_ 0 B.J.Diketa ‘nang C. Dik B., We & Zhang. J. 2015), Wark a calling ia Chi A quaitatiestady (of Chinese college students Journal of Creer Asesament, 292), 296-249. hip op TH711090072714535009, ‘hang, C Hermann, A. Hirsh, Ay Wei J, & Zhan J. (201). Assessing cling in Chisese ‘college tants Development fama dit elation ope dou f Carer Aresomen, 22), 582-596, psd el 1.11 TH1059072715595808, ‘Bryan J. Dik (PRD) is professor of psychology at Colorado Sta University ad also cofounder sn Chie? Science Oticerof jb Zolgy. Bryan stalin meatng an! porose i the were, Calling and vation in carer development, an the nreton of ith and work, nd as ub. lished widely on these ope, ryan fas served on etre bars for seven earch ounals anus collaborated on four books, including Make Your Job Calling: Hew the Payholoy af Nweation Can Change Tour Life at Work He i an American Paychologcal Associaton Felon snd recipient ofthe 2017 ton Holland Award for Outstanding Achievement im Carer oP Sonality Research (APA Div. 17) and the 2018 Api Psyeholgy of Reigon and Spitualiy ‘Avard (APA Di. 36). He lives with his wife Amy and thee fur sons in Fst Coins, Color, [Brian A. Canning ceive his B.A. n glish from the Universty of New Hampsbie, where be ‘war involved i nersscipinary researc. He ie cutealy pursuing is PRD, incounsing py cogy at Colorado State Univers Bian i caren inven esearch roy prin 0 ‘he dtrmiantes and outcomes of cling and meaning-making. lato, Bran studies ear of ‘deh andteror management theory. In respon othe negative behavial utcomes found pr ‘sively nthe err management Herat, Bras work seks to luinae modes of postive ‘eltonhip with morality ha maximize personal an sci wel being Dan R. Marsh is eradate set in the Counseling Psychology Ph.D. Program Colorado Stat University. He received his B.S. in apchology at Ursin Clepe n 2014. Dylan's research primarily ocuses onthe expeiene of meaning, especialy theleel of svaions, nd sense of Ealing in he work domain psychological Capital Development in Organizations: An Integrative Review of Evidence-Based Intervention Programs 5 Marisa Salanova and Alberto Ortega-Maldonado Abstract Psychological Capital (PsyCap i recognized and well investigated set ‘of psychological resources comprised of self-efficacy optimism, hope, andresilience, ‘and it has been empirically shown to be a good predictor of many important pos- itive atitudes and behaviours, such as psychological well-being, job performance, ‘and goal achievement. PsyCap is an emerging, relevant, and applied topic related to scholarly and professional organizational management activity around the world in the workplace because it can be developed through interventions among employ ces and leaders. However, there is a lack of comprehensive reviews and updates of the research on PsyCap interventions in workplaces, which might be very useful far both researchers and practitioners developing, implementing or validating Pos- tive Organizational Interventions. This chapter reviews and synthesizes the PsyCap Jnterventon literature on both specific micro-interventions and broader and more extensive PsyCap development programs. Moreover, cultural differences have been found to be important in Positive Psychology Interventions (PPI), and so we pa ticulaely examine and summarize cultural differences in the PsyCap development literature. To provide a comprehensive and integrative perspective on this emerging issue, we base our analysis ona recent integrative review in which we systematically searched different types of publications, both research and professional literature, including journal articles, doctoral dissertations, books, chapters, and conference Papers. Our conclusions shed light on PsyCap intervention research and practice, 1nd they may help Human Resource Development (HRD) professionals to make evidence-based decisions when implementing PsyCap development peograms. Keywords Psychologica capital »PsyCap development» PsyCap, cullural-ifferences » Evidence-based interventions MM, Salanova(62)- A. Ortega Manado \WANT Research Team, Department of Seca Psychology, Univesta aune Casellon de la Plana, Castel, Span mm: snlnorajies © Springer Naar Switzeriand AG 2019, " 1B Van Zand. Retina Sed) Paste Psychological Iiervenion Desig and Protocol for Mul-Caltural Contest, Indio 10.1007°9783-03020020-5 4 ——2 IM, Saino nd A Oxtegs Maldonady List of Abbreviations HRD Human Resource Developmes OCB Organizational Citizenship Behaviours PCI Psychological Capital Intervention POB Positive Organizational Behaviour PP Positive Psychology Interventions PsyCap_ Psychological Capital 1 Introduction Since the beginning ofthe wenty-first century, we have boen living inan increasingly dynamic, global, and uncertain business world. The information and telecommuni- cations revolution emerged about twenty years ago, and globalization has become ‘reality. Puthermore, a global economic and financial crisis began ten years ago, seriously affecting consumers, workers, and organizations worldwide. In this new socioeconomic era, contemporary organizations will ot be the same (Luthans, ‘Youssef-Morgan, & Avoli, 2015). Organizations have Wo face dynamic and chang ing environments, and they need sustainable resources with distinet advantages and a competitive edge (Kraaijenbrink, Spender, & Groen, 2010; Le Blanc & Ocrlemans, 2016). In this scenario, according to the wesouree-based theory (see Newman, Ucbasaran, Zhu, & Hits, 2014), accumulating traditional material resources (i. financial and technological capital) and recruiting experts with many years of experience (Le., human and social capital) may be insufficient strategies or organizational success (Luthans etal, 2015), anda sustainable and developable workforce could be of vital importance for viability and a competitive advantage (Le Blane & Oerlemans, 2016). ‘Thus, atthe beginning of the new century, Positive Organizational Behaviour (POB) emerged as a new evidence-based management and practice approach, sress- ing the role of Human Resource Development (HRD) asa strategic resource (vali- able, rare, and imperfectly imitable) to obtain a competitive edge (Luthans, Youssef, & Avolio, 2007; Newman et al., 2014). The main focus of POB is on developing employees” psychological