Abstract
Purpose
This paper aims to investigate whether individual adaptability mediates the relationship between personal initiative (PI) and psychological well-being of Ugandan small enterprise employees. Furthermore, the paper examines whether PI and individual adaptability also affect psychological well-being.
Design/methodology/approach
A cross-sectional survey design using quantitative approach was used in this study. Data were collected from 726 employees of small enterprises in Uganda using a self-administered questionnaire. Data were analyzed using the Statistical Package for Social Scientists and uploaded into AMOS version 23. Hypotheses were tested using structural equation modeling technique.
Findings
Results confirm that individual adaptability fully mediates the relationship between PI and psychological well-being. Findings further indicate that PI is negatively related to psychological well-being and that individual adaptability is positively related to psychological well-being.
Research limitations/implications
First, the sample of this study consisted of employees working with small enterprises in Uganda with different demographic characteristics; thus, the generalizability of these findings to other sectors or contexts needs to be established. Secondly, the study was quantitative in nature. This study has managerial implications in a way that managers need to create a climate that fosters individual adaptability among employees to help them enhance their Psychological well-being (PWB).
Practical implications
Small enterprise employees with high levels of PI may benchmark on this study findings by ensuring that they adjust their thinking, emotions and behavior to navigate the challenges of the current working environment such that they can increase their psychological well-being.
Originality/value
This study may be among the first to demonstrate that individual adaptability mediates the relationship between PI and psychological well-being in the context of small enterprise employees of Uganda, an African developing country.
Keywords
Citation
Tabala, A., Munene, J., Kagaari, J., Mafabi, S. and Kyogabiirwe, J. (2024), "Does individual adaptability mediate the relationship between personal initiative and psychological well-being: evidence from Uganda’s small enterprises", Journal of Humanities and Applied Social Sciences, Vol. ahead-of-print No. ahead-of-print. https://doi.org/10.1108/JHASS-06-2024-0082
Publisher
:Emerald Publishing Limited
Copyright © 2024, Agnes Tabala, John Munene, James Kagaari, Samuel Mafabi and Jannat Kyogabiirwe
License
Published in Journal of Humanities and Applied Social Sciences. Published by Emerald Publishing Limited. This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) licence. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this licence may be seen at http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode
1. Introduction
Employee health and well-being are among the global critical factors for organizational success and performance (Bakker et al., 2019). Thinking, feeling and acting positively while working which we refer to as psychological well-being in this context increases productivity and competitive advantage for enterprises (Dennerlein et al., 2020). Small enterprises contribute towards the growth of national economies in terms of employment generation, growth of gross domestic product (GDP) and regional development which makes it vital to understand the nature of the working environment in such small enterprises (Mazzarol et al., 2021). Small enterprises are emotionally infectious and are characterized by long working hours, heavy job demands, work–life conflicts, stigma, frequent social interactions between employees with managers, fellow employees and customers which all influence how employees think, feel and act (Biggs et al., 2016).
Work-related psychological health issues in small enterprises especially stress, anxiety and depression have continuously become critical issues of concern to workplace well-being that has affected productivity of economies in developing countries and Uganda is not exceptional. It is globally estimated that 3–4% of a nation’s gross national product is spent on problems related to psychological health challenges within the work place especially stress. While global stress costs stand at $1tn annually, it is projected to be $60tn by 2030 in reduced productivity (WHO, 2019). Therefore, there has always been a call by the world health organization to pay attention to psychological health concerns in the workplace.
In Uganda specifically, despite the numerous efforts by enterprises such as health risk assessment, counselling, trainings, physical activity, occupational health and safety programs to help employees at the workplaces cope with stress, anxiety and depression, the psychological well-being of small enterprise employees has become increasingly worrisome (Amin and Kihoro, 2014). It is estimated that 10–30% of Ugandan workers develop psychological health problems due to stressful working environments to the extent that work-related stress and depression is said to cause at least 50% of all illnesses suffered by workers (Luberenga et al., 2023). Failure to address this problem is likely to result into an increase in the number of suicidal cases and health complications among employees eventually leading to reduced productivity. Therefore, addressing this problem is not only essential for the affected individuals’ overall health and quality of life but also for the overall productivity and growth of economies.
A number of research gaps in this study were identified. First, majority of the previous studies on well-being have been conducted in large firms without sufficient evidence that psychological well-being factors in large firms reflect those of small enterprises (Cocker et al., 2013). Second, earlier studies on well-being have mostly used a single theoretical approach in explaining psychological well-being (Kinderen et al., 2020). Because of theoretical deficiencies that exist in using a single theory, a multi-theoretical approach was adopted for this study to explain psychological well-being of employees in small enterprises.
In Uganda specifically, existing research on psychological well-being has been conducted in non-working contexts for example among refugees (Balyejjusa, 2019), adolescents (Evarist, 2018), women in Acholi region (Horn, 2014), mothers (Singla et al., 2015) and AIDS orphans (Atwine et al., 2016). We recognize research conducted by Kawalya et al. (2019) on happiness at the workplace, which could be related to our study on PWB. However, it was conducted among professional nurses in public hospitals whose working conditions may differ from employees working with small enterprises who are the main focus of this study. Accordingly, there is scanty research on psychological well-being in the context of small enterprise employees in Uganda.
