Content uploaded by Arran Caza
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Arran Caza on Aug 25, 2020
Content may be subject to copyright.
Electronic copy available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1295299
This Working Paper was prepared for:
1
st
IESE Conference on
“HUMANIZING THE FIRM AND THE MANAGEMENT PROFESSION”
Barcelona, IESE Business School, June 30 – July 2 2008
Positive Organizational Scholarship: What does it Achieve?
Arran Caza, University of Illinois
&
Kim Cameron, University of Michigan
Abstract:
Positive Organizational Scholarship (POS) is a relatively new development in
organizational studies, having formally begun with a 2003 edited collection of the
same name (Cameron, et al., 2003b). Since that time, it has attracted considerable
attention (e.g., George, 2004; Fineman, 2006; Caza and Caza, 2007; Roberts,
2006). The theoretical basis and scope of POS have been addressed quite
recently (Dutton and Glynn, 2007; Dutton and Sonenshein, 2007), so this chapter
only summarizes these issues, in favor of concentrating on the research and
practice of POS. After discussing the domain and precursors of POS, primary
attention is given to what POS has accomplished to date. These accomplishments
have two facets, as POS involves a research perspective and an approach to
managing organizations. This chapter considers the accomplishments of POS in
both areas.
Key Words:
Positive organizational scholarship, abundance, positive deviance.
Electronic copy available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1295299
2
Nature of Positive Organizational Scholarship
In the eponymous book that launched POS (Cameron, et al., 2003b), the
editors began by contrasting two extreme, hypothetical worlds: one of greed,
manipulation, and distrust; the other of appreciation, collaboration, and
meaningfulness. They then characterized POS as recognizing the importance of
the first world, but intentionally emphasizing the second. "POS is concerned with
the study of especially positive outcomes, processes, and attributes of
organizations and their members" (Cameron, et al., 2003a, p.4). POS promotes the
study of enablers, motivations, and effects associated with positive phenomena,
with the aim of revealing positive states and processes that would otherwise be
missed or obscured by traditional, "non-POS," perspectives.
The creation of the label POS was described as a deliberate one, with each
element of the acronym intended to signify an important element of the perspective
(Cameron, et al., 2003a). The use of "positive" declared "an affirmative bias and
orientation [toward] exceptional, virtuous, life-giving, and flourishing phenomena"
(Cameron, et al., 2003a, p. 5). The term "organizational" was meant to stress the
emphasis on organized contexts, as opposed to purely individual phenomena (see
Dutton and Glynn, 2007). Finally, the "scholarship" label was used to make
theoretical explanation and empirical support an explicit requirement for inclusion.
In sum, POS calls for scholarly research examining positive phenomena in
organizations (Cameron, et al., 2003a, p. 11).
While the intended meaning of "organizational" and "scholarship" seem
relatively straightforward, questions have been raised about what constitutes
"positive" (e.g., Fineman, 2006; George, 2004). This issue is addressed in more
detail later in this chapter, but the uncertainty about the precise nature of
positiveness reflects the fact that no formal definition has been offered, either in the
original book (Cameron, et al., 2003b) or in subsequent statements about the
nature of POS (Cameron and Caza, 2004; Caza and Caza, 2007; Roberts, 2006).
Instead, general descriptors and evocative examples have been used to imply the
meaning of positiveness. These include references to elevating processes,
excellence, human strength, resilience, vitality, and meaningfulness (Cameron and
Caza, 2004; Cameron, et al., 2003a; Roberts, 2006). However, the exact nature of
positiveness remains unclear.
In many ways, the POS emphasis on how to see, rather than exactly what to
see, bears an affinity to the technique involved in seeing an auto-stereogram.
Readers will recall the popular culture boom of "magic eye" pictures in the 1990s.
In these pictures, if individuals focused their vision in just the right way, a three-
dimensional image would seem to emerge from a field of random dots. With these
pictures, those who had already seen the image tended to tell others how to look at
the picture, rather than telling them to look for a specific object. Moreover, the act
of properly seeing a given magic eye picture was initially difficult, but once one was
able to see the image in the dots, it became hard to believe that anyone could fail
to see it.
POS has been characterized in comparable terms. The POS perspective
promises a different way of looking at familiar organizations to see that which has
previously been missed, but which is clearly evident and important once one
Electronic copy available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1295299
3
recognizes it. The notion of a different way of perceiving, and of subsequent
revelation, is common in all statements of the aims and nature of POS (Cameron,
et al., 2004, 2003a; Roberts, 2006). In this sense, POS is like many other
conceptual labels in organization studies, serving as an umbrella term to unite a
range of theories and investigations that share a common theme (Dutton and
Glynn, 2007). "POS draws from the full spectrum of organizational theories to
understand, explain, and predict the occurrence, causes, and consequences of
positivity" (Cameron, et al., 2003a, p. 5).
Precursors of Positive Organizational Scholarship
Obviously, POS did not create the notion of positive behaviors, processes,
and outcomes in organizational settings. Numerous research traditions addressed
such phenomena before POS was established. The most relevant of these are
discussed here, including positive psychology, community psychology, positive
organizational behavior, prosocial organizational behavior, organization
development, and corporate social performance.
Positive Psychology is a movement initiated in 1999 by then-president of
the American Psychological Association Martin Seligman (Seligman, 1999). He
called for psychologists to study positive subjective experience, positive individual
traits, and positive institutions. The stated intent of positive psychology was to
counter the overwhelming research focus on pathology, and to develop "a science
that takes as its primary task the understanding of what makes life worth living"
(Seligman and Csikszentmihalyi, 2000, p. 13). In the years following Seligman's
call, positive psychology has showed considerable popularity and success,
generating extensive research and education (Peterson, 2006; Snyder and Lopez,
2002), including a positive companion to the established handbook of mental
pathology (American Psychiatric Association, 1994; Peterson and Seligman, 2004)
and several interventions for increasing happiness (Seligman, et al., 2005). POS is
often described as the organizational equivalent of positive psychology (Cameron,
et al., 2003a; Dutton and Sonenshein, 2007; Roberts, 2006), and positive
psychology scholars were invited to offer advice in the initial POS book (Peterson
and Seligman, 2003).
Community Psychology is a predecessor of positive psychology.
Community psychologists have advanced principles and practices for fostering
wellness, such as positive self-attitudes, wholesome growth, and personal
integration (e.g., Jahoda, 1958). The emphasis in community psychology has been
on preventing illness, rather than curing it, with the goal of enhancing wellness,
instead of reducing sickness (see Durlak and Wells, 1997 for a review). In this way,
community psychology shares the POS emphasis on desirable, positive
phenomena, rather than negative ones.
Positive Organizational Behavior. Building on the work of the Gallup
organization and its emphasis on strengths in the workplace, Luthans (2002) called
for organizational research on individuals' state-based strengths and capacities,
under the label of positive organizational behavior. Self-identified researchers of
positive organizational behavior describe themselves as distinct from POS on the
grounds that POS is "more macro-oriented" (Luthans, et al., 2005, p. 251) than
their emphasis on psychological capacities (Luthans and Avolio, 2003).
4
Nonetheless, the inaugural POS book (Cameron, et al., 2003b) addressed both
macro and micro topics and included a chapter from the leading scholars of
positive organizational behavior (Luthans and Avolio, 2003). As such, this chapter
makes no distinction between positive organizational behavior and POS.
Prosocial Organizational Behavior. A variety of altruistic "citizenship"
behaviors have been studied in organizations (see Ilies, et al., 2007 and Podsakoff,
et al., 2000 for reviews). This research tradition grew out of the early recognition
that organizations depend upon individuals to do much more than is formally
required of them (Katz, 1964), and led to the study of voluntary efforts to benefit
coworkers and the organization. The focus of this research was thus consistent
with, and supportive of, the eudemonic assumption of POS, given that citizenship
behaviors were defined as benefiting others while providing no formal reward to the
individual engaged in them (Smith, et al., 1983).
