Introduction Since the 1930s there has been a countless arrangement of interest in the relationship between employee well-being and productivity. Hersey (1932) reported a positive relationship between daily emotions and performance, whereas Kornhauser and Sharp (1932) reported that worker attitudes (more cognitive valuations of happiness) were altogether unrelated to efficiency. Knowing whether or not happiness in the workplace promotes productivity has important inferences for management and strategies for workplace improvements.
SWB is also comprehensive term comprised of numerous, empirically distinct theories. For example, emotional experience (often operationalized as the independent dimensions of positive affect and negative affect) is correlated with, yet separate from, more cognitive appraisals of subjective well-being such as life happiness (at a global level) or various field satisfactions, such as job satisfaction (see Diener 2005; Kim-Prieto et al. 2005).For years, organizational psychologists deliberated the idea that happy workers would be better performers and more productive. It makes some instinctive sense, right? If you are feeling positive, it appears like you’d be more motivated to get things complete and go through your day with a decent attitude. However, the results around this idea were slightly mixed until people started speak about the alteration between job satisfaction and well-being. 1.1 Rationale for the Happy/Productive Worker HypothesisTheory Y management suggests that happier people will be more productive, and many empirical findings are consistent with this idea.
For example, Bolger and Schilling (1991) found that employees who were more prone to negative emotions were more likely to use contentious interpersonal tactics and thus provoke negative reactions from co-workers. According to Cropanzano and Wright (2001), less happy employees are more sensitive to threats, more defensive around co-workers, and more pessimistic. Conversely, happier employees are sensitive to opportunities, more helpful to co-workers, and more confident.1.2 Productivity and Job SatisfactionWeiss and Cropanzano (1996) stated to the search for a relationship between job satisfaction and also job performance as the ‘Holy Grail’ of organizational behavior study, and the happy-productive worker hypothesis has been widely studied (e.g.
, Judge et al. 2001; Ledford 1999; Staw and Barsade 1993). The mutual theme running through these studies is the certainty that employees who are happier or more gratified with their job will also be well performers on those jobs. Despite the emotional relish of set conceptions of ‘happiness,’ job satisfaction scales do not typically emphasis on emotions, instead asking employees to amount their satisfaction with their wage, working conditions, job as a whole, etc. (e.g., Brayfield and Rothe 1951; Quinn 1979). Fisher (2000, 2003) recommends that this measurement decision contributes to feeble or varying findings.
1.3 Productivity and other Measures of HappinessRecent reviews and theorizing have suggested that affect, especially positive affect, will be particularly important to productivity (Cote´ 1999; Lucas and Diener 2003; Lyubomirsky et al. 2005), but findings are nonetheless mixed. For example, Staw et al. (1994) offer compelling evidence for an association between affective experiences at work and productivity. The authors employed a longitudinal design and found that reports of affect and depression predicted both pay and performance evaluations some 18 months later.
In addition, Fisher (2003) found that affect predicted job performance better than job satisfaction did. However, some studies have failed to find an association between affect and performance (e.g., Wright and Staw 1999) and others have disagreed over whether positive affect (e.g.
, Staw and Barsade 1993) or negative affect (e.g., Wright et al. 2004)isa stronger predictor of performance.1.4 The Present StudyAlthough the bulk of research suggests some association between happiness and productivity, the details of this relationship remain unclear. Central issues include the many ways happiness has been operationalized, and whether state and/or trait happiness predicts productivity.
To address these questions we conducted a study utilizing multiple happiness indicators, assessed as both states and traits.2.1 Definition of Subjective Well-Being (SWB)Subjective well-being means that how people assess their lives. It’s a normal positive state that involves the whole life experience. This assessment may take the form of cognitions when person makes conscious evaluative judgment about their satisfaction with life as whole. A person is having high subjective well-being if he is satisfied with his life and having frequent positive experiences or emotions such as joy and happiness and in frequent negative feeling such as sadness and anger (Diener, Sandvik & Pavot, 1991). Subjective well-being is a trait not a state. Many researchers argue that individual have a ‘set-point’ for happiness level and this is fixed and crucial part of our performance.