Finally, previous studies have positioned individual adaptability a significant mediating variable, for example, Gao et al. (2016) and Holliman et al. (2021). In the search for literature, the authors did not find any study that explored the mediating role of individual adaptability in the relationship between personal initiative (PI) and psychological well-being implying that this path has not been closely examined. This led us to generate the following research objectives.
- (1)
What is the relationship between PI and psychological well-being?
- (2)
What is the relationship between PI and individual adaptability?
- (3)
What is the relationship between individual adaptability and psychological well-being?
- (4)
Does individual adaptability mediate the relationship between PI and psychological well-being?
2. Literature review and hypothesis development
This paper adopted the PI and complex adaptive systems theories as the theoretical lenses for fostering psychological well-being among employees of small enterprises.
2.1 Personal initiative theory (PI) (Frese, 2001; Frese et al., 2016)
The theory assumes that individuals should be self-starting, proactive and persistent in order to overcome barriers to work goals Frese (2001), Glaub et al. (2015). Evidence shows that self-starting employees have a better chance of boosting their well-being (Sheldon and Lyubomirsky, 2019). PI is said to increase the effectiveness of individuals and organizations, including enhancing individual creative thinking, improving working conditions in enterprises and job performance (Zhao et al., 2020), Therefore, from this discussion, the PI theory is seen to be appropriate in explaining this study.
2.2 Complex adaptive systems theory (CAST; Mcmillan, 2008; Goldstein et al., 2010)
The complex adaptive systems theory assumes diverse components called agents that are interdependent, interact with each other at multiple levels, self-organizing, act as a unified whole, have the ability to learn from experience and adapt to change in the environment (McMillan, 2008; Goldstein et al., 2010). This adaptability is said to make a significant contribution to a range of psychological well-being outcomes, including life satisfaction, flourishing and affect (Holliman et al., 2021). Drawing from the complex adaptive systems theory, individuals are regarded as adaptive agents with the ability to make continuous adjustments and changes in their relational boundaries to create positive relationships with others consequently maintaining their own psychological well-being. As such, employees with higher levels of individual adaptability are more likely to be psychological well-being. From this debate, the complex adaptive systems theory is seen to be appropriate in explaining this study.
2.3 Personal initiative and psychological well-being
PI is work behavior characterized by its self-starting nature, proactive approach and persistence in overcoming difficulties that arise in the pursuit of a goal. It is regarded as a form of proactive behavior that involves going beyond assigned tasks, developing one’s own goals and attempting to solve problems that have not yet occurred (Frese et al., 2016). Evidence shows that when people do something new that takes effort (self-starting), they have higher chances of boosting their well-being (Sheldon and Lyubomirsky, 2019). Literature also indicates that proactive individuals are more likely nurture psychological well-being (Bakker and Oerlemans, 2019). It has also been discovered that being proactive shapes individual affective experiences including psychological well-being (Ji et al., 2023). We therefore propose that the following hypothesis.
Personal initiative is positively related to psychological well-being.
2.4 Personal initiative and individual adaptability
As earlier noted, PI is a work behavior characterized by its self-starting nature, proactive approach and persistence in overcoming difficulties that arise in the pursuit of a goal (Frese, 2001). Different studies have found a positive relationship between PI and individual adaptability; for example, research shows that because people with initiative always take the lead in action and overcoming difficulties, they are more likely to adapt to the complex and changeable working environment (Zhao et al., 2020). More so, it has been noted that people with initiative behavior have the capacity to change a situation and to manage work-related changes (Hameed et al., 2020). Relatedly, Uddin et al. (2021) noted that self-starting actions promote creativity which enhances employees' capacity to adjust to the ever-changing work demands. Similarly, Yu et al. (2023) noted that self-initiated acts promote creativity which has a significant impact on the identification of opportunities and the development of new ideas. Jiang (2017) also concluded that proactive individuals are normally change and action oriented, enabling them to identify improvement opportunities, take actions and persevere until they change and improve the status quo. We therefore propose the following hypothesis;
Personal initiative is positively related to individual adaptability.
2.5 Individual adaptability and psychological well-being
Literature has revealed an association between individual adaptability and psychological well-being. For example, longitudinal studies by Martin et al. (2013) have indicated that individual adaptability is predictive of psychological well-being among adolescents. Moreover, Holliman et al. (2021) found out that individual adaptability contributes to a range of psychological well-being outcomes which help employees to adjust to new and uncertain environments (Mackey et al., 2013). In addition, Klein et al. (2023) noted that being able to appropriately adjust one's emotions, even when they involve negative reactions, can enhance psychological well-being. Relatedly, Ruiz et al. (2021) also noted that people who have the ability to adjust their emotions are able to choose coping strategies like emotion focused coping which help in down regulating their negative emotions while maintaining their positive emotions.
The above literature therefore indicates that there is a link between individual adaptability and psychological well-being which leads us to hypothesize that;
There is a positive relationship between individual adaptability and psychological well-being.