Organization Development (OD) provides a series of techniques for
changing and enhancing organizational functioning (Cummings and Worley, 2005)
and is thus concerned with many of the same matters as POS. Of particular
importance to POS is the OD approach known as Appreciative Inquiry, originated
by Cooperrider and Srivastava (Cooperrider, et al., 2000). Appreciative Inquiry is a
technique for guiding organizational change based on previous successes and
peak performance. In Appreciative Inquiry, designing a future state based on the
best of the past serves as a source of learning and power for future organizational
growth (Cooperrider and Whitney, 2005). Formal research on the effects and
contingencies of Appreciative Inquiry is limited as yet (see Burke, 2001), but the
approach is widely employed among OD practitioners.
Corporate Social Performance. Federal governments and international
bodies have urged large organizations to assist in promoting social welfare (e.g.,
OECD, 2000), although opinions about doing so remain divided. While this debate
about the social responsibilities of corporations predates the discipline of
organization studies (e.g., Berle, 1932; Dodd, 1932), corporate social performance
has become an active research literature among organization scientists. Margolis
and Walsh (2003) identified 127 studies of the relationship between companies'
social and financial performance. Similarly, stakeholder theories of organization
examine the potential social benefits that large organizations can produce
(Donaldson and Preston, 1995; Hoffman, 1996; Morris, 1997).
Assumptions Inherent in Positive Organizational Scholarship
Before examining what POS has accomplished, an important point about
initial assumptions should be addressed. POS is premised on the belief that "the
desire to improve the human condition is universal and the capacity to do so is
latent in most systems" (Cameron, et al., 2003a, p. 10). Like the humanism
movement in psychology (Maslow, 1968; Rogers, 1980), POS takes it as given that
individuals and their institutions are inherently eudemonic, that they seek goodness
for its intrinsic value (Dutton and Sonenshein, 2007). This can be contrasted with
other initial assumptions, such as the Freudian view of humanity's conflicted nature
(Freud, 1938) or Hobbes' (1651) belief in humanity's essential brutishness.
Postmodern assumptions about the subjectivity of experience also disagree with
the humanism of POS, since postmodern views tend to reject the existence of any
5
universal aspect of human nature (e.g., Giddens, 1979; Scheurich, 1997). This
issue of initial assumptions is important, because all argumentation depends on
beginning from some fixed point of first principle. An assumption of one kind or
another is inevitable, and what follows from it only makes sense in the context of
that assumption. Since POS begins with the assumption that individuals are
inherently driven to seek that which is positive, most of its claims depend upon the
truth of that assumption.
The logic for grounding POS in the eudemonic assumption was based on
the heliotropic effect (Cooperrider, 1991). Heliotropism is defined as the tendency
of living systems to seek that which is life-giving and to avoid that which is life-
depleting. This effect is shown when organisms move away from darkness toward
light or positive energy (e.g., a plant bending toward the sun). Evidence that living
systems have an inherent inclination toward positive energy and disinclination
toward negative energy has been observed in a variety of disciplines, including the
social and biological sciences.
In the social sciences, numerous instances have been found where
individuals show a preference for positiveness. For example, it has been found that
people are more accurate in learning and remembering positive terms than neutral
or negative terms (Kunz, 1974; Matlin, 1970), and that they are more accurate in
recalling positive stimuli (Akhtar, 1968; Rychlak, 1977; Thompson, 1930). In free
association tasks, people tend to respond with positive rather than negative words
(Silverstein & Dienstbier, 1968; Wilson & Becknell, 1961), and positive items take
precedence when people make lists (Matlin, et al., 1978). People more frequently
recall positive life experiences than neutral or negative ones, and they mentally
rehearse positive items more than negative items (Meltzer, 1930; Stang, 1975).
People seek out positive stimuli and avoid negative stimuli (Day, 1966; Luborsky,
et al., 1963). Moreover, when people see positive and neutral stimuli equally often,
they report that the positive stimuli are more frequent (Stang, 1974; Matlin & Stang,
1975). Positive stimuli are judged to be larger in size than negative or neutral
stimuli (Stayton & Wiener, 1961). Over time positive memories replace negative
memories, and negative memories diminish (Holmes, 1970; Yarrow, et al., 1970).
A similar positive bias is found in language. Positive words have higher
frequencies in all the languages studied, including English, French, German,
Spanish, Chinese, Urdu [India & Pakistan], Russian, Italian, Dutch, Belgian
Flemish, Iranian Farsi, Mexican Spanish, Swedish, Turkish, and Serbo-Croatian.
The preponderance of positive words is present in all types of literature, in formal
and informal usage, in written and spoken communication, and among both adults
and children (Boucher & Osgood, 1969; Matlin & Stang, 1978). It has also be
shown that positive words typically enter English usage more than 150 years
before their negative opposites, so that people were ‘better’ before they were
‘worse,’ and ‘clean’ before they were ‘dirty’ (Matlin & Stang, 1978; Mann, 1968;
Zajonc, 1968; Boucher & Osgood, 1968). Osgood & Richards concluded that: “It
would appear that from time immemorial humans have been differentially
reinforced for strength (rather than weakness), for activity (rather than passivity), . .
. that humans have found believing more reinforcing than doubting, certainty more
than uncertainty, plentitude more than scarcity, asserting more than denying—and
congruity . . . more than incongruity” (1973, p.410).
6
There is equally diverse evidence of heliotropism in the biological sciences.
The basis of evolution is heliotropic, that organisms persist to the extent that they
acquire life-giving resources, processes, and attributes (Smith, 2005). Experiments
with a range of life forms, from bacteria to mammals, find that living organisms
possess an inclination toward heliotropism (e.g., Smith & Baker, 1960; D’Amato &
Jagoda, 1962; Mrosovsky & Kingsmill, 1985). Photosynthesis—the molecular
process of using the sun's energy to create oxygen and biological energy—also
illustrates the relationship between positive energy, in the form of light, and life-
giving processes (Blankenship, 2002).
For the purposes of this chapter, the heliotropic effect was accepted. The
approach taken below is to allow the assumption that human beings are naturally
inclined toward positiveness, so as to take stock of POS on its own terms.
However, to the extent that one believes some other initial assumption is more
appropriate, he or she will view POS as inherently flawed because it begins from a
"mistaken" assumption. It is beyond the scope and concerns of this chapter to
debate the relative merits of one initial assumption over another, but this issue has
been discussed elsewhere (Fineman, 2006; Roberts, 2006).
Positive Organizational Scholarship: Research
As noted earlier, this chapter focuses on the empirical accomplishments of
POS, so only research articles are reviewed here. Others have reviewed the
theoretical basis of POS (Dutton and Glynn, 2007; Dutton and Sonenshein, 2007).
Furthermore, this chapter reviews only articles that could be objectively classified
as “self-identified” POS research. In March 2007, a three-part search for POS
articles was conducted, including: articles listed on the web page of the Center for
Positive Organizational Scholarship (http://www.bus.umich.edu/Positive), an ISI
Web of Knowledge search for works citing the three published statements of POS
(Cameron and Caza, 2004; Cameron, et al., 2003b; Roberts, 2006); and a search
of both the PsycINFO and Proquest databases using variations of the term
"positive organization" in the years 2003 to 2007. The search identified twenty-one
articles that reported research which was explicitly aligned with the POS
perspective (see Table 1). These are discussed below, in six themes.
However, before proceeding, it should be noted that the list in Table 1 is
potentially controversial. It includes work by researchers who are not otherwise
affiliated with POS, and excludes work by researchers who are closely affiliated. A
useful example of the later is a paper by Quinn (2005). This paper uses empirical
evidence to advance a model of flow, which is a desirable, high performance work
state (Csikszentmihalyi, 1996). The author, Ryan Quinn, is listed as a member of
the POS community of scholars (http://www.bus.umich.edu/Positive), and one
might reasonably assume that flow is a POS phenomenon, even though it predates
POS. However, there is nothing in the article itself which explicitly classifies it as
POS research. Unfortunately, while this particular instance seems straightforward,
there are many more cases where the decision to include or exclude an article
would be highly subjective.
