psychological capital (r = 0.417; p < 0.001) and psychological empowerment (r = 0.380; p < 0.001), had significant positive correlations with social responsibility. In addition, this section’s results showed a positive association between psychological capital and psychological empowerment (r = 0.517; p < 0.001).
Both the results of the test of the hypothesized model and the estimations of its effects are shown in Figure 2 and Table 5, respectively. Social responsibility was positively related to psychological capital (β = 0.28, p < 0.01) among the study respondents. Psychological empowerment was positively correlated with social responsibility (β = 0.21, p < 0.01). Moreover, psychological capital had an indirect positive effect (β = 0.11, p < 0.01) on social responsibility mediated by psychological empowerment, with an acceptable range of 95% CI. Since this CI did not contain 0, we concluded that psychological empowerment significantly mediated the relationship between psychological capital and social responsibility. The direct positive effect of psychological capital on social responsibility was 0.28 (p < 0.01), so the mediating effect of psychological empowerment was partial. The total effect of psychological capital on social responsibility was 0.417. Some fitness indices, such as the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA), the goodness of fit index (GFI), the Tucker-Lewis index (TLI), the comparative fit index (CFI), and the chi-square normalized by degrees of freedom, were used to examine the model’s fitness. The values obtained from the path analysis used in the current study are shown in Table 6, along with the acceptable cut-offs for the model fitness indices. It is clear from the results that the model presented in this study is appropriate because all of the fitness indices were within reasonable bounds.

4. Discussion

The current research findings support the hypothesis that there is a connection between psychological capital, psychological empowerment, and an individual’s sense of responsibility to their community. The Cronbach’s alpha values for all the scales and their constructs are greater than 0.7, which indicates reliability. The criteria used in this study have been shown to have the same level of reliability as those used in our current study [7,21,27,39].
In general, this proposition can be stated as follows: The findings demonstrated that the two variables, psychological capital and psychological empowerment, have a relationship that is both positive and significant as to one another. This indicates that a person’s capacity for emotional autonomy increases proportionately with the level of psychological capital components that they possess. People with high levels of psychological capital and psychological empowerment in their community are more likely to have high levels of social responsibility, strong interpersonal relationships, and the determination to do work that serves their communities when they have the skills to do so. This is because people with high levels of psychological capital and psychological empowerment in their community are likelier to have high levels of psychological capital and psychological empowerment. It is recommended that counseling classes and workshops be held for the employees to cultivate a sense of self-efficacy, resilience, hope, and optimism. This is because the constituents of psychological capital are synergistic [7] and educable [61], and the descriptive statistics showed that the participants in this study are well-educated. Possessing psychological capital enables individuals to develop positive thoughts, beliefs, and behaviors.
These considerations lessen the likelihood of an individual’s being exposed to circumstances that could result in a lack of social responsibility on their part. In addition, to develop the psychological capacity of the targeted population in the Saudi community, the requirements should be provided for the flourishing of the individuals’ volunteering, social abilities, and sense of civil service. This is to develop the psychological capacity of the individuals. It has the potential to impact not only their lives but also the lives of other people in the community. Additionally, the findings pointed to a significant connection between psychological capital and individual social responsibility. This result supported the hypothesis that there is a positive relationship between psychological capital and individual social responsibility. The findings of other studies are consistent with the significant association between psychological capital and social responsibility; however, this significant relationship exists only for corporations [54,56,62,63]. Furthermore, the results of this section revealed a positive relationship between psychological capital and psychological empowerment (r = 0.517; p < 0.001). Consistent with the prior findings, there is a positive and statistically significant link between these two factors [8,36,48].
The current study had a few drawbacks that needed to be considered. The wide variety of psychological and social factors that can influence an individual’s level of social responsibility was the first barrier that stood in the way of this research. In other words, the scope of this study was limited to determining the influence of psychological capital on an individual’s level of social responsibility, as mediated by the significance of psychological empowerment in this relationship. It is important to note, however, that psychological empowerment and capital in an individual’s sense of social responsibility are not the only aspects of a person’s life that can be influenced by various factors, including economics, culture, psychology, and even politics. Therefore, it is recommended that future researchers incorporate this issue into their research and investigate the effect of other factors on psychological empowerment and the level of social responsibility an individual possesses. The methodology used in the research is the subject of the second limitation. A questionnaire and a cross-sectional survey were used for data collection due to financial restrictions. On the other hand, the investigation of psychological empowerment and capital in an individual’s social responsibility, through the use of qualitative methods such as in-depth interviews, grounded theory, case studies, mixed methods, and so on, may provide more realistic insights into the aspects and determinants of these concepts. These methods could be combined with quantitative methods to achieve the desired results. For instance, the employee’s own comments could be used to develop the research items and scale the search rather than use the literature review for this purpose. In this scenario, fewer challenges would be brought on by the widening perception gap between the employees and the researchers. As a result, the findings would more accurately reflect the realities of the working environments. The study’s sample population size needs to be revised, which brings us to the third limitation. Even though the sample size in this study was utterly adequate (according to the Krejcie and Morgan sampling table), future researchers can use a larger sample size because doing so can increase the results’ robustness and ability to be generalized.