2.6 The mediating role of individual adaptability in the relationship between personal initiative and psychological well-being
Several scholars have found a positive relationship between PI and psychological well-being. For example, Kwon (2019) found out that individual adaptability mediated the relationship between work volition and employability, whereas Dumulescu et al. (2015) discovered that individual adaptability partially mediated the relationship between calling and career competencies. Such research is important because it gives an insight into how PI influences psychological well-being. However, to date, the mechanism through which individual adaptability mediates this relationship between PI and psychological well-being has not yet been closely explored. Irrespective of this gap, since individual adaptability has played a mediating role in various relationships, it is also likely to mediate the relationship between PI and psychological well-being. This leads us to hypothesize that;
Individual adaptability mediates the relationship between personal initiative and psychological well-being.
2.7 Relationships between variables
Figure 1 below describes the relationships between three variables; the independent variable.
(PI), the dependent variable (Psychological well-being) and the mediating variable individual adaptability.
Figure 1 above shows the direct and indirect crossover from PI to psychological well-being. We therefore propose that PI directly influences psychological well-being (H1), PI directly influences individual adaptability (H2) and individual adaptability directly influences psychological well-being (H3). Furthermore, the study proposes that PI indirectly influences psychological well-being through individual adaptability (H4).
3. Research design
3.1 Sample selection and data collection
The sample of this study consisted of employees working with small enterprises in Kampala, Uganda. A list of 16,560 small enterprises was obtained from Uganda Bureau of Statistics (UBOS, 2018). This study employed a multi-stage sampling approach to select the respondents. First, small enterprises were selected from the five administrative divisions of Kampala. This was followed by the selection of employees from the selected enterprises. Using the Yamane (1973) formula, we got a sample of 391 enterprises targeting 2 respondents from each enterprise who were conveniently selected giving us a total of 782 respondents. The convenience sampling method was employed because it is a cost-effective and quick way to contact potential respondents (Dillman et al., 2014). Additionally, it has been frequently used in well-being studies (Brown et al., 2023; Sood and Kour, 2023). A total of 782 questionnaires were administered out of which 756 responses were received back. On sorting the 756 received questionnaires to identify useable ones, 30 were rejected because 50% of their items were not filled (Hair et al., 2014). Thus, 726 were useable for the study. A good response rate of 91.9% was obtained because of the personal approach used by the researchers while collecting data. According to Baruch and Holtom (2008), the average response rate for studies at the individual level is 52.6% and above. Hence, the study response rate met the standard for a minimum acceptable response rate.
3.2 The study variables
In this study, three variables are examined, that is, the dependent (Psychological well-being), independent (PI), mediating (Individual adaptability and control variables (age and Position held). Psychological well-being was assessed in terms of positive emotions, engagement, relations, meaning and accomplishment with items adopted from the workplace PERMA profiler by Kern et al. (2014) and Ryff’s psychological well-being scale (Ryff, 1989). A sample item for positive emotions was “I feel contented with the work that I do. See Appendix”.
PI was assessed using items adopted from the PI scale by Frese et al., 1996) operationalized in terms of Self-starting, Persistence and Pro-activity. A sample item for PI was “Such employees perform their work tasks on their own. See Appendix”.
Individual adaptability was measured using items adapted from the I-ADAPT scale by Ployhart and Bliese (2006) and the Adaptive performance scale by Marlow et al. (2015) using dimensions of cognitive flexibility, emotional flexibility and behavioral flexibility. The sample items were “I consider multiple options regarding my work before making a decision”, “I am flexible enough to adjust to dynamic workplace requirements. See Appendix”.
3.3 Control variables
The study empirically tested the effect of control variables on the dependent variable reason being that prior research has indicated that psychological well-being which is the dependent variable varies across individuals indicating the possibility of confounding factors that bring about the variations. According to Bartov et al. (2000), failure to control for confounding factors may incorrectly lead to the rejection of hypotheses that could have been earlier accepted. This is why the current research found it necessary to control for the psychological well-being with respondents’ age and position held. In the search for literature, this study found similar prior research by Charles et al. (2001) who established significant effects of age and position held on psychological well-being. We, therefore, extend the previous literature by proposing and demonstrating the general possibility that position held by the employee and their age affects their psychological well-being.
3.4 Reliability
Testing for reliability was meant to determine whether the instrument gives consistent and dependable results if used repeatedly (Hair et al., 2014). The study instrument (questionnaire) was tested for reliability both at exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). At EFA Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was used while at CFA the composite reliability coefficient was used. A cut off of 0.70 and above was considered appropriate (Hair et al., 2014). Below are the reliability results for all the variables both at EFA and CFA:
The results in Table 1 above show that both at EFA and CFA all the study variables (PI, Individual adaptability and psychological well-being) met the cut-off point of 0.7 and above. This means that the study instrument was reliable to be used for the study.
3.5 Testing for validity
Validity tested whether the instrument measures what it was intended to measure. This was examined by carrying out convergent and discriminant validity both at EFA and CFA (Cooper and Schindler, 2014). Convergent validity was evaluated based on the average variance extracted (AVE) while discriminant validity at CFA was computed by comparing the inter construct correlations among constructs with the respective square root of the AVE (Fornell and Larcker, 1981). The rule of the thumb is that the square root of the AVE should be greater than the inter-construct correlations for discriminant validity to exist as indicated in the table below;
The results in Table 2 above indicate that the AVE values for PI, individual adaptability and psychological well-being were 0.940, 0.955 and 0.934, respectively, all exceeding the recommended value of 0.6 (Hair et al., 2014). This indicates that convergent validity was achieved. While the square root of each construct’s AVE was greater than the correlation with other variables; for example, the square root of the AVE for PI was 0.970, individual adaptability was 0.977 and psychological well-being was 0.966, which confirmed discriminant validity.