The ideal search criteria would have been either a list of POS phenomena or
a concrete definition of “positiveness.” However, as noted above and discussed
below, neither is currently available. As such, we chose conservative, objective
7
search criteria that limited our review to those articles that explicitly connected their
research to POS. Therefore, the list in Table 1 should not be construed as a
judgment. It simply reflects the belief that it would be inappropriate, and likely
misleading, to make a list from our own, inevitably biased, perceptions.
Insert Table 1 here
Individual Virtue and Social Concern. A survey study of white-collar
workers examined the relationship linking hope, gratitude, and responsibility
(Andersson, et al., 2007). Hope was defined as a motivational state of felt agency,
as the belief that one could achieve a desirable effect. Gratitude was a moral
affective state, in which the individual feels motivated toward prosocial behavior, to
"give back" in return for whatever caused the feeling of gratitude. In this study, the
researchers found that gratitude led to greater feelings of responsibility for
employees and social issues if high hope was present. That is, if individuals felt
both grateful and hopeful, then they also felt greater responsibility for other
members of the organization and for extra-organizational social matters.
Similar results were shown in two surveys that linked positive psychology
character strengths to concern about corporate social performance (Giacalone, et
al., 2005). In the first survey, consumers who scored high on trait-based gratitude
and hope were also more concerned that organizations serve multiple purposes so
as to benefit society, rather than simply maximizing profits. The second survey
linked similar concerns about corporate social performance to the traits of
spirituality (transcendent ideals and a desire for meaning in community) and
generativity (concern for future generations). Together, these results suggest that
individual virtue is an important factor in understanding how individuals judge
organizations.
Leadership. There have been several investigations of the role of POS
phenomena in explaining leadership. Bono and Ilies (2006) described a series of
studies showing that leaders who express more positive emotions engender the
same emotions in followers, who then perceive that leader as more charismatic
and effective. Similarly, another study found that Army leaders who expressed
more vision and love satisfied their followers' needs for the same, fostering greater
well-being, commitment, and productivity among followers (Fry, et al., 2005). In the
fast food industry, leader hope has been linked to follower satisfaction and
retention (Peterson and Luthans, 2003). Similarly, a simulation study showed that
group members' assessment of an individual's leadership ability was influenced by
that individual's displayed level of empathy (Kellett, et al., 2006). As a set, these
studies indicate that POS phenomena can assist in predicting and explaining
effective leadership.
Organizational Virtue. A number of studies have examined virtues as
organizational phenomena, with virtue broadly defined as selfless action taken for
the sake of others. For example, one study described how members of a business
school were able to redirect existing organizational systems to support
compassionate responses to individual tragedy (Dutton, et al., 2006). Similarly,
O'Donohoe and Turley's (2006) interview study of newspaper staff dealing with
bereaved clients found the staff engaging in "philanthropic emotion management,"
8
in which they made personal sacrifices for the sake of grieving clients, even though
these sacrifices were neither required nor rewarded by the organization.
There have also been several studies linking virtue to performance. One
study within a health care network showed how units that were supportive of their
members' spirituality produced higher levels of customer satisfaction (Duchon and
Plowman, 2005). Another study, among Dutch sales staff, found that pride was a
source of self-worth, motivation, creativity, and altruism, and thus led to higher
levels of adaptive selling, individual effort, self-efficacy, and citizenship behavior
(Verbeke, et al., 2004). Consistent with both of these studies, Cameron and
colleagues' (2004) report of survey data used organizational forgiveness, trust,
optimism, compassion, and integrity to predict measures of innovation, quality,
turnover, customer retention, and profitability. In a related paper, Bright and
colleagues (2006) found that leaders who took responsibility for the disruptive
effects of downsizing received more forgiveness from followers, and this
forgiveness reduced the performance losses usually created by downsizing.
One feature that all of these studies have in common is a consideration of
the organizational nature of virtue. While it was obviously individuals experiencing
or expressing virtuous behavior, these studies suggest that such expressions of
virtue have the potential to become collective phenomena. Through emotional
contagion, reciprocity, and institutionalization, organizational contexts can
potentially engender virtuous behavior in individuals.
Positive Relationships and Performance. Relationships are another
important source of potential performance benefits investigated by POS. A study of
the airline industry found that carriers with better internal relations showed greater
resilience in the post-9/11 economy; airlines with better internal relations had lower
costs, fewer layoffs, and quicker recovery to pre-9/11 stock prices (Gittell, et al.,
2006). Similarly, an ethnographic study of a midwifery practice showed how that
practice's emphasis on social relationships and humanistic values benefited patient
service and staff development (Wooten and Crane, 2004). And in a study of
management teams, Losada and Heaphy (2004) described how the highest
performing teams on unit profitability, customer satisfaction, and 360-degree
evaluations were characterized by more positive communication and interpersonal
connection among members.
Interestingly, the performance effects observed in all of these studies
resulted from combining positive relationships with some other "non-POS" factor.
For example, Gittell and colleagues (2006) found that airlines recovered more
quickly when they had positive relations and greater financial resources. Similarly,
the successful management teams in Losada and Heaphy (2004) could be
identified by their ratio of positive to negative communication. Interactive effects of
this sort suggest the need to simultaneously consider both POS and “non-POS”
phenomena in studying organizational behavior.
Psychological Capital. This is a second-order construct comprised of
resilience, optimism, self-efficacy, and hope (Luthans, et al., 2007). Several studies
have examined its effects in organizations. One study linked psychological capital
to reduced absenteeism, and found it was a better predictor of involuntary
absenteeism than job satisfaction or organizational commitment (Avey, et al.,
2006). In another study, nurses' psychological capital predicted their own intentions
9
to stay in their job and their supervisors' ratings of their organizational commitment
(Luthans and Jensen, 2005). A third study found that psychological capital
predicted supervisory ratings of worker performance (Luthans, et al., 2005). As
such, the positive individual state of psychological capital has been linked to
improved health, motivation, commitment, and performance, suggesting its
potentially broad importance in understanding organizational behavior.
Absence of Negativity. The importance of a POS perspective depends on
positive phenomena involving more than the absence of negative ones (Cameron
and Caza, 2004; Dutton and Glynn, 2007). If one can achieve POS processes and
outcomes simply by eliminating ineffective practices, then there is little that is
unique about positiveness. However, if there are important differences between
reducing the negative and increasing the positive, then distinct study of positive
phenomena is merited (Roberts, 2006).
Britt and colleagues' (2007) results suggest that there is indeed a difference
between that which is positive and an absence of that which is negative. Their
survey study of soldiers deployed in Kosovo tested the idea that morale, defined as
a positive construct of individual motivation and enthusiasm to accomplish the
organizational mission, was distinct from depression (Britt, et al., 2007). The
authors challenged the prevailing view that morale and depression were opposing
anchors of a single dimension and used their survey results to show that the two
were distinct constructs. While both were influenced by individuals' confidence in
their leaders, meaningful work was only important to morale, whereas stress was
only a predictor of depression. Since morale and depression had different
antecedents, they were distinct phenomena, and this implies that positiveness is
not simply an absence of negativity.
In a similar vein, Pittinsky and Shih (2004) presented indirect support for the
value of a POS perspective. Their survey of Internet and software workers showed
that, contrary to traditional expectations, job change did not reduce commitment to
the organization during tenure. In an era of portfolio careers and high
organizational mobility, most individuals can expect to work for multiple companies,
and this would seem to reduce the potential for commitment to any particular
organization, especially in contrast to an individual who has lifetime employment
with one organization. However, Pittinsky and Shih (2004) showed that this is not
necessarily true, and that commitment was possible even among highly mobile
knowledge workers.
However, not all results were so clearly supportive. Ellis and colleagues'
(2006) lab study suggested that a positive focus is not helpful for task learning.
They used a computer-based business simulation to test the effect of different
after-event review strategies. Participants completed the simulation, and then took
part in facilitated interventions to help them improve their performance. There were
three interventions, one each focusing on successes, failures, or both success and
failure. The results from a second round of the simulation showed that those who
focused only on success did no better than a control group with no intervention,
and that an analysis of failures tended to produce the greatest increase in
subsequent performance. These results may raise some questions about success-
focused interventions, and certainly serve to emphasize the need to address both
positive and negative phenomena in organizations (e.g., Bagozzi, 2003).