resources in order to enhance their psychological well- boeing and performance levels, through positive interveations, asa valuable tool to increase workforce sustainability (Le Blanc & Oerlemans, 2016; Luthans, Avey, ‘Avolio, Novian, & Combs, 2006) ‘A recognized and well investigated st of psychological resources that is highly involved in task performance and goal achievement is krown as psychological capi: {al orsimply PsyCap (Luthans, Youssef, ta, 2007) [tis defined as “an individual's positive psychological state of development that is charctrized by (I) having con Fidence (efficacy) to take on and putin the necessary effet o succeed at challenging tasks; (2) making a positive attribution optimism) abou: sueceeding now and inthe ~~ prycnlopical Capital Development in Organizations 8 future; 3) persevering toward goals and, when necessary redirecting paths to goals {hope in order 1 succeed; and (4) when beset by problems and adversity sustaining ‘and bouncing back and even beyond (resiliency) to attain sucess" (Luthans eta, 2015, p.2). The four psychological resources of PsyCap have empirically been found to make up s higher-order care construct in which they interac in a synergetic way (Lthans, Avolio, Avey, & Norman, 2007) In other words, the whole is greater than the sum of its pats, PsyCap isa dynamic topic that has experienced rapid growth in te literature (Luthans & Youssef-Morgan, 2017), “There are compilations on the theoretical predictive relationship between PsyCap and employee attudes, behaviours, and performance (Lathans eta, 2015; Luthans, Youssef, tal, 2007), as well as numerous literature reviews (Dawkins, Martin, Scott, & Sanderson, 2013; Luthans, 2012; Lurhans & Youssef:Morgan, 2017; Newman ct a, 2014) and meta-analyses (Avey, Reichard, Luthans, & Mhatre, 2011) on this topic, Generally, the PsyCap literature supports the higher-order factor steucture of the core construct, the prediction of desirable levels of performance (self-reported, ‘managerrated, and objective performance), and positive altitudes and behaviours such as problem solving, imovative behaviour, organizational citizenship behaviours (OCB), commitment, job satisfaction, and psychological well-being (Abbas & Raja, 2015; Avey, Luthans, Smith, & Palmer, 2010; Avey, Luthans, & Youssef, 2010; Avey, ‘Wernsing, & Luthans,2008; Baron, Franklin, & Hinieleski, 2013;Chot & Lee, 2014; Culbertson, Fullagar, & Mills, 2010; Li, 2013; Luthans, Luthans,& Jensen, 2012: [Lathans, Avey, Clapp-Smith, & Li, 2008; Luthans, Avolio, etal. 2007; Lathans, voli, Norman, & Avey, 2006; Luthans, Avolio, Walumbwa, & Li, 2005; Peterson, Lthans, Avolio, Walumbwa, & Zhang, 2011; Rego, Marques, Leal, Sousa, & Pina Cunha, 2010; Youssef & Luthans, 2007), as wel asthe prediction of lower levels of undesirable attudes and behaviours such as absenteeism, counterproductive work behaviours, cynicism, deviance, ob search behaviours, stess, and turnover intentions (Abas & Raja, 2015; Avey, Luthans, & Jensen, 2009; Avey, Pater, & West, 2006; Avey etal, 2008, Avey Luthans, & Youssef, 2010; Choi & Lee, 2014), ‘Moreover, PsyCap has been conceptualized—and empirically demonstrated —as 4 malleable state-like psychological resource, which means tht it ean be dev ‘oped through Positive Psychology Interventions (PPIs) (Lathans, Avey, & Patera, 2008; Lurhans etal, 2015), making ita very interesting variable for practitioners Wino want to invest in evidence-based positive ations now in order to reduce future costs. Since Luthans and colleagues proposed the Psychological Capital Interven- tion (PCT) model (Luthans, Youssef, et al., 2007), cumulative body of research on PsyCap development has been published. There is empirical evidence about face face micro-interventions (Lathans. Avey. Avolio, & Peterson, 2010) and web:hased interventions (Luthans, Avey, & Patera, 2008) in samples of students and employees (Dello Russo & Stoykova, 2015), people at risk of social exclusion (Rew, Powell, Brovin, Becker, & Slesnick, 2017), and expattiate workers (Reichard, Doll, & Louw-Poigieter, 2014). The majority ofthe PsyCap intervention literate replicates the PCI, However, some ofthe research is based on PCI, but introduces some va ations (Rew etal, 2017), developing a new PsyCap intervention approach (Zhan, Li, Ma, Hu, & Jiang, 2014) or combining PsyCap and stengths interventions (Mey: ee eee eeeM. Samora and A, Ort Maldonado es, Van Woerkom, De Reuver, Bak, & Obersk, 2015). There is also evidence of a syCap increase atthe end ofthe intervention (Luthans, Avey, & Patera, 2008), and even afer follow-up period (Reichard eta, 2014). Moreover, PsyCap development Increases positive outcomes in performance levels (Luthans etal, 2010), assertive- ness (Demerouti, Beuwik, Saelder, & Will, 2011), postive emotions (Reichard etal, 2014), and job satisfaction (Harty, Gustafsson, Bjérkdahl, de Motler, 2016), However, (othe best of our knowledge, there has bees no comprehensive review ‘and update of the research on PsyCap interventions, which might be very useful for both researchers and practitioners engaged in Work and Organizational Positive Psychology. To begin to fill this gap and facilitate more rigorous HRD and per- formance programs and increase practitioners’ confidence in PsyCap interventions, ‘Orcega-Maldonado (2018) performed an integrative review of 32 works on PsyCap interventions, including different types of publications such as journal articles, doc- ‘oral dissertations books, chapters, and eonference papers (reviewed studies appear in Table 1). Based on this work, inthis chapter we synthesize different published strategies, procedures, and methodologies fr PsyCap development and analyse their cffetiveness and results, We especially explore whether tere are cultural differences in PsyCap development, and we compare the advantages and disadvantages ofeach imtervention, 2. Method ‘To provide a comprehensive and integrative perspective on PsyCap intervention, (Ortega-Maldonado (2018) systematically searched in hs dissertation both research and professional literature, including journal aricles, dectoral dissertations, books, chapters, and conference papers. Fist, three databases on business, management, and psychology were searched (ie. PsyeNet, ABVINFORM