It can also be noted in Table 2 above that the mean value of PI is 4.52 meaning that on average, employees of small enterprises take initiative. The mean value of individual adaptability is 4.96 implying that on average, employees of small enterprises are adaptive to changes in their work roles while the mean value of psychological well-being is 4.95 implying that on average, employees of small enterprises nurture their psychological well-being.
4. Data analysis
Data were analyzed using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) Version 23 software and later was uploaded into AMOS Version 23 software for further analysis. AMOS was preferred because of its ability to test multiple relationships in a single model (Hair et al., 2014). We also examined the indirect effect of individual adaptability in the relationship between PI and psychological well-being using the bootstrapping approach because of its ability to test both the direct and indirect effects in a single model (Hair et al., 2014).
4.1 Results
4.1.1 Correlations results between variables
Pearson correlation coefficient (r) was used to determine the association between the study variables as shown in the table below:
Table 3 above reveals that PI is positively and significantly correlated with psychological well-being (r = 0.181, p ≤ 0.01), hence supporting Hypothesis 1. This means that positive changes in PI are associated with positive changes in psychological well-being. The association between PI and individual adaptability was also positive and significant (r = 0.64, p ≤ 0.01), hence supporting Hypothesis 2. This means that an increase in PI is associated with positive changes in individual adaptability. In addition, the association between individual adaptability and psychological well-being was positive and significant (r = 0.57, p ≤ 0.01), hence supporting Hypothesis 3. This means that an increase in individual adaptability leads to an increase in psychological well-being. However, individual adaptability had a higher correlation with psychological well-being compared to PI.
4.2 Direct test results
The study used structural equation modelling, and data were imported into AMOS version 23 to examine the impact of the hypothesized relationships between the study variables. To test for mediation, different control variables such as marital status, education level, age, position held, number of years spent while working for the enterprise were introduced in the structural model. The bootstrapping technique was employed to estimate the statistical significance of the hypothesized model when control variables were introduced. However, only age and position held yielded significant results as presented in Figure 2 below;
After introducing control variables in the model, results in Figure 2 above revealed a negative impact of PI towards psychological well-being (β = −0.10), hence rejecting H1. Results revealed a positive impact of PI towards individual adaptability (β = 0.70) supporting H2, a positive effect of individual adaptability towards psychological well-being (β = 0.27) supporting H3. Results also revealed that position held and age had a positive effect on psychological well-being (β = 0.30 and β = 0.38, respectively) implying that psychological well-being varies across age and position held while position held had a negative relationship with individual adaptability (β = −0.23) implying that position held does not affect individual adaptability. However, the fit indices were (CMIN = 0.434, df = 1, CFI = 1.000, GFI = 0.999, RMSEA = 0.000) implying an acceptable goodness of fit of the model.
The results are summarized and presented in Table 4 below;
4.3 Indirect test results
We used the bootstrapping approach to test the indirect effect of PI and psychological well-being through individual adaptability. Results show that the indirect effect of PI on psychological well-being through individual adaptability was positive and significant (β = 0.19, p < 0.01) bootstrapped at 95% CI lower limit = 0.10 and upper limit = 0.28). As zero is not contained in the 95% confidence interval for the indirect effect, Hypothesis 4 was supported, and therefore, individual adaptability fully mediates the relationship between PI and psychological well-being. It was full mediation because the relationship was significant at (p < 0.05). Results of the bootstrap are summarized in Table 5 below;
5. Discussion of results and conclusion
Results from this study reveal that PI has no significant influence on psychological well-being hence rejecting H1. These findings mean that an individual might possess high levels of PI but still experience low levels of psychological well-being. It may also imply that being self-starting and proactive at work may not guarantee psychological well-being. The study contradicts findings of Sheldon and Lyubomirsky (2019) who indicate that when people do something new that takes effort (self-starting) they have better chances of boosting their well-being. However, in contrast, these results refute the findings of Cangiano and Parker (2016) who found out that controlled proactivity performed effortfully for extrinsic reasons such as impression management, social influence or job promotions depletes psychological resources, hence reducing psychological well-being. Moreover, preliminary evidence by Strauss et al. (2017) indicated that proactivity tends to be associated with greater job strain, both in the short run and long run, hence demonstrating a negative relationship between PI and psychological well-being. Therefore, the current study makes a contribution to the existing literature by stating that PI is not significantly associated with psychological well-being of small enterprise employees.
As hypothesized, results of H2 confirmed a strong and significant relationship between PI and individual adaptability. More specifically, the results indicate that PI accounted for 70% of the variance in individual adaptability. These hypothesis means that the higher the PI, the higher the levels of individual adaptability for small enterprise employees. This finding implies that small enterprise employees who perform tasks on their own and prepare in advance for unforeseen problems are likely to adjust their thinking, emotions and behaviors to meet the changing needs at their workplaces. This resonates with findings of Uddin et al. (2021) who noted that self-starting actions promote creativity which enhances employees' capacity to adjust to the ever-changing work demands. These results are also in agreement with findings of Yu et al. (2023) who noted that self-initiated acts promote creativity which has a significant impact on the identification of opportunities and the development of new ideas.
