Search results

There is an abundance of empirical evidence on the positive effects of employment – and the detrimental effects of unemployment – on individuals’ psychological and physical health and well-being. In this chapter, the authors explore whether and how self-employment or entrepreneurship could be a solution for individuals’ (re)entry to the job market and which (psychological) variables enhance the likelihood of entrepreneurial success. Specifically, the authors first focus on unemployment and its detrimental effects for health and wellbeing, and outline the existing interventions aimed at assisting reemployment and combating the negative consequences of unemployment for individuals’ well-being. Then, the authors will explore entrepreneurship as a potential solution to unemployment and explore the psychological variables that enhance the likelihood of entrepreneurial success. One of the variables the authors highlight as particularly relevant for self-employment is the second-order construct of Psychological Capital (PsyCap; Luthans, Avolio, Avey, & Norman, 2007), as well as its individual components – hope, optimism, efficacy, and resilience. PsyCap is a malleable construct that can be successfully trained, and PsyCap interventions are inherently strength-based and have positive effects on employees’ and entrepreneurs’ performance and wellbeing. Therefore, the authors end the chapter by suggesting that a PsyCap component in existing education and training programs for entrepreneurship is likely to not only increase entrepreneurial intentions and success, but also increases participants’ well-being, self-esteem, and the general confidence they can pick up the reigns and take back control over their (professional) lives.

Sociologists, social psychologists, and organizational theorists alike have shown a great deal of interest in the concept of social capital. To a large extent, this interest has been fueled by accumulating evidence that social capital plays a vital role in the development of more cooperative relationships within groups and organizations. Inspired by this evidence, a primary goal of the present paper is to examine more systematically the psychological underpinnings of social capital within contemporary workplaces. Drawing on social identity theory and related theories on the self, this paper develops a framework for conceptualizing how individuals’ psychological identification with a workgroup enhances their willingness to engage in behaviors that contribute to the creation of social capital within that workgroup. The paper reviews empirical evidence in favor of the framework, and draws out theoretical and applied organizational implications of the framework.

Much like “Yeti,” the Abominable Snowman whose footprints are everywhere but itself nowhere to be seen, unfounded assertions of human capital as valuable contributors to strategic success continue to proliferate. Many of these treatments are nonbinding, nonmeasureable, idiosyncratic, tautological, and therefore nearly impossible to use for any comparative market valuation. In this chapter, we selectively review the interdisciplinary literature on exemplars of human-derived capital. We systematically examine specific epistemological strengths, weaknesses, and gaps in recognized theories, measures, and practices. In particular, a multidisciplinary, multilevel, connectionist point of view is suggested. We present the case for an evidence-based classification system of human-derived capital at the micro-, meso-, and macro-levels. Our framework goes beyond static stock models by emphasizing dynamic human-derived capital flows, as well as their within-level and cross-level linkages, all within the context of a modern society that increasingly is networked, fluent with technology, and prodigious with social media.

This chapter provides valuable insights around the entrepreneurial landscapes of the twenty-first century, as well as the inherent stressors that may impact entrepreneurial well-being and performance. As the World Health Organization declares stress as the epidemic of the twenty-first century, entrepreneurs face increasingly volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous contexts, or what the Army War College refers to as “VUCA” environments. In these contexts, traditional models of leadership and stress management in entrepreneurship require tapping into new, sometimes previously untapped and underdeveloped resources. Resources such as Psychological Capital (Luthans, Youssef-Morgan, & Avolio, 2007), Algorithmic Leadership (Harms & Han, 2018), and wearable biometric technologies (Tsuji, Sato, Yano, Broad, & Luthans, 2019) that exploit big data analytics powered by artificial intelligence will be invaluable to entrepreneurs as they manage stress, and build and maintain their competitive edges.

The Global Mindset Inventory® has been developed through a very rigorous theoretical and empirical process. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis indicated three components: (a) intellectual capital, (b) social capital, and (c) psychological capital. Each component had good internal reliability. Each component showed evidence for discriminant and convergent validity. The instrument development followed a multiphase, multimethod research methodology, and has robust psychometric properties as evidenced by its strong reliability scores and its multidimensional validity properties.

Despite widespread interest in the gig economy, academic research on the topic has lagged behind. The present chapter applies organizational theory and research to compose a working model for understanding participation in the gig economy and how gig work may impact worker health and well-being. Drawing from past research this chapter defines the gig economy in all its diversity and advances a framework for understanding why individuals enter into gig economy. Next, the authors discuss how various characteristics of the gig economy and gig workers can be understood as both demands and resources that influence how gig work is likely to be experienced by the individual. To understand how these characteristics are likely to influence worker health and well-being, we draw from past research on alternative work arrangements and entrepreneurship, as well as the limited extant research on the gig economy. Finally, a research agenda is proposed to spur much needed research on the gig economy and its workers.

While there is strong agreement that globalization is spreading rapidly, there is no agreement on what globalization actually means and how it is measured. Giddens (1999) defines globalization as “the worldwide interconnection at the cultural, political, and economic level resulting from the elimination of communication and trade barriers.” He further defines it as “…a process of convergence of cultural, political, and economic aspects of life” (reported in Inkpen & Ramaswamy, 2006, p. 13). Govindarajan and Gupta (2001) define globalization as “growing economic interdependence among countries as reflected in increasing cross-border flows of three types of entities: goods and services, capital, and know-how” (p. 4).

Inherent in the meaning of global mindset is the dilemma of an appropriate level of analysis at which we define, measure, and research this construct. This chapter addresses the individual level of analysis using social cognition, which explains how the development process of global mindset helps individuals make sense of unfamiliar stimuli, broaden their cognitive capacities, adjust their behavior accordingly, and have a positive influence on others. Our recently developed core construct of positive psychological capital, or PsyCap (Luthans, Youssef, & Avolio, 2007), and the overarching process of authentic leadership development (Avolio & Luthans, 2006) are used to explicate the theoretical social cognitive framework. The “influence on others” implies a leadership process, and that is why we address the role that global mindset may have in the authentic leadership development process (Avolio & Luthans, 2006).

From the start, organizational socialization has been all about learning. In fact, most definitions of organizational socialization are very explicit about this and the general notion that socialization involves learning “the ropes” of a particular organizational role (Fisher, 1986). Socialization has been described as a sense-making and learning process in which newcomers acquire a variety of types of information and knowledge to become effective members of the organization (Klein & Weaver, 2000).