complete and ProQuest Central), Two keywords were used as deseripors (“psychological capital” and "Psy: Cap"), combined with one operator “and” (“inerventin") in two different fed “ile” and “abstract. Literature on PsyCap interventions was selected for review only if, after reading the abstract, it met all of the follwing inclusion criteria: (1) they were focused on PsyCap interventions (application and evaluation), (2) they ‘were written in English or Spanish, and (3) they were accessible either searching in the author's University electronic library or requesting from the corresponding authors by email, ‘Second, the search was completed by using additional sources of information. such as publications included inthe Google Scholar and Resezrchgate profiles ofthe main, PsyCapauthors, or articles published in atopie-related, specific, applied jourmal:"*The Positive Work and Organizations: Research and Practice PWORPY’, which belongs toa scienifc and professional association: the Work and Organizations Division of the International Positive Psychology Association (htp:fwww ippanetwork.org) "To analyse the literature a complete reading of each selected literature source ‘was conducted identifying the intervention objective, characteristics and proce- _ psychological Capita Development in Ormnizations 8s ‘ule PsyCapinterveaton procedues organized by duration (Org Maldon, Tinine 10min 1 7a Teh Teh teh iets Tah Th Tash Vay Computer-based (aii) Facet fe sop) Face t-ice roup) Frceo-fice (group) (arp) (eroup) Face e (ere) (grow (romp) Fraceto fae gow) (sop) Frcetoce (gow) Invention Flow up| Sad mmol seivins | (Crear of | trina) [caine | hang oat | mrenion ats. rer 7 Gait 010 var tas, Ar, | sta) 2000), 0° | Rey (201). bo eS uienes | 2016, tans, tes at ‘vey 1, ans, Ae, eta 2008, 2o10) Gooner Rekhadet a PyCap ting nie Pap - sn, il deveopasn Denia ‘ting ‘pan C2015) {imi Pe Pct Labs Ave stl 200, tata, coon ra Laas, Neal ta. | eo ERO - | Dato Reso workshop | 2014, Dello ‘mart Pc) Rasa | Stykove 201) Per ie | Died 2015) SOAR penn |e aoie bern | ror Welly Hodges D1) pines | vets) ‘Stengtis | Homeworks | Meyer end Van 2017 ‘contnsed) eee eee eeeyr 8 M. Sano and A Ones Maldonado pyle Capa Deeopmea in Oraations " Tile conined) rile (oni Ti Thpeat scion [Inervenion Flew p [Suds ining pe ofsesion [Increnion [Fallow wp [Stes sl seine moa saves Trane of (Trans of ‘inag) vain) Ty Facettice | Skengihe 2st Meera aah Frcciwiice [Heath eiak | Welty phone Row al ‘era inerenion —[bomeverkusts | 015) Goon) tetavoursand [reminder | 17 vets an scan ‘areas) St imereton Wey Fe tolace | Deciensy | 2st Meyer ta Tish anew |Conpueresed [PCT (RCL+ |x 1Smin | Hargrove O12) ‘erp inervenion —/bomevorktasks 15) 2ncSmin |sadtaeiorace | snes) sebasl vets and ina | fonevark mente) Petnseninr 245min | Computed | CI 7 Lathan ta Sah Frectefies | Progam on Hany ea Sain cam owes) —_|tomp) [postive fas e016 Te hited) |Faetotce | Naviging be | Baume 8) seth Freeiodice | Poa on Hay a (ore) college (aoweeks) | eeup) ‘| comtactne e016 experience | room sling | ‘smart PCD anh Frceteiiee | PCD Kelman and 2xAh(day [Facet | PyCap son (2008 Ginn) ou) Sunn (2017) ow run) components 2x2 Faeeoiice | Cer - Babin a Giowels) | oop) evelopment 201 Ax Ish _[Faeolofoee Briereience |Premark | Steric Soy, mrseton (Gress) ——|Gnid) comeing |actiies | Mons and sed on browne ison 201) Psyc 3x3 Facstoface | Posive Willams, Ker Noinfomation Faces | RET - Dent ta Gonsetve |g Pacholory tad Wars, Gon | (eat) ys) ining zoe ‘Nae IDR = Jo-Denan Resouces: PCDTI = Pcl Capit Deelpment Tang Inerenton; BC = Pgeologie Capita renin: PCT = Pycolgial Capi Tring Fx dhGwosks) |Facciofiee UDR HHewock | Vn Winged, eT = Ratona-emoie Therpy; SOAR =Suengh, Opyrtit, Aspen, Real arp) Fmervewion —[taobeween [Balter and feaoe2ends [Des 206) (Gea) Seas — ses — ee ek re ee dure ie design, patcipans, timing, and schedule), andthe main resus spayed ules fesse [elatecean [Deka a (ix. PsyCap increase outcomes andeffectsignficanceandsize).Inoelertohomoge- Fnercaton |sospn2and 3 | Bathr(20°7) nize the data reported by every study reviewed the percentage ofincrease or decrease | ves imeach variable fom each study was calculated. Hsosiows | Facetoze [oberg | Homeverk | Vn Wingeen (@veets) | igeun) inerention —faksbetueen eta C017) ters a3 | Gwe) 3. Developing PsyCap Through a Specific uations Facetofice | Pnonal | Homework | Vn Wingard Micro-intervention: The PCI Model Goes) | gun ources-+job [tsteween [etal 2017), | crating tcxsbn ad 3 imenevon (eve As Table 1 shows, most ofthe PoyCap interventions found in the Herature (85) ene are mieo-iterventions, a highly focused and very shot strategy (1 oF 2 sessions) for developing this set of psychological resources (Luthans, Avey, et al, 2006). Micro-interventions ar a highly cost-effective tool for HRD practitioners and man:8 IM, Saanovaand A. Ole Maldonado agers (Luthans et a., 2015) that might lead organizations towards a culture of health and resilience (Salanova, Llorens, Cire, & Martinez, 2012). OF these micro- interventions the most popular procedure for developirg PsyCap to date isthe Py: chological Capital Intervention model (PCI (Luthans, Avey, etal, 2006). At leas 38% of the studies reviewed conducted PCI, ether th original version proposed by Fred Luthans and colleagues or an adapted or similar intervention based on the PCI proposal. PCI is a micro-intervenion that generally consists of a 1-4 h group workshop designed to develop PsyCap through differen strategies to increase patic- Jans’ levels of each ofthe four PsyCap components, Based on previous research on self-efficacy, hope, optimism, and resilience development, PCI presents participants with a wide range of activites designed to develop each resource through several cognitive and affective strategies (Luthans, 2012). Moreover, due tothe higher-order core construct property af PsyCap, the PCT approach isa synergetic model based on increasing PsyCap through the reinforcing effects of developing its components in the activities performed (For more information about PCI, see Luthans, Avey, etal., 2006; Luthans et al, 2015; Luthans, Youssef, et al, 2007). Next, we synthesize the psychological strategies detected inthe literature review to develop each ofthe syCup components. ‘Hope