Results for H3 also reveal that individual adaptability has a positive and significant impact on psychological well-being. These results imply that the higher the individual adaptability, the greater the chances of being psychologically well. This finding may also mean that small enterprise employees who think flexibly perceive multiple alternative explanations to work challenges and are able to generate multiple alternative solutions to their work challenges which later influences them to think and act positively. Relatedly, Afrashteh and Hasani (2022) found a positive and significant relationship between cognitive flexibility and psychological well-being. This finding is in agreement with Vignochi et al. (2020) who clarified that cognitive flexibility enables people to generate alternative responses to opportunities and avoid courses of action that restrict adaptation to new and difficult problem situations.
Lastly, this study established a full and significant mediation effect of individual adaptability in the relationship between PI and psychological well-being among small enterprises employees. Thus, H4 was supported. This implies that PI does not directly relate to psychological well-being, but individual adaptability fully acts as a conduit through which PI fosters psychological well-being. This finding may also mean that small enterprise employees who take initiative prepare in advance for unforeseen problems and so they are likely to adjust their thinking, emotions and behaviors to meet the changing needs of their work tasks. This finding is in line with Jiang (2017), who noted that proactive individuals are normally change and action oriented, enabling them to identify improvement opportunities, take actions and persevere until they change and improve their status quo. Consequently, they are in position to nurture positive thoughts, feelings and acts which eventually benefit the enterprise.
The research findings therefore conclude that individual adaptability fully mediates the relationship between PI and psychological well-being. PI positively influences individual adaptability and that individual adaptability positively influences psychological well-being. However, PI negatively affects psychological well-being. The findings further confirm the many findings of previous studies, particularly in the field of industrial and organizational psychology. In a nut shell, small enterprise employees with high levels of PI may benchmark on this study findings by ensuring that they adjust their thinking, emotions and behavior to navigate the challenges of the current working environment such that they can increase their psychological well-being.
6. Implications
Having found out that individual adaptability influences psychological well-being, this study informs managers of small enterprises about the need to think flexibly and adjust their conduct to suit the changing nature of their working environment. This is likely to create a climate that fosters individual adaptability among employees to enhance their PWB which is further amplified by Choi and Lee (2014) who noted that organizational leaders should play a significant role in developing a positive organizational climate that fosters individual adaptability and well-being.
The government in partnership with other relevant stakeholders such as representatives from small enterprises may collaborate in drafting a psychological well-being policy that incorporates the current workplace issues such as stress in order to promote and protect employees’ psychological well-being.
Human resource managers of small enterprises may design a psychological well-being policy that is geared towards promoting psychological well-being of employees. Such a policy may guide the identification of adaptive practices which may help in enhancing psychological well-being of employees while working.
7. Limitations and suggestions for future research
First, the sample of this study consisted of employees working with small enterprises in Uganda with different demographic characteristics where the model was tested. Thus, the generalizability of these findings to other sectors or contexts such as large enterprises in rural areas needs to be established. Secondly, the study used PI and individual adaptability to predict psychological well-being using a quantitative approach and results indicated that PI does not affect psychological well-being. Therefore, future studies may use a qualitative approach to investigate the underlying factors that may hinder employees of small enterprises with high levels of PI from being psychologically well. The study utilized the PI and complex adaptive systems theoretical lenses to study psychological well-being; therefore, further study can use other theories such as the conservation of resources theory. However, the findings are applicable to related studies.
Figures
Summary of reliability results
Variables | Cronbach’s alpha | Composite reliability |
---|---|---|
PERSINI | 0.81 | 0.88 |
INDADAPT | 0.85 | 0.86 |
PWB | 0.80 | 0.87 |
Source(s): Primary data
Convergent and discriminant validity at CFA
Variables | mean | SD | AVE | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PERSINIT (2) | 4.52 | 0.32 | 0.940 | 0.325** | 0.970 | ||
INDADAPT (3) | 4.96 | 0.81 | 0.955 | 0.637** | 0.547** | 0.977 | |
PSYWELBE (4) | 4.95 | 0.83 | 0.934 | 0.715** | 0.181** | 0.566** | 0.966 |
Source(s): Primary data. Fornell and Larcker (1981)
Correlation analysis between variables