10
Summary. The studies described above include a wide range of methods
and contexts, and they cross all levels of analysis. It is therefore clear that POS is
not a focused analytic approach in the way that population ecology or network
theory are defined approaches. However, there are notable regularities across
these studies. One concerns the location of the POS phenomena. Eighteen of the
papers used distinctively POS phenomena to explain traditional outcomes, while
only six studied specifically POS outcomes. Therefore, although POS has been
described as the study of positive enablers, processes, and outcomes, the
research conducted thus far has been primarily concerned with using POS to
explain familiar, "non-POS," outcomes such as profit and retention.
One can also conclude from these studies that there is value in a POS
perspective. The evidence reviewed here suggests that positiveness is more than
the absence of negativity, and so there is a need to study positiveness as such. At
the same time, it seems clear that the ideal approach would be to study relevant
positive and negative phenomena simultaneously. It has been shown that, under
some conditions, positive phenomena can produce undesirable results (e.g.,
reduced learning from a focus on success, Ellis, et al., 2006 or overconfidence
resulting from pride, Verbeke, et al., 2004). Likewise, the benefits of positive
behaviors may be contingent on the presence of other behaviors that are more
traditionally studied in organization studies, such as morale's dependence on
confidence in leadership (Britt, et al., 2007), or positive relationship benefits
depending on adequate financial reserves (Gittell, et al., 2006).
Positive Organizational Scholarship: Practice
Practicing and applying POS in organizations has taken a variety of forms,
including the writing of case studies to document especially positive organizational
performance, developing specific tools and techniques for generating positive
effects among workers, and designing university courses and executive education
programs centered on POS knowledge. Examples include Hess and Cameron's
(2006) case studies of the positive practices used in a variety of organizations. In
addition, specific tools and techniques aimed at enhancing positive outcomes for
individuals or organizations have been developed, such as the Reflected Best-Self
Instrument (Quinn, et al., 2003; Roberts, et al., 2007), the Reciprocity Ring (Baker,
2007), Appreciative Inquiry Summits (Cooperrider and Whitney, 2005), and
supportive communication techniques (Dutton, 2003a; Cameron, 2007). These
tools, and others, are being applied in a variety of organizational settings. Case
studies of extraordinary leaders or organizations also have been produced for
teaching purposes (e.g., Baker and Gunderson, 2005; Bek, et al., 2007; Dutton, et
al., 2002). In addition, undergraduate and graduate courses based on POS have
been designed and taught in several colleges and universities (syllabi for many of
these courses are available at from the Center for POS at
http://www.bus.umich.edu/Positive).
Relative to this volume of applied work, there has been relatively little formal
study of the effect of POS interventions. This is primarily due to the constraints of
detecting effects from planned organizational interventions while controlling for
11
possible confounds. Moreover, organization-level interventions have been rarer
than individual-level ones. However, some reports have been made, with results
suggesting that positivity in practice is associated with higher levels of
performance.
For example, Cameron and Lavine (2006) studied the exceptional
performance of a company that cleaned up and closed a nuclear production facility
60 years ahead of schedule, $30 billion under budget, and to standards 13 times
greater than federally required. This was arguably the most remarkable example of
organizational success in recent memory. More than three million square feet of
buildings had to be decontaminated and removed, over 100 tons of plutonium
residues had to be neutralized and disposed of, and numerous protesters had to
be converted into supporters and advocates. During the cleanup, union members
were motivated to work themselves out of a job as quickly as possible, an
approach contradictory to traditional union priorities, while maintaining levels of
morale and safety that exceeded industry averages by a factor of two. Cameron
and Lavine (2006) explained this remarkable performance as a product of 21
different positive organizational practices.
Another intervention study was reported in which two different organizations
which had been suffering through periods of downsizing and deteriorating
performance each implemented a new change agenda grounded in POS practices.
In both of these organizations performance improvements were significant, and
employees attributed the success to the implementation of POS principles
(Cameron, 2003). Of course, causality could not be determined in either of these
two organizations because data were collected after the turnaround had begun to
occur.
In contrast to the limited study of organization-level practice, there has been
more extensive study of positively-oriented interventions at the individual level,
largely as a result of positive psychology (e.g., Seligman, et al., 2005). However,
because the emphasis here is on POS, only those individual interventions with a
specifically organizational focus are considered. One example is work by Grant
and associates (2007) that found that the perceived meaningfulness of work could
be enhanced by personal interaction. Workers who had direct contact with the
beneficiaries of their work subsequently displayed more task persistence. These
workers also had significantly greater productivity in routine tasks, producing more
than one and a half times the output of those who did not have contact with
beneficiaries.
Baker, Cross, and Wooten (2003) discovered that “positive energizers”
(individuals who uplift and boost others) had higher performance than “negative
energizers” (people who deplete the good feelings and enthusiasm of others). In
fact, individuals who provided positive energy to many people were four times
more likely to succeed than individuals who were at the center of information or
influence networks. Moreover, the performance enhancement associated with
positive energy was also conveyed to those interacting with the energizer. Baker,
Cross, and Parker (2004) further reported that high performing organizations have
three times as many positive energizers as average organizations. Because
positive energy is not a personality trait, but rather a behavioral attribute, training in
12
the enhancement of positive energy was reported to be part of an intervention
agenda in some of these organizations.
The strengths-based research of the Gallup Organization has also led to a
number of organizational training activities. Reports from this training suggest that
identifying employee strengths and then providing the opportunity to use those
strengths produces significant performance enhancements. For example,
managers who spent more time with their strongest performers, as compared to
spending it with their weakest performers, achieved double productivity in their
units. Likewise, in organizations where workers were given a chance each day to
do what they do best, productivity was one and a half times greater than in the
typical organization (Clifton and Harter, 2003).
Taken together, these examples provide some support for the benefits of
POS-related practices in real-world work settings. As yet, not enough is known to
draw firm conclusions regarding the what, how, or when of such interventions, but
there is suggestive evidence that practices based on POS can benefit individuals
and organizations. Thus, in addition to the personal benefit, there may be
organizational reasons to enhance virtues such as gratitude, foster positive energy,
increase work meaningfulness, and build on individual strengths.
Challenges and Opportunities
The most fundamental challenge to POS is clearly whether (or when) its
fundamental humanistic assumption is appropriate. As noted earlier, Fineman
(2006) provides a cogent discussion on this topic, so it will not be duplicated here.
However, even when one accepts the starting premise of POS, a number of
important challenges and opportunities remain. These are discussed below.
Clarifying "Positive." As noted at the outset, POS has yet to offer a
definitive statement about what constitutes positiveness in organizations. The
language used often implies that there is some universal standard by which
positiveness can be judged, but that standard has yet to be specified (e.g.,
Cameron, et al., 2003a; Cameron and Caza, 2004). Most likely there is no easy
resolution to this matter, as shown by the challenges of definition faced in other
fields. Biologists, engaged in the study of life, do not have a universally accepted
definition of life, and most of their proposed definitions involve outcomes rather
than independent criteria (e.g., it is alive if it metabolizes, reproduces, and adapts).
Similarly, Justice Stewart's (Jacobellis v. Ohio 1964) famous remarks about not
being able to define pornography, but knowing it when he saw it, suggest that
recognizing a phenomenon and succinctly defining are very different endeavors
(also see Dutton, 2003b).
At present, consistent with the humanism at the heart of POS, it seems to be
assumed that enabling the inherently eudemonic nature of individuals and their
organizations will lead to positive behavior, create positive dynamics, and produce
positive results. Unfortunately, the empirical evidence suggests more complex
relationships. Positive emotions can produce negative behaviors (Verbeke, et al.,
2004), negative emotions can produce positive behaviors (Bagozzi, 2003), and
positive behaviors may produce negative results (Ellis, et al., 2006; Lee, et al.,
2003). Given this, one has to wonder what ultimately counts as positive. If a cause
13
or process is only labeled positive when it produces a positive result, then the
definition threatens to become circular or meaningless. For example, if it is true
that positive phenomena rarely arise from blissful or tranquil circumstances
(Cameron and Caza, 2004), then discord and turmoil play a crucial role in
generating positive phenomena. Given this, if a positive process is defined by its
positive product, then discord and turmoil would be positive enablers.