5. Conclusions and Implications

Based on these findings, it can be deduced that an individual’s level of social responsibility will increase in tandem with their level of psychological capital. The capacity for problem-solving and the drive to achieve success are both direct results of having psychological capital. On the other hand, it is a well-known fact in the field of psychology that individuals, in general, will only take a risk if they feel as though they have a sufficient amount of control over their own lives and have hope for the future. According to this study’s findings, individuals with high levels of psychological capital are more likely to be socially responsible. It is also recommended that more attention be paid to the psychological capital of employees in the Jazan region because the individuals who participated in this study exhibited a high degree of benevolence and benevolence toward others. Since the results showed that the participants had degrees, it is clear that this setting is conducive to delivering beneficial activities and classes. Additionally, having socially active experiences and receiving socially active training can be used to build up one’s psychological capital and, consequently, one’s social responsibility. In this regard, the organization of the workers into cooperatives and other social organizations can be of assistance. In conclusion, it is essential to point out that the findings demonstrated a significant and positive connection between psychological empowerment and an individual’s level of social responsibility. This indicates that giving employees the means to improve their emotional well-being will also improve their ability to interact socially with one another. As a result, to foster the growth of individual capabilities and creative potential, organizations that focus on rural development might recommend that their programs emphasize the psychological empowerment of employees and the characteristics of their personalities. The capacity of these organizations’ employees to effectively cope with stress should also be a focus of their efforts.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, H.D.H.K.; methodology, H.D.H.K. and O.A.R.; software, H.D.H.K. and O.A.R.; validation, H.D.H.K. and O.A.R.; formal analysis, H.D.H.K. and O.A.R.; investigation, H.D.H.K. and O.A.R.; resources, H.D.H.K. and O.A.R.; data curation, H.D.H.K. and O.A.R.; writing—original draft preparation, H.D.H.K. and O.A.R.; writing—review and editing, H.D.H.K.; visualization, O.A.R.; supervision, O.A.R.; project administration, O.A.R.; funding acquisition, H.D.H.K. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

The authors extend their appreciation to the Deputyship for Research & Innovation, Ministry of Education in Saudi Arabia for funding this research work through the project number ISP20-31.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Ethical approval cleared by Ethical committee of Department of Psychology, College of Education, Jazan University, Jazan, Saudi Arabia.

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

Data available upon reasonable request.

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Jazan University for supporting this research under the scientific research project (ISP20-31).