development strategies are mainly grounded in Snyder’s (2000) theory and research on Hope, which proposes two primary cognitive processes for hope ‘building: will: power (agency) and way-power (pathway). Hope is conceptualized as postive goal-directed motivational state, and so several activities to improve the individual's goal design capacity were suggested in te literature, Thus, activites such as SMART goal-setting (designing Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant ‘and Time-bound goals, stepping (dividing goals ito soveralsub-goals), and learn- ing to fit goals to personal values and challenges, are conducted to enhance agency (Luthans eta, 2015). On the other hand, way-powerisadressed asa pathway gen- craton capacity to overcome obstacles. Activities are focused on learning to adopt ‘an approach orientation rather than an avoidance orientation, obstacle planning and designing alterative pathways, and positive self-talk taining. Participants usually ‘work on their own the fist time and then share thei ideas and reflections through _aroup activities. Practices such as real task-teated role-play are also performed in hhope development training. ‘Optimism development strategies are mainly based on the positive expectancy {efiition ofthis positive resource (Seligman, 2011). Optimism training is focused fn learning to accept the past, appreciate the present, and be confident through ‘opportunity-seeking for the future. Suggested activites ae again sel talk taining it positive and realistic expectations and reported activitos such as the “best positive self” exercise (Sheldon & Lyubomirsky, 2006) and the ABCDE model (Seligman, 2011), Thisis.a cognitive strategy to address life's had circumstances, hecome aware ‘ofreal Adversity, elf-related Beliefs, and eal Consequences, Dispute personal nega- tivebeliets, and Energize proative behaviour to overcome sethacks. Because PsyCap is ahigher onder construct, optimism i also developed though hope, self-efficacy, and resilience training, yr prycoogsal Capital Development in Organizations » Se-efeacy development strategies are grounded in social cognitive theory (Ban ura, 1997), which proposes self-efficacy development via five psychological pro- ceses: ask mastery, vicarious leaning and role modelling, social persuasion, poi tive feedback, and physiological and psychological arousal, Activities suggested in tne PsyCap development iterature are visualization (mastery-experienees) and com: tnanication skis exercises (positive Feedback). Moreover, seletfcacy is tained through group interaction (social persuasion and facilitator interaction (modeling) Resilience development strategies are designed to obtain an ideal resilience pro ces, charaterized by having a realistic and objective perception of negative events and performing ideal reactions when sthacks aise, The iterventios reviewed focused on thee well-recognized elements of resilience: (1) increasing ase factors, {@) decreasing risk factors, and (3) enhancing an adaptive perception of influence processes when adverse events occur (Masten, 2001). Thus, suggested activities to Jnetease asset factors included recognizing and increasing personal, group, and ong rizatonal resources, such as personal reflexion and communication skill exercises Suggested activities to decrease risk factors were focused, onthe one hand, on dim ishing stressors through visualizing, anticipating, and planning obstacles inorder to proatively void the risk of adversities. On the eter hand, activities were focused fon mobilizing the power of the individual's adaptation system through taining in adaptive coping and problem-solving strategies, enhancing stress management skill, nd practicing goal-setting exercises, Suggested activities for enhancing the adap. tive perception of influence processes when adverse evens eur involved cognitive reframing of adverse events (ABCDE mode!) In summary, the resilience develop- tment srategies were mostly designed to inerease participants’ level of control and pathway generation when obstacles arse and interfere withthe desired gal 3.1 Miero-interventions’ Efficacy PCL or similar PsyCap micro-iterventions are conceptualized as & cost-effective tool for developing PsyCap. However, scholars and practitioners might wonder \whethor this procedure is really effective and worthwhile in terms of HRD investment (Lathans & Youssef Morgan, 2017). According to our review, the average PayCap inerease after this type of intervention was 3.11%, ranging from ~5.60%; (decrease) to 7.50%, with the majority obtaining an increment of 2-45, Moreover, some of these studies obtained an increase of about 5% (Dello Russo & Stoykova, 2015; Entosun eta, 2015: Reichard et al, 2014), and one developed PsyCap by 7.508 (Reichard etal, 2014). The increase in PsyCap participants levels was statistically significant, except forthe study conducted by Bauman 2014). ect sizes reported were small (Cohen's d ranged from 0.19 100.40) (Bauman, 2014; Luthans, Ave, & Patera, 2008, 2010), which is consistent with effect sizes inthe Positive Psychology interventions literature (See Bolier etal, 2013, fora positive interventions meta- "Some atts did ot report information about significant diterences, a Ry0 IM, Salanoa and A, Ortega Manat analysis), However, (Wo of the micro-interventions reviewed were not successful in increasing PsyCap participants’ levels, which hardly increased (0.40%) or even decreased (~5.60%) (Griffith, 2010; Hodges, 2010). Despite of these unsuccessful resulls weren't statistically significant, it was argued that their results may be due to the so-called ceiling effet (i. participants’ level scored near the uppe limit at the pre-test so that developing PsyCap through the intervention was almost impossi- ble) (Grifith, 2010), Furthermore, dhe qualitative data were successful in reporting ‘changes inthe variables of study (Hodges, 2010). 