There seem to be at least two possible responses to the challenge of
defining positiveness. One would be adopting some prescriptive norm of
positiveness. Some POS researchers seem inclined in this direction (e.g., Spreitzer
and Sonenshein, 2003), and this is the solution used by positive psychology.
Although there is some debate about specifics (e.g., Beutler and Malik, 2002), the
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (American Psychiatric
Association, 1994) provides a broadly accepted description of normal psychology.
As such, it is straightforward for psychologists to define negative as worse than
normal and positive as better than normal. One option for POS is to develop a
comparable standard to serve as the basis for judgments of positiveness. The
other option would be more contingent, requiring specification of the factors and
processes that condition the local meaning of positiveness (e.g., Bagozzi, 2003;
Lee, et al., 2003). Whichever solution is adopted, clarity about positiveness seems
crucial to the continued development and coherence of POS as a perspective.
Positive-Negative Interactions. It has been observed that the most
dramatic examples of positive outcomes are observed amidst poor conditions
(Cameron and Caza, 2004). Moreover, it is intuitively obvious that some positive
behaviors require negative conditions. There is no need for forgiveness without
offense and resilience is meaningless without hardship. Consistent with this,
statements of POS stress the intent to counter an undue emphasis on negative
phenomena, but not to call for an end to such study (Cameron, et al., 2003a;
Dutton and Glynn, 2007; also see Luthans and Youssef, 2007). Nonetheless, the
excitement generated by POS has the potential to lead to over-correction, and the
failure to consider the role of non-positive phenomena (e.g., Bono and Ilies, 2006).
Such over-correction should be avoided, as behavior in organizations is complex
and reliably multi-causal (Mohr, 1982). The full insight of the POS perspective can
likely only be realized in interaction with non-positive phenomena, as shown by the
results reviewed earlier. Consider, for example, that pride can produce positive and
negative outcomes simultaneously (Verbeke, et al., 2004), and that group
performance is explained by the ratio of positive to negative communication
(Losada and Heaphy, 2004). As these examples show, organizational behavior
may be best understood by addressing all relevant phenomena, whether positive
or not.
Integration. One of the early concerns raised about POS was construct
proliferation (George, 2004). This concern is an instance of a more general issue
facing POS, one which is both a challenge and an opportunity, and that is the
integration of POS research. Even just within POS, there are exciting possibilities
for integration. For example, the study described above by Ellis and colleagues
(2006) found that focusing only on success produced little improvement in
subsequent task performance. This seems to suggest that focusing on failures is
the best way to learn from experience. However, one may interpret these results
14
differently in light of the findings in Losada and Heaphy (2004). This latter study
found that management teams were most successful when their communication
consisted of approximately 85% positive comments and 15% negative comments.
As such, one wonders if the best post-event learning strategy might not require
finding the optimal ratio in which to focus on success and failure. More generally,
this example shows the potential benefit of tighter integration within POS research.
The excitement of a new perspective may create a heady, open frontier feeling, but
it seems that theory would advance more quickly with closer connection between
studies.
Of course, the benefits of integration with the larger field of organization
studies are of the same sort, only many times greater (see Dutton and Glynn,
2007). POS faces the need to carefully link its new constructs to relevant existing
ones. The work on leadership offers an easy example, where the findings about
emotion and mood (e.g., Kellett, et al., 2006; Peterson and Luthans, 2003) seem
quite consistent with pre-existing treatments of leadership (e.g., Pescosolido,
2002). Similarly, there would seem to be natural affinities between the POS work
on how virtues influence expectations of corporate social performance (e.g.,
Andersson, et al., 2007; Giacalone, et al., 2005) and the existing work on how
corporate reputation influences individuals (e.g., Albinger and Freeman, 2000;
Fombrun and Shanley, 1990; Turban and Greening, 1997). Such integration will
also be important for establishing the discriminant validity of POS constructs. While
there is evidence that hope and self-efficacy are distinct, despite their apparent
similarity (Magaletta and Oliver, 1999), many other POS constructs have yet to
have their independence verified.
Cultural Specificity. POS has been promoted, and primarily studied, in
developed western cultural settings. However, given the POS assumption that all
individuals share an inherent desire for that which is positive, comparative cross-
cultural research seems essential. For example, comparative anthropologists have
shown that nearly all human societies have some form of incest taboo (Wolf and
Durham, 2005) , experimental psychologists have shown that the fear of snakes
and spiders is a universal human trait (Ohman, et al., 2001), and positive
psychologists have found evidence of shared values in world religious traditions
(Dahsgaard, et al., 2005). Demonstrating similarly wide-ranging findings would
greatly bolster POS claims about universal drives. Without such evidence, any
particular researcher's description of a positive behavior or outcome is subject to
criticisms of being culture-bound, or even hegemonic (e.g., Fineman, 2006).
Moreover, exploring the dynamics of positive organizing in other cultures would
serve to enhance the underlying theory as refinements would surely be required to
correct the cultural idiosyncrasies unconsciously included in the initial theory.
Psychological capital provides an illustrative example of this potential (also
see Schaufeli, et al., 2006). When researchers tested the four-part construct of
psychological capital in China, they found that only three of the four components
were relevant. Resilience, optimism, and hope were measured as usual, but self-
efficacy was dropped from the analysis (Luthans, et al., 2005). Although the
authors did not explain this omission, it presumably reflects the unique nature of
American self-concepts. Kitayama and colleagues (1997) found that American self-
esteem benefited from positive feedback, whereas the absence of negative
15
feedback was more beneficial to Japanese self-esteem. If the same is true in
China, then it is not surprising that the American notion of positive self-efficacy was
uninformative when applied to Chinese workers. Moreover, since the three-part
measure of psychological capital had the predicted relationship with performance,
it suggests that self-efficacy may be ancillary to the core construct. Self-efficacy
may be highly correlated with psychological capital in America, but not in other
cultures. As this example shows, POS needs cross-cultural research, both to
buttress its claims of universality and to refine its theory.
Other Boundary Conditions. Cultural specificity is only one example of
potential boundary conditions relevant to POS. The importance of boundary
conditions is clearly recognized in most theoretical treatments of POS. However,
relatively little research effort has been directed to such issues as yet, though
some interesting possibilities have been identified. For example, Andersson and
colleagues (2007) found that hope and gratitude predicted concern for employees
and social problems, but not for economic, safety, or financial issues.
Understanding why would surely enrich theories of hope and gratitude. An
important direction for POS will thus be defining boundary conditions, and
particularly why positive phenomena are so rare.
The issue of rarity is also important because it raises a potential paradox at
the heart of the POS perspective. When thinking about positive phenomena, one
may reasonably ask whether the positiveness derives from the activity or its rarity.
In other words, is an exceptional behavior positive because it produces a desirable
outcome, or because it produces a desirable outcome that is also rare? Most
discussions have described POS as the study of positive deviance, as the study of
that which is both positive and exceptional (Cameron and Caza, 2004; Cameron, et
al., 2003a; Dutton and Sonenshein, 2007; Peterson and Seligman, 2003). Given
this, suppose that an intervention succeeded in making a positive behavior
commonplace. Would that behavior stop being relevant to the concerns of POS? If
anyone could do it, would it still be positive? Of course, this returns to the issue of
defining positiveness, and thus underscores how fundamental that issue is for the
advancement of POS (also see Weick, 2003).
POS Outcomes. As noted in the literature review, most research attention
has been devoted to understanding how POS phenomena produce familiar
outcomes such as profit and retention. This is presumably to be expected, as the
new perspective seeks to establish its validity within the larger field. However, it
may be that POS can make its most important contributions by offering alternatives
to the familiar outcomes. Given growing public concern about the social role of
large organizations (Margolis and Walsh, 2003; Mitchell, 2001), POS may be
ideally positioned to contribute to this discussion by suggesting precisely what
organizations should be concerned with, in addition to profit and retention (e.g.,
Dutton, et al., 2006).