Variables | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
RAGE (1) | 1 | ||||
POSITION (2) | 0.330** | 1 | |||
PERSINI (3) | 0.387** | 0.412** | 1 | ||
INDADAPT (4) | 0.247** | 0.217** | 0.637** | 1 | |
PSYWELB (5) | 0.116** | 0.252** | 0.181** | 0.566** | 1 |
Note(s): N = 726, **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (1-tailed)
Source(s): Primary data
Summary of hypotheses, results and decision
No | Hypothesis | Results | Decision |
---|---|---|---|
H1 | There is a positive relationship between personal initiative and psychological Well-being | (β = −0.10, p > 0.000) | Not supported |
H2 | There is a relationship between personal initiative and individual adaptability | (β = 0.70, p < 0.000) | Supported |
H3 | There is a relationship between individual adaptability and psychological well-being | (β = 0.27, p < 0.000) | Supported |
H4 | Individual adaptability mediates the relationship between personal initiative and psychological well-being | (β = 0.40, p < 0.000) | Supported |
Source(s): Summary of quantitative results
Summary of bootstrap results
Estimate | S.E. | C.R. | p | BCa | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Direct | |||||||
INDADAP | ← | PERSINI | 0.70 | 0.04 | 17.5 | 0 | 0.61, 0.77 |
INDADAP | ← | position | −0.23 | 0.05 | −4.5 | 0 | −0.33, 0.13 |
PSYCHWEL | ← | PERSINI | −0.10 | 0.08 | −1.2 | 0.25 | 0.26–0.07 |
PSYCHWEL | ← | age | 0.38 | 0.04 | 9.2 | 0 | 0, 0 |
PSYCHWEL | ← | position | 0.3 | 0.06 | 5.2 | 0 | 0.18, 0.46 |
PSYCHWEL | ← | INDADAP | 0.27 | 0.06 | 4.2 | 0 | 0.14, 0.39 |
Indirect effect | |||||||
PSYCHWEL ← INDADAP ← PERSINI | 0.19 | 0.05 | 4.1 | 0 | 0.10, 0.28 |
Source(s): Primary data
Appendix Measurement items
References
Afrashteh, M.Y. and Hasani, F. (2022), “Mindfulness and psychological well-being in adolescents: the mediating role of self-compassion, emotional dysregulation and cognitive flexibility”, Borderline Personality Disorder and Emotion Dysregulation, Vol. 9 No. 1, p. 22, doi: 10.1186/s40479-022-00192-y.
Amin, Z. and Kihoro (2014), “The mediating effect of quality of work life on the relationship between career development and psychological well-being”, International Journal of Research Studies in Psychology, Vol. 2 No. 3, pp. 67-80.
Atwine, B., Cantor-Graae, E. and Bajunirwe, F. (2016), “Psychological distress amongst AIDS orphans in rural Uganda”, Social Science and Medicine, Vol. 61 No. 3, pp. 555-564, doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2004.12.018.
Bakker, A.B. and Oerlemans, W.G.M. (2019), “Daily job crafting and momentary work engagement: a self-determination and self-regulation perspective”, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 112 No. 6, pp. 417-430, doi: 10.1016/j.jvb.2018.12.005.
Bakker, A.B., Hetland, J., Olsen, O.K. and Espevik, R. (2019), “Daily strengths use and employee well-being: the moderating role of personality”, Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 92 No. 1, pp. 144-168, doi: 10.1111/joop.12243.
Balyejjusa, M.S. (2019), “Somali refugees' well-being: the role of socio-culturally mediated agency”, Journal of Science and Sustainable Development, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 149-166, doi: 10.4314/jssd.v6i2.8.
Bartov, E., Gul, F.A. and Tsui, J.S.L. (2000), “Discretionary-accruals models and audit qualifications”, Journal of Accounting and Economics, Vol. 33 No. 2, pp. 173-204.
Baruch, Y. and Holtom, B.C. (2008), “Survey response rate levels and trends in organizational research”, Human Relations, Vol. 61 No. 8, pp. 1139-1160, doi: 10.1177/0018726708094863.
Biggs, D.M., Swailes, S. and Baker, S. (2016), “The measurement of worker relations: the development of a three-component scale”, The Leadership and Organization Development Journal, Vol. 37 No. 1, pp. 1-12, doi: 10.1108/lodj-08-2012-0098.
Brown, L.L., Cohen, B.E., Costello, R.B., Brazhnik, O. and Galis, Z. (2023), “Conceptualizing a resilience research framework at NIH”, Stress and Health, Vol. 39 No. 1, pp. 4-9, doi: 10.1002/smi.3260.
Cangiano, F. and Parker, S.K. (2016), “Proactivity for mental health and well‐being”, in Clarke, S., Probst, T.M., Guldenmund, F. and Passmore, J. (Eds), The Wiley Blackwell Handbook of the Psychology of Occupational Safety and Workplace Health, Wiley, London, pp. 228-250.
Charles, S., Reynolds, C.A. and Gatz, M. (2001), “Age-related differences and change in positive and negative affect over 23 years”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 80 No. 1, pp. 136-151, doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.80.1.136.
Choi, Y. and Lee, D. (2014), “Psychological capital, Big Five traits, and employee outcomes”, Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 29 No. 2, pp. 122-140, doi: 10.1108/JMP-06-2012-0193.
Cocker, F., Martin, A., Scott, J., Venn, A. and Sanderson, K. (2013), “Psychological distress and related work attendance among small-to-medium enterprise owner/managers: literature review and research agenda”, International Journal of Mental Health Promotion, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 1-18, doi: 10.1080/14623730.2013.771036.
Cooper, D.R. and Schindler, P.S. (2014), Business Research Methods, 12th ed., McGraw, New York.
Dennerlein, J.T., Burke, L., Sabbath, E.L., Williams, J.A.R., Peters, S.E., Wallace, L., Karapanos, M. and Sorensen, G. (2020), “An integrative total worker health framework for keeping workers safe and healthy during the COVID-19 pandemic”, Human Factors, Vol. 62 No. 5, pp. 689-696, doi: 10.1177/0018720820932699.