4. Developing PsyCap Through Broader Positive Psychology Interventions ‘As Table I shows, other interventions for developing PsyCap consist of general PPL (Williams et a, 2016) or specific PP, such as strengths development (Bell, 2016; ‘Meyers & Van Woerkom, 2017; Meyers tal,2015), persona resourcesinterventions (Van Wingerden et al, 2017), and postive focus trainig and constructive problem solving exercises (Harty etal, 2016). Moreover, the PsyCap intervention literature also utilizes Organizational ot Clinical Psychology procedures to enhance partci- pans" PsyCap lovels, such as Ells Rational-Emotive Therapy (RET). For example, Demerouti etal (2011) conducted a training program based on this psychother ‘peutic approach with 36 Dutch employees, showing an increase inthe four PsyCap dimensions after the training intervention. Unfortunately, there was no control group to compare training program effects. More recently, Manesh and Shibani (2018) ‘conducted an Ellis intervention model to promote the psychological capital of 60 ‘experts working in industrial centees inthe Iran KhodeoDiesel Company. They used ‘randomly controlled design with experimental and costrol groups. The experimen- tal group received taining in 10 two-hour sessions using the Ellis rational emotive behavioural method, and results supported the inerease in PsyCap in these employees ‘compared tothe control group, even on the follow-up measures, ‘Other Work and Organizational psychology interventions, such as creer develop ‘ment Babinchak, 2012), job crafting intervention (Van Wingerden etal, 2017), job ddemands and resources intervention (Van Wingerden, 2016), coaching (Sherlock: Storey tal, 2013), savouring (Sytin, Brit, Sawhney, Wilson, & Keith, 2018), and personal branding interventions (Bell, 2016), appeared inthe literature as PsyCap ‘developmen strategies. Furthermore, researchers also designed PsyCap development btnategoe that combine PCI and specifie postive contents. There are combinations ‘of PCI and happiness (Hodges, 2010), stress management (Hargrove, 2012), health ‘behaviour avoidance (Rew et al, 2017), and even cross-cultural interactions (Reichard etal, 2014). However, itis important to noe that there is also research on PayCap development based on traditional Psychology either with traditional con- {ents such as deficiency intervention (Meyers etal, 2015) or tational procedures such as a reading intervention Zhang et al, 2014), - chological Captal Development in Organizations 3 Finally, regarding the interventions conducted in more than two sessions (42%), they obsained an average increase of 4.56%, ranging from 1.20 1 8.88%. Two of these lengthenedPsyCap interventions obtained an increase of about 8% (Babinchak, 2012; Demeroat et al, 2011). The nest ofthe studies (N = 9) reported an increase in paticipans’ PsyCap levels of about 1, 2, or 4%. These interventions again obtained fan increase in participants’ PsyCap levels, and his increment was statistically signi icant (except fr Hargrove, 2012). Moreover, he Van Wingerden eta. (2016) study reported a large effet size ofthe intervention (jp = 27), even when otherrated evaluations were used (d = 0.89) (Demerouti etal, 2011), 5 Comparing Micro Versus Long-Term Interventions Many of the studies reviewed (62%) reported between groups comparisons. These ‘comparisons were successful a wide range of studies, both in micro- and long-term interventions. Inthe case of PCL or similarly successful comparison studies, Bauman (2014) and Luthans etal, 2014) obiained highly significant diflerences bewoen the PCI condition and a control or waiting list condition in university students. In tuition, Zhang et al. 2014) found that using a brief 30-min structured reading ‘mateials-based PsyCap intervention significantly increased participants’ levels of PsyCap, compared to workers who did not participate. Highly significant results ‘were also found in long-term PsyCap intervention. Babinchak (2012) reported a significant development of students’ PsyCap levels, compared to a waiting list in his eareer development program consisting of 20 two-hour sessions in 10 weeks. Moreover, some of the PsyCap micro-intervention literature did not find si: nificant differences beween participants and contol groups ar a WL (waiting, list) condition (or did notreport them). Some of this litraturecarred out PCI with univer sity students and workers (Evtosun etal, 2015; Luthans, Ave, etal, 2006; Luthens cet, 2010; Luthans, Avey,& Patera, 2008), whereas three studies Comesponded to extended PsyCap programs conducted at work, such as positive psychology taining, interventions (Williams et a, 2016), job crafting taining (Van Wingerden eta, 2017), and PCT plus stress management (Hargrove, 2012). However, some of the reviewed research reported inconsistent results. Thus, on the one hand, we found some PCI o similar studies that reported unsatisfactory effects in group comparison results (Grifth, 2010; Hodges, 2010; Larson, 2004; O” Reilly, 2016). Methodolog cal problems in conducting he interventions and ceiling effets due to high baseline levels of PsyCap were discussed by the authors as possible explanations for these negative results. On the other hand, four-week health risk behaviour and PsyCap intervention did not eport satisfactory results when comparing the wo conditions (Rew et al, 2017). However, participants inthis program were a population at social risk and it must be kein mind tha PsyCap development was not originally designed for people with mental health problems 5c ott LE LZ2 IM Salata and A Ortega Makonat 5.1 PsyCap Interventions’ Durability Some of the reviewed studies (24%) reported follow-up measures designed to assess ‘the durability ofthe PsyCap intervention effets. The rests reported generally sup port the sustained effects of PsyCap micro and long-terminterventions, measuted in ‘arange from? weeks to 6 months. Bauman 2014) measured PsyCap two weeks after ‘a micro-intervention ended and found that participants levels of PsyCap remained at the baseline level. However, the waiting list levels significantly decreased (5.8%, p< (01), and this difference between groups was highly significant (p <.05, »’p =.18), confirming the post-intervention results. Additionally, ether researchers performed the follow-up measure one month after the last taining session, For example, Wo mnero-interventions showed maintenance of participant" increased PsyCap levels after the program ended (Dello Russo & Stoykova, 2015; Meyers & Van Woerkom, 2017), These results were confirmed in between compar'sons. For instance, signif «ant diferences with small effect sizes were found between the experimental and WI. conditions in two studies: Dello Russo and Stoykova (2015) (p <.05, d = 34) and Meyersand Van Woerkom (2017) (p<.05,?p =.05)-Aditionally atthe one-month follow-up after a long-term intervention (Rew etal, 2017), PsyCap levels continued ‘increase inthe experimental condition, but the WL. alsoreported a similar increase, Regarding longer follow-up research designs, Reichard et sl. (2014) measured PsyCap betwen one and wo months after their eros-cultral PsyCap micto- intervention ended. They Found that participants’ PsyCap evels remained higher than baseline (p <.01), even though the scores were lower than in the post measurement ‘The same results were found by Zhang et al. (2014) ina three-month follow-up: furthermore, they found large signilicant differences between participants in their short reading intervention and the WL (p<.01). Additionally, asix:month follow-up study ofa ten-week program on constructive problem-solving reported higher levels ‘of participants’ PsyCap compared to baseline (Harty etal, 2016) Finaly, the study by Meyers etal. 2015) reported wo different follow-up mea- sures after the first and third month, where PsyCap levels of participants showed 4 “rolleroastes” patter. They increased after the micro-intervention, started to decrease one month ater, and finaly reached the highest scores inthe thi! month, ‘These results ae consistent with PsyCap's definition asa state-like and developable psychological resource (Lathan, Youssef, et al. 2007), 5.2 PsyCap Interventions and Positive Organizational Outcomes: Some of the reviewed PsyCap interventions were designed to enhance not only participants’ PsyCap levels, but also positive organizational outcomes such as employee performance, ether self-reported or manager-rated. In both micro and Jong-term interventions, in-role self-reported performance was positively devel- > prssolonel Co ta Development in Organizations os coped. Van Wingerden et al. (2016) found a significant 1.75% inerease in part pants’ performance compared toa WL (p<.05) after five-week JD-R intervention ‘Zhang etal. 2014) conducted a short reading intervention and found a significant increase of 3.8% in participants’ performance, compared to a WL (p< 001), which ‘remained alter three months (p <.05). Extending the sel-reported measure of perfor. ‘nance, some studies combined self-reported measures with manager-ratings, show: ing increases on both measures (Hodges, 2010; Luthans eta, 2010). Moreover, ‘Luthans and his team reported a high and significant increase in participans" se epoted performance (10.89%, p<.01,d =.96) and a small and significant increase in manager-rated performance (6%, p <.05, d = 38). In adtion to job performance enhancement, thee studies aimed o increase pos- ive job atitudes, Demeorout etal. 2011) found a high significant inerease in both self-reported (14.6%, p<.001,d = 1.27) and other-rated 9.55%, p<.001,d = 085) assertiveness after participating in a RET program, Reichard eal, 2014) reported ‘high significant increase in participants’ cultural intelligence ater a cross-cut PsyCap micro intervention (4.25%, p <.001), and this increase was maintained two ‘months later (4%, p <.01). They also reported a decrease in levels of negative at tudes, such as ethnocentrism at work, at both the post (3.605, <.001) and follow-up measures (1.9). Similar positive effects were found after a brief resilience coaching rogram that achieved a 10.93% (p < 01) increase in readiness for organizational change (Sherlock-Storey etal, 2013) The PsyCap intervention literature also aims t improve employees” health and ‘wellbeing at work. Regarding engagement, the literature reviewed reported incon- sistent results. A longer, general positive resources intervention obtained a 5.83% increase in engagement, which was significantly different from a WL. (p <.01) (Van ‘Wingerden eta, 2016). However, wo PsyCap micro-interventions did not obtain ‘work engagement improvements, compared tothe experimental condition and WL. (Hodges, 2010; Meyers & Van Woerkom, 2017). Positive results have been found ‘with job satisfaction (4% increase), positive emotions (10.6%, p < 001), and work happiness (1%) (Harty etal. 2016; Meyers & Van Woerkom, 2017; Reichard etal, 2014; Williams ea, 2016) Finally, Meyers etal. (2015) reported positive results on amore general well-being measure: personal growth initiative. I'showed an increase of about 8.4% after strengths intervention and about 4.4% afteradefcieney-solving intervention. These results remained stable at |- and 3-month follow-up measures. Additionally, the literature review showed psychological variables and cognit, ‘mechanisms related to the effectiveness of PsyCap interventions, such as partic: ants’ levels of taining eansfer motivation and perceptions of cepanizational virtues (Giff, 2010; Williams etal. 2016). Moreover. participants reposted higher levels ‘of positive selective exposure (focus on positive stimuli) than WL members (Sand 0.186%, respectively) (Wiliams eta, 2016) i9 IM, Solinova and A Ortega Maldon 53° Qualitative Data Some of the reviewed articles provided qualitative dat to complement the quan- titative information about the effectiveness of PsyCap interventions. Kalman and ‘Summak (2017) conducted a qualitative study to explore the participants” evaluation ofthe experience of a PsyCap intervention. Content analysis of semi-structured intr views revealed participants’ general saisoction with the intervention implements tion. They found the program to be useful for their persoaal and professional growth, and they described having higher levels of personal awareness, positive affect, and efficacy in problem-solving after the intervention. Moreover, some of the literature reviewed used mixed methodology with quantitative and qualitative daa, The ual itative data generally confirmed the PsyCap intervention effects found in quantitative research, This iterature suggested that participants understood what PsyCap means, and they benefitted fom the training transfer of the resoures developed to ther daily ‘work lives. They reported positive changes at work, feling more positive emotions and facing dificultes with » more positive approach by being, more aware of their personal resources (Diedrich, 2015; Hargrove, 2012; Harty et al. 2016; Hodges, 2010; Van Wingerden et al, 2017). 