In concluding this chapter, it is worth noting that the discussion thus far has
omitted what may be the most important accomplishment of POS, both in practice
and research: excitement. In its first four years, POS has generated books, articles,
presentations, cases, workshops, undergraduate and graduate curricula, corporate
programs, and dedicated research centers. Moreover, anecdotal evidence
indicates that many of those involved in POS derive great motivation and
16
satisfaction from it (e.g., Bernstein, 2003; Dutton, 2003b; Luthans, 2002). For these
reasons, it seems wise to remain conscious of the tension between the specificity
demands of theoretical precision and the openness that allows the widest range of
inclusion and discovery.
17
References
Akhtar, M. (1968). Affect and memory: An experimental note. Pakistan
Journal of Psychology, 1:25-27.
Albinger, H. S. and Freeman, S. J. (2000). Corporate social performance
and attractiveness as an employer to different job seeking populations. Journal of
Business Ethics, 28(3):243–253.
American Psychiatric Association. (1994). Diagnostic and statistical manual
of mental disorders. American Psychiatric Association, Washington, DC, 4th
edition.
Andersson, L. M., Giacalone, R. A., and Jurkiewicz, C. L. (2007). On the
relationship of hope and gratitude to corporate social responsibility. Journal of
Business Ethics, 70:401–409.
Avey, J. B., Patera, J. K., and West, B. J. (2006). The implications of
positive psychological capital on employee absenteeism. Journal of Leadership
and Organizational Studies, 13(2):42–60.
Bagozzi, R. P. (2003). Positive and negative emotions in organizations. In
Cameron, K. S., Dutton, J. E., and Quinn, R. E., editors, Positive Organizational
Scholarship: Foundations of a New Discipline, pages 176–193. Berrett-Koehler
Publishers Inc., San Francisco, CA.
Baker, W. (2007). The Reciprocity Ring. Center for Positive Organizational
Scholarship, University of Michigan.
Baker, W. and Gunderson, R. (2005). Zingerman’s Community of
Businesses. Center for Positive Organizational Scholarship, University of Michigan.
Baker, W., Cross, R. and Parker, A. (2004). What creates energy in
organizations? Sloan Management Review, 44: 51-56.
Baker, W., Cross, R. and Wooten, M. (2003). Positive organizational
network analysis and energizing relationships. In Cameron, K. S., Dutton, J. E.,
and Quinn, R. E., editors, Positive Organizational Scholarship: Foundations of a
New Discipline, pages 328-342. Berrett-Koehler Publishers Inc., San Francisco,
CA. Bek, J., Benedetto, K., Feldman, E., Goldenberg, S., Jaffe, A., Lavery, B.,
Martin, C., Waller, A., Dutton, J.E., Grant, A.M., and Russo, B. (2007). A
Foundation of Giving: How One Company Cares for Its Employees. Center for
Positive Organizational Scholarship, University of Michigan.
Berle, A A, J. (1932). Corporate powers as powers in trust. Harvard Law
Review, 45(6):1049–1074.
Bernstein, S. D. (2003). Positive organizational scholarship: Meet the
movement: An interview with Kim Cameron, Jane Dutton, and Robert Quinn.
Journal of Management Inquiry, 12(3):266–271.
Beutler, L. E. and Malik, M. L., editors (2002). Rethinking the DSM: A
psychological perspective. American Psychological Association, Washington, DC.
Blankenship, R.E. (2002) Molecular Mechanisms of Photosynthesis.
London: Blackwell.
Bono, J. E. and Ilies, R. (2006). Charisma, positive emotion and mood
contagion. Leadership Quarterly, 17:317–334.
18
Boucher, J. and Osgood, C.E. (1969). The Pollyanna hypothesis. Journal of
Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 8: 1-8.
Bright, D., Cameron, K. S., and Caza, A. (2006). The ethos of virtuousness
in downsized organizations. Journal of Business Ethics, 64(3):249–269.
Britt, T. W., Dickinson, J. M., Moore, D., Castro, C. A., and Adler, A. B.
(2007). Correlates and consequences of moral versus depression under stressful
conditions. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 12(1):34–47.
Burke, R. M. (2001). Appreciative inquiry: A literature review: Appreciative
Inquiry Commons Working Paper.
Cameron, K. S. (2003). Organizational virtuousness and performance. In
Cameron, K. S., Dutton, J. E., and Quinn, R. E., editors, Positive Organizational
Scholarship: Foundations of a New Discipline, pages 48–65. Berrett-Koehler
Publishers Inc., San Francisco, CA.
Cameron, K. S. and Caza, A. (2002). Organizational and leadership virtues
and the role of forgiveness. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies,
9(1):33–48.
Cameron, K. S. and Caza, A. (2004). Contributions to the discipline of
positive organizational scholarship. American Behavioral Scientist, 47(6):731–739.
Cameron, K. S., Bright, D., and Caza, A. (2004). Exploring the relationships
between organizational virtuousness and performance. American Behavioral
Scientist, 47(6):766–790.
Cameron, K. S., Dutton, J. E., and Quinn, R. E. (2003a). Foundations of
positive organizational scholarship. In Cameron, K. S., Dutton, J. E., and Quinn, R.
E., editors, Positive Organizational Scholarship: Foundations of a New Discipline,
pages 3–13. Berrett-Koehler Publishers Inc., San Francisco, CA.
Cameron, K. S., Dutton, J. E., and Quinn, R. E., editors (2003b). Positive
organizational scholarship: Foundations of a new discipline. Berrett-Koehler
Publishers Inc., San Francisco, CA.
Cameron, K.S. (2007). Building relationships by communicating
supportively. In Whetten D.A. and Cameron, K.S., editors, Developing
Management Skills, pages 229-272. Prentice Hall: Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Cameron, K.S. and Lavine, M. (2006). Making the Impossible Possible.
Berrett Koehler: San Francisco, CA.
Caza, B. B. and Caza, A. (2007). Positive organizational scholarship: A
critical theory approach. Journal of Management Inquiry.
Clifton, D. O. and Harter, J.K. (2003). Investing in strengths. In Cameron, K.
S., Dutton, J. E., and Quinn, R. E., editors, Positive Organizational Scholarship:
Foundations of a New Discipline, pages 111-121. Berrett-Koehler Publishers Inc.,
San Francisco, CA.
Cooperrider, D.L. (2000). Positive image, positive action: The affirmative
bias of organizing. In Cooperrider, D.L., Sorenson, P.F., Whitney, D., and Yeager
T.F. (Eds.) Appreciative Inquiry, (pp. 29-53). Champaign, IL: Stipes.
Cooperrider, D. L. and Whitney, D. (2005). Appreciative inquiry: A positive
revolution in change. Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc., San Francisco, CA.
Cooperrider, D. L., Sorenson, P. F., D, W., and Yeager, T. F., editors (2000).
Appreciative inquiry. Stipes, Champaign, IL.
19
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996). Creativity: Flow and the psychology of
discovery and invention: Harper Collins, New York, NY.
Cummings, T. G. and Worley, Christopher, G. (2005). Organization
development and change. Thomson South-Western, Mason, OH, 8th edition.
D’Amato, M.R. and Jagoda, H. (1962). Effect of early exposure to photic
stimulation on brightness discrimination and exploratory behavior. Journal of
Genetic Psychology, 101(2) 267-271.
Dahsgaard, K., Peterson, C. and Seligman, M. E. P. (2005). Shared virtue:
The convergence of valued human strengths across culture and history. Review of
General Psychology, 9(3): 203-213.
Day, H. (1966). Looking time as a function of stimulus variables and
individual differences. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 22:423-428.
Dodd, E Merrick, J. (1932). For whom are corporate managers trustees?
Harvard Law Review, 45(7):1145–1163.