Dillman, D.A., Smyth, J.D. and Christian, L.M. (2014), Internet, Phone, Mail, and Mixed- Mode Surveys: the Tailored Design Method, 4th ed., John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ.
Dumulescu, D., Opre, A. and Buzgar, R. (2015), “Is your career meaningful?” Exploring career calling on a Romanian student's sample”, Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 187 No. 1, pp. 553-558, doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.03.103.
Evarist, A. (2018), “Adolescent trauma and psychosocial well-being in Entebbe-Uganda”, Universal Journal of Psychology, Vol. 6 No. 3, pp. 67-79, doi: 10.13189/ujp.2018.060301.
Fornell, C. and Larcker, D.F. (1981), “Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 39-50, doi: 10.2307/3151312.
Frese, M. (2001), “Personal initiative (PI): the theoretical concept and empirical findings”, in Erez, M., Kleinbeck, U. and Thierry, H. (Eds), Work Motivation in the Context of a Globalizing Economy, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 99-110.
Frese, M., Kring, W., Soose, A. and Zempel, J. (1996), “Personal initiative at work: differences between east and west Germany”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 39 No. 1, pp. 37-63, doi: 10.2307/256630.
Frese, M., Hass, L. and Friedrich, C. (2016), “Personal initiative training for small business owners”, Journal of Business Venturing Insights, Vol. 5, pp. 27-36, doi: 10.1016/j.jbvi.2016.01.001.
Gao, Y., Zhang, X., Chen, A., Sun, Y. and Zhang, R. (2016), “Adapt to changes or not? The mediating effect of individual adaptability between social media and task performance”, in Sprague, R.H. and Bui, T.X. (Eds), Proceedings of the 49th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, HICSS, IEEE Computer Society, 2016-March, pp. 2126-2135, 2016 (pp. 2126-2135). Article 7427450 (Proceedings of the Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. doi: 10.1109/HICSS.2016.269.
Glaub, M.E., Frese, M., Fischer, S. and Hoppe, M. (2015), “Increasing personal initiative in small business managers or owners leads to entrepreneurial success: a theory- based controlled randomized field intervention for evidence-based management”, Q Academy of Management Learning and Education, Vol. 2015 No. 1, pp. 21-46.
Goldstein, J., Hazy, J. and Lichtenstein, B. (2010), “Applying generative leadership to your organization”, in Complexity and the Nexus of Leadership, Palgrave MacMillan Press. doi: 10.1057/9780230107717.
Hair, J.F., William, C.B., Barry, B.J., Rolph, E.A. and Ronald, L.T. (2014), Multivariate Data Analysis, 6th ed., Pearson Education, Upper Saddle River.
Hameed, I., Brohi, S. and Shahab, A. (2020), “Impact of proactive personality on career adaptability and intentions for expatriation”, Canadian Journal of Career Development, Vol. 19 No. 1, pp. 4-13.
Holliman, A.J., Waldeck, D., Jay, B., Murphy, S., Atkinson, E., Collie, R.J. and Martin, A. (2021), “Adaptability and social support: examining links with psychological well-being among UK students and non-students”, Frontier Psychology Education of Psychology, Vol. 12, 636520, doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.636520.
Horn, R. (2014), “Psychosocial distress and well-being among Acholi women in Northern Uganda”, Logica Working Paper series; no. 1, © World Bank, Washington, DC.
Ji, S., Chen, Z. and Cangiano, F. (2023), Proactivity and Well-Being: Initiating Changes to Fuel Life Energy, Bristol University press, pp. 263-284, doi: 10.51952/9781529212655.ch011.
Jiang, Z. (2017), “Proactive personality and career adaptability: the role of thriving at work”, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 98, pp. 85-97, doi: 10.1016/j.jvb.2016.10.003.
Kawalya, C., Munene, J.C., Ntayi, J., Kagaari, J., Mafabi, S. and Kasekende, F. (2019), “Psychological capital and happiness at the workplace. The mediating role of flow experience”, Congent Business and Management, Vol. 6 No. 1, doi: 10.1080/23311975.16850601685060.
Kern, M.L., Waters, L.E., Adler, A. and White, M.A. (2014), “A multidimensional approach to measuring well-being in students: application of the PERMA framework”, The Journal of Positive Psychology, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 262-271, doi: 10.1080/17439760.2014.936962.
Kinderen, S., Valk, A., Khapova, S.N. and Tims, M. (2020), “Facilitating eudemonic well- being in mental health care organizations. The role of servant leadership and workplace civility climate”, International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, Vol. 17, 1173, doi: 10.3390/ijerph17041173.
Klein, R.J., Jacobson, N.C. and Robinson, M.D. (2023), “A psychological flexibility perspective on well-being: emotional reactivity, adaptive choices, and daily experiences”, Emotion, Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 911-924, doi: 10.1037/emo0001159.
Kwon, J.E. (2019), “Work volition and career adaptability as predictors of employability: examining a moderated mediating process”, Sustainability, Vol. 11 No. 24, pp. 1-16, doi: 10.3390/su11247089.