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Khusanova, R.; Choi, S.B.; Kang, S.-W. Sustainable Workplace: The Moderating Role of Office Design on the Relationship between Psychological Empowerment and Organizational Citizenship Behaviour in Uzbekistan. Sustainability 2019, 11, 7024. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Bowen, H.R. Social Responsibilities of the Businessman; University of Iowa Press: Iowa City, IA, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  3. Kumar, N. Corporate Social Responsibility: An analysis of impact and challenges in India. Int. J. Soc. Sci. Manag. Entrep. (IJSSME) 2019, 3, 53–63. [Google Scholar]
  4. Bénabou, R.; Tirole, J. Individual and corporate social responsibility. Economica 2010, 77, 1–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Droms Hatch, C.; Stephen, S.-A. Gender effects on perceptions of individual and corporate social responsibility. J. Appl. Bus. Econ. 2015, 17, 63. [Google Scholar]
  6. Takala, T.; Pallab, P. Individual, Collective and Social Responsibility of the Firm. Bus. Ethics Eur. Rev. 2000, 9, 109–118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Luthans, F.L.; Avolio, B.J.; Avey, J.A. Psychological Capital Questionnaire. Available online: https://psycnet.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037/t06483-000 (accessed on 12 December 2022).
  8. Avey, J.; Luthans, F.; Youssef, C. The additive value of positive psychological capital in predicting work attitudes and behaviors. J. Manag. 2012, 30, 173–191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Nuscheler, D.; Engelen, A.; Zahra, S.A. The role of top management teams in transforming technology-based new ventures’ product introductions into growth. J. Bus. Ventur. 2019, 34, 122–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Goldsmith, A.H.; Veum, J.R.; Darity, W., Jr. The impact of psychological and human capital on wages. Econ. Inq. 1997, 35, 815–829. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Al Kerdawy, M.M.A. The role of corporate support for employee volunteering in strengthening the impact of green human resource management practices on corporate social responsibility in the Egyptian firms. Eur. Manag. Rev. 2019, 16, 1079–1095. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Han, S.H.; Yoon, S.W.; Chae, C. Building social capital and learning relationships through knowledge sharing: A social network approach of management students’ cases. J. Knowl. Manag. 2020, 24, 921–939. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Luthans, F.; Youssef, C.M.; Avolio, B.J. Psychological Capital and Beyond; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  14. Liao, S.-H.; Hu, D.-C.; Chung, Y.-C.; Chen, L.-W. LMX and employee satisfaction: Mediating effect of psychological capital. Leadersh. Organ. Dev. J. 2017, 38, 433–449. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Hmieleski, K.M.; Carr, J.C.; Baron, R.A. Integrating discovery and creation perspectives of entrepreneurial action: The relative roles of founding CEO human capital, social capital, and psychological capital in contexts of risk versus uncertainty. Strateg. Entrep. J. 2015, 9, 289–312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Karimi, F. Correlation between Psychological Capital and Occupational Burnout in Nurses. Health Educ. Health Promot. 2018, 6, 59–64. [Google Scholar]
  17. Amin, A.; Shahnwaz, M.G.; Imran, M.; Rehman, U.; Kamra, A.; Osmany, M. Revisiting and Expanding Psychological Capital: Implications for Counterproductive Work Behaviour. Trends Psychol. 2022, 1–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Al Zeer, I.; Alkhatib, A.A.; Alshrouf, M. Determinants of organisational commitment of universities’ employees. Int. J. Acad. Res. Account. Financ. Manag. Sci. 2019, 9, 136–141. [Google Scholar]
  19. Dust, S.B.; Resick, C.J.; Mawritz, M.B. Transformational leadership, psychological empowerment, and the moderating role of mechanistic–organic contexts. J. Organ. Behav. 2014, 35, 413–433. [Google Scholar]