Donaldson, T. and Preston, L. E. (1995). The stakeholder theory of the
corporation: Concepts, evidence, and implications. Academy of Management
Review, 20(1):65–91.
Duchon, D. and Plowman, D. A. (2005). Nurturing the spirit at work: Impact
on work unit performance. Leadership Quarterly, 16:807–833.
Durlak, J. A. and Wells, A. M. (1997). Primary prevention programs for
children and adolescents: A meta-analytic review. American Journal of Community
Psychology, 25:115–152.
Dutton, J. E. (2003b). Breathing life into organizational studies. Journal of
Management Inquiry, 12(1):5–19.
Dutton, J. E. and Glynn, M. (2007). Positive organizational scholarship. In
Cooper, C. and Barling, J., editors, Handbook of Organizational Behavior. Sage,
Thousand Oaks, CA.
Dutton, J. E. and Sonenshein, S. (2007). Positive organizational scholarship.
In Lopez, S. and Beauchamps, A., editors, Encyclopedia of Positive Psychology.
Blackwell Publishing, Malden, MA.
Dutton, J. E., Worline, M. C., Frost, P. J., and Lilius, J. (2006). Explaining
compassion organizing. Administrative Science Quarterly, 51(1):59-96.
Dutton, J.E. (2003a) Energizing Your Workplace: Building and Sustaining
High Quality Relationships at Work. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Dutton, J.E., Quinn, R., and Pasick, R. (2002) The Heart of Reuters. Center
for Positive Organizational Scholarship, University of Michigan.
Ellis, S., Mendel, R., and Nir, M. (2006). Learning from successful and failed
experience: The moderating role of kind after-event review. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 91(3):669–680.
Fineman, S. (2006). On being positive: Concerns and counterpoints.
Academy of Management Review, 31(2):270–291.
Fombrun, C. and Shanley, M. (1990). What's in a name? reputation building
and corporate strategy. Academy of Management Journal, 33(2):233–258.
Freud, S. (1938). The basic writing of Sigmund Freud. Modern Library, New
York, NY. translated by A. A. Brill.
20
Fry, L. W., Vitucci, S., and Cedillo, M. (2005). Spiritual leadership and army
transformation: Theory, measurement, and establishing a baseline. Leadership
Quarterly, 16:835–862.
George, J. M. (2004). Book review of "positive organizational scholarship:
Foundations of a new discipline". Administrative Science Quarterly, 49(2):325–330.
Giacalone, R. A., Paul, K., and Jurkiewicz, C. L. (2005). A preliminary
investigation into the role of positive psychology in consumer sensitivity to
corporate social performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 58:295–305.
Giddens, A. (1979). Central problems in social theory: Action, structure, and
contradiction in social analysis. University of California Press, Berkeley, CA.
Gittell, J. H., Cameron, K., Lim, S., and Rivas, V. (2006). Relationships,
layoffs, and organizational resilience: Airline industry responses to September 11.
Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 42(3):300–329.
Grant, A.M., Campbell, E.M., Chen, G., Cottone, K., Lapedis, D., and Lee,
K. (2007) Impact and the art of motivation maintenance: The effects of contact with
beneficiaries on persistent behavior. Organizational Behavior and Decision
Processes, (forthcoming).
Hess, E.D. and Cameron, K.S. (2006) Leading with Values: Positivity,
Virtue, and High Performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hobbes, T. (1651). Leviathan: The matter, forme, and power of a common-
wealth ecclesiasticall and civill. Andrew Crooke, London, UK.
Hoffman, A. J. (1996). A strategic response to investor activism. Sloan
Management Review, Winter:51–64.
Holmes, D.S. (1970). Differential change in affective intensity and the
forgetting of unpleasant personal experiences. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 15: 234-239.
Ilies, R., Nahrgang, J. D., and Morgeson, F. O. (2007). Leader-member
exchange and citizenship behaviors: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 92(1):269–277.
Jahoda, M. (1958). Current concepts of positive mental health. Basic Books,
New York, NY.
Katz, D. (1964). The motivational basis of organizational behavior.
Behavioral Science, 9:131–133.
Kellett, J. B., Humphrey, R. H., and Sleeth, R. G. (2006). Empathy and the
emergence of task and relations leaders. Leadership Quarterly, 17:146–162.
Kitayama, S., Markus, H. R., Matsumoto, H., and Norasakkunkit, V. (1997).
Individual and collective processes in the construction of self: Self-enhancement in
the unites states and self-criticism in Japan. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 72:1245–1267.
Kunz, D. (1974). Response faults on word association as a function of
associative difficulty and of affective connotation of the words. Journal of
Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 42: 231-235.
Lee, F., Caza, A., Edmondson, A. C., and Thomke, S. (2003). New
knowledge creation in organizations. In Cameron, K. S., Dutton, J. E., and Quinn,
R. E., editors, Positive Organizational Scholarship: Foundations of a New
Discipline, pages 194–206. Berrett-Koehler Publishers Inc., San Francisco, CA.
21
Losada, M. and Heaphy, E. D. (2004). The role of positivity and connectivity
in the performance of business teams. American Behavioral Scientist, 47(6):740–
765. Luborsky, L. Blinder, B., and Mackworth, N. (1963). Eye fixation and recall of
pictures as a function of GSR responsivity. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 16:469-
483. Luthans, F. (2002). The need for and meaning of positive organizational
behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23:695–706.
Luthans, F. and Avolio, B. (2003). Authentic leadership development. In
Cameron, K. S., Dutton, J. E., and Quinn, R. E., editors, Positive Organizational
Scholarship: Foundations of a New Discipline, pages 241–258. Berrett-Koehler
Publishers Inc., San Francisco, CA.
Luthans, F. and Youssef, C. M. (2007). Emerging positive organizational
behavior. Journal of Management, 33(3), 321-349.
Luthans, F., Avey, J. B., Avolio, B. J., Norman, S. M., and Combs, G. M.
(2006). Psychological capital development: Toward a micro-intervention. Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 27:387–393.
Luthans, F., Avolio, B. J., Walumbwa, F. O., and Li, W. (2005). The
psychological capital of Chinese workers: Exploring the relationship with
performance. Management and Organization Review, 1(2):249–271.
Luthans, F., Youssef, C. M., and Avolio, B. J. (2007). Psychological capital.
Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.
Luthans, K. W. and Jensen, S. M. (2005). The linkage between
psychological capital and commitment to organizational mission: A study of nurses.
Journal of Nursing Administration, 35(6):304–310.
Magaletta, P. R. and Oliver, J. m. (1999). The hope construct, will and ways:
Their relations with self-efficacy, optimism, and well-being. Journal of Clinical
Psychology, 55:539–551.
Mann, J.W. (1968). Defining the unfavorable by denial. Journal of Verbal
Learning and Verbal Behavior, 7:760-766.
Margolis, J. D. and Walsh, J. P. (2003). Misery loves companies: Rethinking
social initiatives by business. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48:268–305.
Maslow, A. (1968). Toward a psychology of being. Van Nostrand: New York,
NY. Matlin, M.W, and Stang, D.J. (1978) The Pollyanna Principle: Selectivity in
Language, Memory, and Thought. Cambridge, MA: Schenkman Publishing.
Matlin, M.W. (1970). Response competition as a mediating factor in
frequency-affect relationship. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 16:
536-552.
Matlin, M.W. and Stang, D.J. (1975). Some determinants of word frequency
estimates. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 40: 923-929.
Matlin, M.W. Stang, D.J., Gawron, V.J., Freedman, A., and Derby, P.L.
(1978). Evaluative meaning as a determinant of spew position. Journal of General
Psychology.
Meltzer, H. (1930). The present status of experimental studies on the
relationship of feeling to memory. Psychological Review, 37:124-139.
22
Mitchell, L. E. (2001). Corporate irresponsibility: America's newest export.
Yale University Press, New Haven, CT.
Mohr, L. B. (1982). Explaining organizational behavior. Jossey-Bass, San
Francisco, CA.
Morris, S. A. (1997). Internal effects of stakeholder management devices.
Journal of Business Ethics, 16(4):413–424.