So, SWB is very important as without it human beings shrink their skill to gather desired assets and weaken their ability to handle and remain flexible in the face of challenges (International Well being Group, 2006). 2.2 Subjective well-being at WorkAccording to Diener’s (2006) definition of SWB, an employee has elevated work related SWB if he is satisfied with his job and have frequent positive experiences and infrequent negative emotions. Positive emotions are employees’ experiences at work investigative of engagement, happiness or satisfaction.
Diener (1994) also stated that when SWB, term is read it must be immediately noted that it’s not the same as happiness but synonymous to it. It can be defined as broad category that includes people’s emotional response, domain satisfactions and global judgments of life satisfaction. Sleigman (2002) also said that positive psychology is the scientific study of how humans achieve happiness and mental satisfaction, in order to discover how people can lead the most productive lives possible.
It is about positive subjective experience i.e. well being ad satisfaction. In short, positive psychology is a science of subjective well-being.
2.3 Positive forms of Work related SWBWork engagement: it is defined as “an optimistic, gratifying, work related state of mind that is portrayed by vigor, dedication, and absorption” (Schaufeil and Bakker, 2010). Its position in circumplex model is at upper right quadrant resembling high levels of pleasure and activation. Vigor means high level of energy while working and persistence even in the face of difficulties, dedication means being strongly in ones on work and experience a sense of enthusiasm and lastly absorption mean being fully concentrated in ones own work . Because of engaged employees’ positive attitude towards them selves, employees’ buildup their own positive feed back in terms of appreciation, recognition and success (Bakker, 2009). Happiness at work: numerous researchers have connected subjective well-being with the term happiness (Cropanzano and Wright, 1999; Easterlin, 2001; Sleigman, 2002; Lyubomirski, 2001). It refers to high level of activation as being satisfied and some hat lower as being excited.
According to Fisher, (2003) more than 90% of workers agree that happy workers are productive workers as they are more active, energetic and interested in work and persistent to face difficulties as compared to unhappy employees. It is important to distinguish happiness as a specific emotion from other measures that cover a range of positive and negative emotions (Veenhoven, 1984).2.4 Negative Forms of Work-related SWBWorkaholism: it is placed in the upper left of the quadrant reflecting lower levels of pleasure and high levels of work activation workholism is an inner drive to struggle and work hard (Oates1971).
According to Tris, Schaufeil and Shimzau (2010), workholism is an employee has compulsion to work incessantly and give exceptional time to work and to meet expected organizational requirements.Burnout: it’s placed in the lower left of the circumplex model reflecting low levels of pleasure and activation. According to Masiach and Jackson (1986) it was originally conceived as work related syndrome that most often occurs among individuals who work with other people.
Consistent with our categorization of SWB according to circumplex model and some researches have suggested that burnout is the opposite of work engagement (Gonalez-Roma-Schaufeil, Bakker and Lloret, 2006).The subjective well-being construct is comprised of four different components:? Life satisfaction (universal judgment of one’s own life).? Satisfaction with necessary life domains ( family, health work)? Positive affect ( many positive emotion and moods experienced)? Low negative affects ( familiar with few unpleasant emotions and moods)Dolan and White (2006), regard as these mechanisms of SWB as divisible elements.
a person for example who have high level of positive affect for a particular event will be dissatisfied because he has failed to achieve personal aim. Alternatively, an individual experiencing negative affect may be satisfied by comparing himself to an individual in less favorable situation. There are cross cultural differences in happiness and life satisfaction that are not completely explained by income differences. Bradburn (1969) study showed that Subjective well-being was moderately associated with adjustment, neuroticism, work satisfaction and family situation, but were considerably associated to each other.Conclusion References