Luberenga, I., Kasujja, R., Vasanthan, L.T., Nyende, A., Tumwebaze, E. and Henry Joseph, L.J. (2023), “Mental health awareness programmes to promote mental well-being at the workplace among workforce in the low-income and middle- income countries: a scoping review protocol”, BMJ Open, Vol. 13 No. 7, e073012, doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-073012.
Mackey, J.D., Ellen, B.P. III, Hochwarter, W.A. and Ferris, G.R. (2013), “Subordinate social adaptability and the consequences of abusive supervision perceptions in two samples”, The Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 24 No. 5, pp. 732-746, doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2013.07.003.
Marlow, K.K., Calarco, H.N., Frame, M.C. and Hein, M.B. (2015), “Building a better adaptive performance measure: Factor analysis and scale validation”, Poster presented at the 11th annual River Cities Industrial/Organizational Psychology conference, TN, Chattanooga.
Martin, A.J., Nejad, H.G., Colmar, S. and Liem, G.A.D. (2013), “Adaptability: how students' responses to uncertainty and novelty predict their academic and non- academic outcomes”, Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 105 No. 3, pp. 728-746, doi: 10.1037/a0032794.
Mazzarol, T., Soutar, G.N., McKeown, T., Reboud, S., Adapa, S., Delwyn, J.R. and Clark, D. (2021), “Employer and employee perspectives of HRM practices within SMEs”, Small Enterprise Research, Vol. 28 No. 3, pp. 247-268, doi: 10.1080/13215906.2021.1989627.
McMillan, E. (2008), Complexity, Management and the Dynamics of Change, Create Space Independent Publishing Platform.
Ployhart, R.E. and Bliese, P.D. (2006), “Individual adaptability (I-ADAPT) theory: conceptualizing the antecedents, consequences, and measurement of individual differences in adaptability”, in Burke, C.S., Pierce, L.G. and Salas, E. (Eds), Understanding Adaptability: A Prerequisite for Effective Performance within Complex Environments, Elsevier, pp. 3-39, doi: 10.1016/S1479-3601(05)06001-7.
Ruiz, M.J.S., Tadros, N., Khalaf, T., Ego, V., Eisenbeck, N., Carreno, D. and Nassar, E. (2021), “Trait emotional intelligence and well-being during the pandemic: the mediating role of meaning-centered coping”, Frontiers in Psychology, Vol. 12, 648401, doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.648401.
Ryff, C.D. (1989), “Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning of psychological well- being”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 57 No. 6, pp. 1069-1081, doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.57.6.1069.
Sheldon, K.M. and Lyubomirsky, S. (2019), “Revisiting the sustainable happiness model and pie chart: can happiness be successfully pursued?”, The Journal of Positive Psychology, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 145-154, doi: 10.1080/17439760.2019.1689421.
Singla, D.R., Kumbakumba, E. and Aboud, F.E. (2015), “Effects of a parenting intervention to address maternal psychological well-being and child development and growth in rural Uganda: a community-based, cluster-randomised trial”, Lancet Global Health, Vol. 3 No. 8, pp. e458-e469, doi: 10.1016/S2214-109X(15)00099-6.
Sood, S. and Kour, D. (2023), “Perceived workplace incivility and psychological well-being in higher education teachers: a multigroup analysis”, International Journal of Workplace Health Management, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 20-37, doi: 10.1108/IJWHM-03-2021-0048.
Strauss, K., Parker, S.K. and O'Shea, D. (2017), “When does proactivity have a cost? Motivation at work moderates the effects of proactive work behavior on employee job strain”, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 100, pp. 15-26, doi: 10.1016/j.jvb.2017.02.001.
Uddin, M.A., Priyankara, H.P.R. and Mahmood, M. (2021), “Does a creative identity encourage innovative behaviour? Evidence from knowledge-intensive IT service firms”, European Journal of Innovation Management, Vol. 23 No. 5, pp. 877-894, doi: 10.1108/EJIM-06-2019-0168.
Uganda Bureau of Statistics (UBOS) (2018), available at: www.ubos.org/wpcontent/uploads/publications/03_20182010_COBE_Report.pdf
Vignochi, L., Lezana, Á.G.R. and Andrade Paines, P.D. (2020), “Modelo cognitivo de liderança empreendedora”, Ciência da Informação, Vol. 48 No. 2, pp. 41-52, available at: http://revista.ibict.br/ciinf/article/download/4779/4166
WHO (2019), Promoting Mental Health: Concepts, Emerging Evidence, and Practice: A Report from the World Health Organization, Department of Mental Health and Substance Abuse in collaboration with the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation and the University of Melbourne, Geneva, available at: http://www.who.int/mental_health/evidence/en/promoting_mhh.pdf
Yamane, T. (1973), Statistics: An Introductory Analysis, 3rd ed., Harper and Row, New York.
Yu, X., Zhao, X. and Hou, Y. (2023), “Cognitive flexibility and entrepreneurial creativity: the chain mediating effect of entrepreneurial alertness and entrepreneurial self-efficacy”, Frontiers in Psychology, Vol. 14, 1292797, doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1292797.
Zhao, Y., Yang, X.Y., Wang, J.H. and Wang, Y.X. (2020), “Research on the relationships among knowledge sharing, proactive personality and new product development performance in state-owned enterprises”, Innovat. Technol., Vol. 20, pp. 21-27.