Mrosovsky, N. and Kingsmill, S.F. (1985). How turtles find the sea. Z.
Tierpsychology, 67: 237-256.
O'Donohoe, S. and Turley, D. (2006). Compassion at the counter: Service
providers and bereaved consumers. Human Relations, 59(10):1429–1448.
OECD (2000). Is there a new economy? Technical report, Organisation for
Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris, France.
Ohman, A., Flykt, A., and Esteves, F. (2001). Emotion drives attention:
Detecting the snake in the grass. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,
130(3):466–478.
Osgood, C.E. and Richards, M.M.. From Tang to Tin to and or bit.
Language. 49:380-412.
Pescosolido, A. T. (2002). Emergent leaders as managers of group emotion.
Leadership Quarterly, 13(5):583–599.
Peterson, C. (2006). A primer in positive psychology. Oxford University
Press, New York, NY.
Peterson, C. and Seligman, M. E. P. (2003). Positive organizational studies:
Lessons from positive psychology. In Cameron, K. S., Dutton, J. E., and Quinn, R.
E., editors, Positive Organizational Scholarship: Foundations of a New Discipline,
pages 14–28. Berrett-Koehler Publishers Inc., San Francisco, CA.
Peterson, C. and Seligman, M. E. P. (2004). Character strengths and
virtues: A handbook and classification. Oxford University Press, New York, NY.
Peterson, S. J. and Luthans, F. (2003). The positive impact and
development of hopeful leaders. Leadership and Organization Development
Journal, 24(1):26–31.
Pittinsky, T. L. and Shih, M. J. (2004). Knowledge nomads: Organizational
commitment and worker mobility in positive perspective. American Behavioral
Scientist, 46(6):791–807.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Paine, J. b., and Bachrach, D. G.
(2000). Organizational citizenship behaviors: A critical review of the theoretical and
empirical literature and suggestions for future research. Journal of Management,
26(3):513–563.
Quinn, R. W. (2005). Flow in knowledge work: High performance experience
in the design of national security technology. Administrative Science Quarterly,
50(4), 610-641.
Quinn, R.E., Dutton, J.E., and Spreitzer, G.M. (2003) Reflected Best Self
Exercise. Center for Positive Organizational Scholarship, University of Michigan.
Roberts, L. M. (2006). Response – shifting the lens on organizational life:
The added value of positive scholarship. Academy of Management Review,
31(2):292–305.
23
Roberts, L.M., Dutton, J.E., and Spreitzer, G.M. (2007) Bringing My
Reflected Best Self to Life. Center for Positive Organizational Scholarship,
University of Michigan.
Rogers, C. R. (1980). A way of being. Houghton Mifflin, Boston, MA.
Rychlak, J.F. (1977) The Psychology of Rigorous Humanism. New York:
Wiley-Interscience.
Schaufeli, W. B., Bakker, A. B., and Salanova, M. (2006). The measurement
of work engagement with a short questionnaire: A cross-national study.
Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66(4):701–716.
Scheurich, J. J. (1997). Research method in the postmodern. Falmer Press,
Washington, DC.
Seligman, M. E. P. (1999). The president's address. American Psychologist,
54:559–562.
Seligman, M. E. P. and Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000). Positive psychology:
An introduction. American Psychologist, 55:5–14.
Seligman, M. E. P., Steen, T. A., Park, N., and Peterson, C. (2005). Positive
psychology progress: Empirical validation of interventions. American Psychologist,
60(5):410–421.
Silverstein, A. and Dienstbier, R.A. (1968) Rated pleasantness and
association value of 101 English nouns. Journal of Learning and Verbal Behavior,
7:81-86.
Smith, C. A., Organ, D. W., and Near, J. P. (1983). Organizational
citizenship behavior: Its nature and antecedents. Journal of Applied Psychology,
68(4):653–663.
Smith, J.C. and Baker, H.D. (1960). Conditioning in the horseshoe crab.
Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 53(3): 279-281.
Smith, J.M. and Dawkins, R. (2005). The Theory of Evolution (Canto).
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Snyder, C.R. and Lopez, S.J. (2002). Handbook of positive psychology.
Oxford University Press, New York, NY.
Spreitzer, G. M. and Sonenshein, S. (2003). Positive deviance and
extraordinary organizing. In Cameron, K. S., Dutton, J. E., and Quinn, R. E.,
editors, Positive Organizational Scholarship: Foundations of a New Discipline,
pages 207–224. Berrett-Koehler Publishers Inc., San Francisco, CA.
Stang, D.J. (1975). Student evaluations on twenty-eight social psychological
tests. Teaching of Psychology, 2:12-15.
Stayton, S.E. and Wiener, M. (1961). Value, magnitude, and accentuation.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 62:145-147.
Thompson, R.H. (1930). An experimental study of memory as influenced by
feeling tone. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 13: 462-467.
Turban, D. B. and Greening, D. W. (1997). Corporate social performance
and organizational attractiveness to prospective employees. Academy of
Management Journal, 40(3):658–672.
Verbeke, W., Belschak, F., and Bagozzi, R. P. (2004). The adaptive
consequences of pride in personal selling. Academy of Marketing Science Journal,
32(4):386–402.
24
Weick, K. E. (2003). Positive organizing and organizational tragedy. In
Cameron, K. S., Dutton, J. E., and Quinn, R. E., editors, Positive Organizational
Scholarship: Foundations of a New Discipline, pages 66–80. Berrett-Koehler
Publishers Inc., San Francisco, CA.
Wilson, W.R. and Becknell, J.C. (1961). The relationship between the
association value, pronouncability, and affectivity of nonsense syllables. Journal of
Psychology, 52: 47-49.
Wolf, A. P. and Durham, W. H., editors (2005). Inbreeding, incest, and the
incest taboo: The state of knowledge at the turn of the century. Stanford University
Press, Stanford, CA.
Wooten, L. P. and Crane, P. (2004). Generating dynamic capabilities
through a humanistic work ideology: The case of a certified-nurse midwife practice
in a professional bureaucracy. American Behavioral Scientist, 47(6):848–866.
Yarrow, M.R., Campbell, J.D., and Burton, R.V. (1970). Recollections of
childhood: A study of the retrospective method. Monographs of the Society for
Research in Child Development, 35: Serial 5.
Zajonc, R.B. (1968). Attitudinal effects of mere exposure. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 9:1-27.
25
Table 1. Summary of POS research articles
Article Relevant Findings
Andersson, et al., 2007
Given hope, gratitude increases organizational
concern for social issues
Avey, et al., 2006
Psychological capital reduces absenteeism
Bono and Ilies, 2006
Positive emotion is a source of charismatic
leadership
Bright, et al., 2006
Leadership responsibility increases organizational
virtue; organizational virtue buffers against the
negative effects of downsizing
Britt, et al., 2007
Morale is distinct from depression; meaningful work
fosters morale
Cameron, et al, 2004
Organizational virtue improves organizational
performance
Duchon and Plowman, 2005
Unit spirituality leads to greater customer
satisfaction
Dutton, et al., 2006
Traditional organizational systems can be
redirected to organize and support expressions of
compassion
Ellis, et al., 2006
Failure teaches more than success
Fry, et al., 2005
Leader spirituality increases follower well-being,
commitment, and productivity
Giacalone, et al., 2005
Virtuous consumers are more concerned with the
social performance of organizations
Gittell, et al., 2006
Positive relations improve organizational
performance
Kellet, et al., 2006
Empathy is a source of leadership ability
Losada and Heaphy, 2004
Positive communication creates interpersonal
connection, leading to better group performance
Luthans and Jensen, 2005
Psychological capital increases commitment to the
organization
Luthans, et al, 2005
Psychological capital improves individual
performance
O'Donohoe and Turley, 2006
Organizational compassion leads to more care for
customers
Peterson and Luthans, 2003
Leader hope increases profit, retention, and
satisfaction
Pittinsky and Shih, 2004
Career mobility does not reduce commitment to the
organization
Verbeke, et al., 2004
Pride can benefit individual performance
Wooten and Crane, 2004 Valuing relationships improves unit performance
26