6 ‘Transfer ‘Training Approaches ‘The main goal of POB traning intervention is not only to obtain changes immed: ately after the intervention, but also to ensure that positive resources acquired during teaining will bo useful in daly work life, in orde to tly provide an organizational competitive edge (Nielsen, Randall, & Christensen, 2015). According to this pro posal and related tothe follow-up methodology explained above (Bauman, 2014; Dello Russo & Stoykova, 2015; Harty etal, 2016; Meyers & Van Woerkom, 2017, Meyers eta, 2015; Reichard et al.,2014; Zhang eta, 2014), some ofthe reviewed sudies designed activities for taining transfer. The mst widely utilized strategy ‘was planning short daily or weekly follow-up “homework” tasks to develop PsyCap indaily work life, These activities were performed between the intervention sessions (Meyers et al, 2015; Van Wingerden et, 2017) or when all the sessions had ended (Hargrove, 2012; Hodges, 2010; Meyers & Van Woerkom, 2017), and they were based on reinforcing and practicing the PsyCap contents learned during the sessions (Ge. specific behaviours and cognitions) Electronic deviees were utilized by some of these studies reviewed, such as a web-based “hontewors” format (Hargrove, 2012) or weekly phone reminders to participants (Rew eta, 2017). Finally, one ofthe PsyCap intervention studies did ot report post-intervention tasks, bu rather pre-interventon activities. Sherlock-Storey etal (2013) conducted abet resilience coaching program with managers froma public organization, They required participants to complete some workbook activities related tothe intervention before the first meeting with the coach assigned fo them, _ rycholopeal Capital Development in Organizations 9s Research on PsyCap has considered the relevance of cultural differences inthis con- siruet There are numerous studies on this topic, with aspects emerging such as: dhe ‘evidence of cultural differences in Psycap (Dorling, 2017), measure sensitivity tocul- tural differences (Lépez-Nanez, de Jess, Viseu, & Santana-Cérdenas, 2018), impli- cations of measuring cross-cultural PsyCap in employees who work internationally for within a diverse workplace (Dollwet & Reichard, 2014), and cultural boundary conditions of current tools employed for empirical research on PsyCap (vey, 2014), Moreover, there are evidence for a cross-cultural nine-item PsyCap instrument with three factors, based on a large study with a sample of 56,363 employees from 12 national cultures (GLOBE project) (Wernsing, 2014), oF even forthe identification of cultural psychological capital as an important resource for expatriates (Avey, Nimmnicht, & Pigeon, 2010; Yunlu & Clapp-Smith, 2014), Regarding the PsyCap intervention literature, as we show in this chapter, there are studies on employees, supervisors, students, and unemployed people across different jobs, organizations and even countries, However, regarding counties, itis impoctant fo note thatthe majority of the research was conducted in Western contexts, for example, in the USA (53%) and Europe (34%, specifically in Bulgaria, Ireland, The Netherlands, Turkey, Spain, Sweden, and UK). However, there were only three staies in Asia (vo in China and one in Tran), one in South Ameria (Venezuels), ‘one in Afticn (South Africa), and one in Oceania (Australia), So far, there are many ‘more studies in Wester counities on PsyCap intervention that could be replicated in other Eastern cultures and countries in order to validate past results, Cultural and societal settings are important factors to consider in POB and HRD Jerventions (Luthans & Youssef-Morgen, 2017). For example, this is illustrated by the PsyCap intervention conducted by Zhang et al. (2014) in an Eastern context ‘Those researchers designed a structured reading materals-based PsyCap interven- tion in which participants read a text about psychological capital individually and silendy. The material was designed according to the PCI model, and paticipants had 30 min to carefully read it and comprehend its meaning. At the poses ticipants’ PsyCap levels had significantly increased, compared to workers who did ‘ot participate, and this inerease remained stable afer three months. Moreover, this shor reading intervention produced a significant 3.8% increase in participants’ per- formance, compared to those who did not participate, which also remained stable after three months, However, all ofthe individual PsyCap development studies con= ducted in Western contexts were computer- or web-based interventions, which are suitable forthe individual approsch due to their didactic characteristis (Grif, 2010; Hargrove, 2012; Luthans, Avey, & Patera, 2008). Thus, itis worth wonder ing whether it would be possible to conduct this structured reading materal-based PsyCap intervention in Western contexts, where HRD scholars are concerned with ‘engaging participants in PsyCap interventions and have suggested using gaticaion “Strategies supported by hand held devices, video games, or smartphone apps, as & now type of PsyCap development strategies (Luthans & Youssef Morgan, 2017). Se —eeeeE96 MM, Seanva ond A Ortega Maldonado Finally, the applicability of PsyCap development ha extended into the domain of «cross-cultural interactions. Reichard etal. (2014) conducted PsyCap intervention designed to increase cross-cultural PsyCap and cultura intelligence and decrease ethnocentrism. They reported a highly significant increase in participants’ cultural intelligence after the raining that remained two moaths att. They also reported a decrease in levels of negative attitudes, such as ethnocentrism at work, at both the post and follow-up measures. As the authors of ths study suggest, the findings from {his study provide important practical applications for the contemporary global work setting, whichis leading most societies to become increasingly more multicultural and diverse. In summary, PsxyCap interventions emerge asa social and development strategy {oreinforce social cohesion and inclusion in organizations and society at large. From ‘our perspective, effectiveness research on PsyCap interventions From across-cultural viewpoint helps to advance the scientific knowledge on iis topic. 