  20. Luthans, F.; Avey, J.B.; Avolio, B.J.; Peterson, S.J. The development and resulting performance impact of positive psychological capital. Hum. Resour. Dev. Q. 2010, 21, 41–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Gorgens-Ekermans, G.; Herbert, M. Psychological capital: Internal and external validity of the Psychological Capital Questionnaire (PCQ-24) on a South African sample. SA J. Ind. Psychol. 2013, 39, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Guo, Y.F.; Wang, K.F.; Cross, W.; Lam, L.; Plummer, V.; Li, J. Quality of life in cancer patients with different preferences for nurse spiritual therapeutics: The role of psychological capital. J. Adv. Nurs. 2022, 78, 991–1000. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Uwakwe, R.C.; Okolie, U.C.; Ehiobuche, C.; Ochinanwata, C.; Idike, I.M. A Multi-Group Study of Psychological Capital and Job Search Behaviours Among University Graduates with and Without Work Placement Learning Experience. J. Career Assess. 2022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Mikus, K.; Teoh, K.R. Psychological Capital, future-oriented coping, and the well-being of secondary school teachers in Germany. Educ. Psychol. 2022, 42, 334–353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Yu, X.; Li, D.; Tsai, C.-H.; Wang, C. The role of psychological capital in employee creativity. Career Dev. Int. 2019, 24, 420–437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Santos, A.S.; Neto, M.T.R.; Verwaal, E. Does cultural capital matter for individual job performance? A large-scale survey of the impact of cultural, social and psychological capital on individual performance in Brazil. Int. J. Product. Perform. Manag. 2018, 67, 1352–1370. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Morgan, H.; Parker, A.; Roberts, W. Community sport programmes and social inclusion: What role for positive psychological capital? In The Potential of Community Sport for Social Inclusion; Routledge: London, UK, 2022; pp. 223–237. [Google Scholar]
  28. Lee, Y.-L.; Yang, D.-J. Potential contributions of psychological capital to the research field of marketing. Front. Psychol. 2019, 10, 2111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Sadeghi, F.; Tagharrobi, Z.; Sharifi, K.; Sooki, Z. Effects of happiness on psychological capital in middle-aged women: A randomized controlled trial. Int. Arch. Health Sci. 2021, 8, 253. [Google Scholar]
  30. Akbar, E.; Samira, T.; Mehdi, A. The relationship between psychological capital and organizational commitment. Afr. J. Bus. Manag. 2012, 6, 5057–5060. [Google Scholar]
  31. Wang, Z.; Xie, Y. Authentic leadership and employees’ emotional labour in the hospitality industry. Int. J. Contemp. Hosp. Manag. 2020, 32, 797–814. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Rego, A.; Sousa, F.; Marques, C.; Pina e Cunha, M. Authentic leadership promoting employees’ psychological capital and creativity. J. Bus. Res. 2012, 65, 429–437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Newman, A.; Ucbasaran, D.; Zhu, F.; Hirst, G. Psychological capital: A review and synthesis. J. Organ. Behav. 2014, 35, S120–S138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Youssef-Morgan, C.M.; Luthans, F. Psychological capital and well-being. Stress Health J. Int. Soc. Investig. Stress 2015, 31, 180–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Abubakar, A.; Mourgan, F.H.A.; Al Kharusi, B.; Elfitori, C.M. Impact of entrepreneurial education, trait competitiveness and psychological capital on entrepreneurial behavior of university students in GCC. J. Enterprising Communities People Places Glob. Econ. 2022. ahead-of-print. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Silva, D.; Roche, M. Contribution of psychological capital to entrepreneurs success during recessionary times. In Proceedings of the SHAKE-UP: New Perspectives in Business Research and Education: New Zealand Applied Business Education Conference (NZABE) 2010, Napier, New Zealand, 27–28 September 2010. [Google Scholar]
  37. Spreitzer, G.M. Social structural characteristics of psychological empowerment. Acad. Manag. J. 1996, 39, 483–504. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Spreitzer, G.M. Psychological empowerment in the workplace: Dimensions, measurement, and validation. Acad. Manag. J. 1995, 38, 1442–1465. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Stander, M.W.; Rothmann, S. Psychological empowerment, job insecurity and employee engagement. SA J. Ind. Psychol. 2010, 36, a849. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Dewettinck, K.; Van Ameijde, M. Linking leadership empowerment behaviour to employee attitudes and behavioural intentions: Testing the mediating role of psychological empowerment. Pers. Rev. 2011, 40, 284–305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Zhou, H.; Chen, J. How does psychological empowerment prevent emotional exhaustion? psychological safety and organizational embeddedness as mediators. Front. Psychol. 2021, 12, 546687. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Reeve, J.; Nix, G.; Hamm, D. Testing models of the experience of self-determination in intrinsic motivation and the conundrum of choice. J. Educ. Psychol. 2003, 95, 375. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  43. López-Núñez, M.I.; Rubio-Valdehita, S.; Diaz-Ramiro, E.M.; Aparicio-García, M.E. Psychological capital, workload, and burnout: What’s new? the impact of personal accomplishment to promote sustainable working conditions. Sustainability 2020, 12, 8124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Oppong Asante, K.; Meyer-Weitz, A.; Okafo, D.C. Psychological capital and orientation to happiness as protective factors for coping among first year university students in South Africa. Int. J. Health Promot. Educ. 2022, 60, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Ugwu, F.O.; Onyishi, I.E.; Rodríguez-Sánchez, A.M. Linking organizational trust with employee engagement: The role of psychological empowerment. Pers. Rev. 2014, 43, 377–400. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Shah, T.A.; Khattak, M.N.; Zolin, R.; Shah, S.Z.A. Psychological empowerment and employee attitudinal outcomes: The pivotal role of psychological capital. Manag. Res. Rev. 2019, 42, 797–817. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Yazdanshenas, M.; Mirzaei, M. Leadership integrity and employees’ success: Role of ethical leadership, psychological capital, and psychological empowerment. Int. J. Ethics Syst. 2022. ahead-of-print. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Haji, L.; Valizadeh, N.; Karimi, H. The effects of psychological capital and empowerment on entrepreneurial spirit: The case of Naghadeh County, Iran. Int. J. Financ. Econ. 2022, 27, 290–300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Gorski, H.; Fuciu, M.; Croitor, N. Research on Corporate Social Responsibility in the Development Region Centre in Romania. Procedia Econ. Financ. 2014, 16, 224–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Shen, J.; Benson, J. When CSR is a social norm: How socially responsible human resource management affects employee work behavior. J. Manag. 2016, 42, 1723–1746. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Rupp, D.E.; Shao, R.; Skarlicki, D.P.; Paddock, E.L.; Kim, T.Y.; Nadisic, T. Corporate social responsibility and employee engagement: The moderating role of CSR-specific relative autonomy and individualism. J. Organ. Behav. 2018, 39, 559–579. [Google Scholar]
  52. Chen, L.-F.; Khuangga, D.L. Configurational paths of employee reactions to corporate social responsibility: An organizational justice perspective. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2021, 28, 389–403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Nyuur, R.B.; Ofori, D.F.; Amankwah, M.O.; Baffoe, K.A. Corporate social responsibility and employee attitudes: The moderating role of employee age. Bus. Ethics Environ. Responsib. 2022, 31, 100–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Randolph, R.V.; Memili, E.; Koç, B.; Young, S.L.; Yildirim-Öktem, Ö.; Sönmez, S. Innovativeness and corporate social responsibility in hospitality and tourism family firms: The role of family firm psychological capital. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 2022, 101, 103128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Al-Ghazali, B.M.; Sohail, M.S.; Jumaan, I.A.M. CSR perceptions and career satisfaction: The role of psychological capital and moral identity. Sustainability 2021, 13, 6786. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Papacharalampous, N.; Papadimitriou, D. Perceived corporate social responsibility and affective commitment: The mediating role of psychological capital and the impact of employee participation. Human Resour. Dev. Q. 2021, 32, 251–272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Krejcie, R.V.; Morgan, D.W. Determining sample size for research activities. Educ. Psychol. Meas. 1970, 30, 607–610. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Luthans, F.; Avolio, B.J.; Avey, J.B.; Norman, S.M. Positive psychological capital: Measurement and relationship with performance and satisfaction. Pers. Psychol. 2007, 60, 541–572. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Avey, J.B.; Luthans, F.; Jensen, S.M. Psychological capital: A positive resource for combating employee stress and turnover. Human Resour. Manag. 2009, 48, 677–693. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Ravinder, E.B.; Saraswathi, A. Literature Review of Cronbach alpha coefficient (A) And Mcdonald’s Omega Coefficient (Ω). Eur. J. Mol. Clin. Med. 2020, 7, 2943–2949. [Google Scholar]
  61. Juhdi, H. Psychological capital and entrepreneurial success: A multiple-mediated relationship. Eur. J. Interdiscip. Stud. 2015, 1, 110–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Khanjari, L. Investigating the relationship between social responsibility and improving organizational commitment in employees of Tehran Ghavamin Bank with respect to the mediating role of psychological empowerment. J. Fundam. Appl. Sci. 2017, 9, 96–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Mao, Y.; He, J.; Morrison, A.M.; Andres Coca-Stefaniak, J. Effects of tourism CSR on employee psychological capital in the COVID-19 crisis: From the perspective of conservation of resources theory. Curr. Issues Tour. 2021, 24, 2716–2734. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Sustainability 15 02720 g001 550
Figure 1. Theoretical framework of the study.
Figure 1. Theoretical framework of the study.
Sustainability 15 02720 g001
Sustainability 15 02720 g002 550
Figure 2. The final model. Significance level (**) was 0.01. PsyCap: Psychological capital; SR: Social responsibility; PE: Psychological empowerment.
Figure 2. The final model. Significance level (**) was 0.01. PsyCap: Psychological capital; SR: Social responsibility; PE: Psychological empowerment.
Sustainability 15 02720 g002
Table
Table 1. Study measure.
Table 1. Study measure.
MeasureDomainsNo of Questions
Psychological capitalHope, resilience, optimism, and self-efficacy15
Psychological empowermentMeaningfulness, self-determination, impact, and competence12
Individual’s social responsibilityOne domain 20
Table
Table 2. Demographic characteristics of the respondents.
Table 2. Demographic characteristics of the respondents.
VariablesCategoriesN%
GenderMale32239.6
Female49160.4
MaritalSingle20925.7
Married55968.8
Divorced364.4
Widow91.1
ShiftDay Shift55668.4
Night Shift8810.8
Day/Night16920.8
SectorGovernment57971.2
Private15819.4
Own Business769.3
Total 813100
Table
Table 3. Descriptive statistics of the study variables and their subscales.
Table 3. Descriptive statistics of the study variables and their subscales.
Variable MinimumMaximumMeanSDCronbach’s Alpha
Psychological capital154.060.580.910
Hope154.030.660.845
Resilience154.040.720.785
Optimism154.090.730.755
Self-efficacy154.120.720.743
Psychological empowerment154.320.560.904
Self-determination154.110.680.836
Competence153.950.780.887
Impact154.040.720.812
Meaning154.390.720.845
Social responsibility154.500.540.929
Table
Table 4. Correlation matrix of study variables.
Table 4. Correlation matrix of study variables.
Variable123
1. Social responsibility (SR)1
2. Psychological capital (PsyCap)0.417 **1
3. Psychological empowerment (PE)0.380 **0.517 **1
** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Table
Table 5. Direct and indirect effects.
Table 5. Direct and indirect effects.
Structural PathsDirect EffectsIndirect Effects (95% CI)Total Effects
PsyCap → SR0.280.110.39
PE → SR0.21–0.21
PsyCap → PE0.50–0.50
Note: PsyCap: Psychological capital; SR: Social responsibility; PE: Psychological empowerment.
Table
Table 6. Model fit indices.
Table 6. Model fit indices.
IndicesAbbreviationValueReference Value
Relative chi-squareCMIN/df3.28≥2.0
Comparative fit indexCFI0.96≥0.90
Goodness of fit indexGFI0.95≥0.90
Root mean square error of approximationRMSEA0.051≤0.08
Tucker-Lewis indexTLI0.98≥0.95
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Kariri, H.D.H.; Radwan, O.A. The Influence of Psychological Capital on Individual’s Social Responsibility through the Pivotal Role of Psychological Empowerment: A Study Towards a Sustainable Workplace Environment. Sustainability 2023, 15, 2720. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15032720

AMA Style

Kariri HDH, Radwan OA. The Influence of Psychological Capital on Individual’s Social Responsibility through the Pivotal Role of Psychological Empowerment: A Study Towards a Sustainable Workplace Environment. Sustainability. 2023; 15(3):2720. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15032720

Chicago/Turabian Style

Kariri, Hadi Dhafer Hassan, and Omaymah Abdulwahab Radwan. 2023. "The Influence of Psychological Capital on Individual’s Social Responsibility through the Pivotal Role of Psychological Empowerment: A Study Towards a Sustainable Workplace Environment" Sustainability 15, no. 3: 2720. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15032720

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