8 Limitations and Future rections ‘Que study has limitations what could be solved in Future research, Fist, inclusion criteria for thisreview could be putapart and no reviewed rome studies. Future studies could include more papers and research with inclusion criteria broader. Second, although the studies reviewed found increases in participants’ PsyCap levels aftr the interventions that were also statistically significant, with abroad range of effect sizes, utther research should investigate PsyCap interventions by improving statistical power and significance. Two strategies could be useful: using larger sample sizes And using different methodologies for the traditional aralysis of variance, such as Jongitudinal growth madels (Moskowitz eta, 2017). Results obiained did not lead to robust conclusions about the sustainability of the clfets, and there were large diserepancies between the suis" follow-up measures, ranging from 2 wecks to 6 months. Moreover, researcher are interested in determin- ing the sustainability of PsyCap development through longitudinal research designs and analyses, suggesting the need for future follow-up studies with measurements alice 1,3, and/or 6 months, or even ater a whole year (Dello Rusto & Stoykova, 2015; Meyers & Van Woerkom, 2017; 0" Reilly, 2016; Rew eta, 2017; Yuan, Liu, ‘Tang, & Zhang, 2014), Future research on sustaining YsyCap intervention effects might focus on traning transfer, testing strategies such as using positive resources in the workplace and receiving reminders from HID practitioners. Finally, for greater external vlisity of the PsyCap intervention research, we sug gest further developing research on cultural differences, conducting comparative suds and extending the literature to Easter contexts, PsyCap development is also relevant for eros-cullual interactions, and so we think fuer research should inves- tigate whether PsyCap interventions might encourage theconstruction of more inclu- sive and respectful societies, contributing to avoiding social problems such as racism ‘or social exclusion and seeking a more diverse world . chalga Capital Development in Orsnizations 7 9 Conclusions Based on our PsyCap eview, wecan conclude that PsyCap isa promising developable psychological resource related to positive organizational outcomes. Specifically, we fan conclude the fllowing: «+ PoyCap interventions seem tobe a promising area forvesearchers and practitioners to inerease wellbeing and performance in organizations, as well as other positive attitudes and behaviours. «+ Many of the studies re miero-inerventions with 1 or 2 sessions, mainly using the Psychological Capital Intervention Model (PCD, Broader PPIs to develop PsyCap also exist, such as focusing on strengths, personal resources, Ellis RET therapy, postive focus and constructive problem solving activities, career development, jb crafting, savouring, and so on. Both types of PsyCap interventions had pos- itive effects on PsyCap, but some inconsstences were also noted. Additionally in many of these studies, the authors did not report whether there were signi ‘ant dferences between experimental and coneolwaiing list groups, and 0 itis dificult to generalize the result. « Bects durability: results generally support the long-term effects of PsyCap micro aux long-term interventions, measured in a range from 2 weeks to 6 months, «+ PsyCap interventions were effective in increasing not only baseline levels of Psy- Cap, but also positive organizational outcomes such as job peeformance, job atitudes (Le, assertiveness, cultural intelligence, and change readiness), and ‘employee well-being, as well as training transfer motivation and organizational virtues perception «Ibis relevant to use @ combination of quantitative and qualitative to test the PsyCap intervention effects. «In onler to increase the effectiveness of PsyCap interventions, i is important to focus on strategies 1 extend transference of these effets, sich as follow-up homework + Further studies on PsyCap Interventions should use a more sophisticated method- ‘ology, improving statistical power and significance, ie. using larger sample sizes and longitudinal growth models + Most of the PsyCap interventions were conducted in western counties such as the USA and various European countries (87% of the reviewed studies), and so many of the conclusions of these interventions ean only be generalized to west- ern employees and organization. In ths area, we recommend further developing research on cultural differences, conducting comparative studies, and extending {he literature to Eastern contexts methodologies Acknowledgements Wiig this chapter was uppaced by a rat rom Ministerio de eon 'Compettivdnd, Gobierno de Exp BPSI20156955-R) and Universitat ume 1(LUE-B2017 an, Bo LEE8 IM. Salanova and A. Oregs Maldon References [Abas M, & Raja, U. 2015). Impact of psychological capital on innovative performance and gb srs, Conadin Jounal of Adninisaive SciencedRerue Cananne Des Sciences de PAdninitrotion, 320), 128-158. tps orf. 1002. 114 ‘Avy. B. (204), The lel side of peychologial capitals New evidence o dhe antecedents of PxxCap.lourua of Leadership & Organizational Sis, 21(, 141-18. ‘vey, Luthaas, Fe leases, 8. M. (2009), Pyehoogical capital: postive resource fr combing employee ses and arnove Honan Resource Manapenent,4813)677-63. ps1 ‘botor/10.1002hen, ‘vey JB Lithans, Fy Smith, R. ML, & Pans, N.F (2010). pact of postive pychoogia! "pital on employe wel ing ovr tine, Journal of Occupational Health Pytlog. 150), 17-28 ste g0.103 750016998, ‘Aves JB. thas, Fs & Yousef, C. M. (2010). The Addtve Value of Posie Psychologie! "Cail in Pediing Work Atos aad Behavioural of Management, 36(2, 430-452 nip6og0.11710149206308329961 ‘vey JB, Nich, Le Pigeon, NG 2010. Two id ses examining the asocation ‘tween povepsychologial apa and employe performance. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 313) 384-40 ‘vey J. Patera, de Wes B.1-(2006, The implication of paiive psychological capita on ‘mployee sbeetcism, Journal of Leadership & Organization! Sti, 15(2), 82-60. psf) dokory/ 0.771071 791907O1 30020401, vey, 1B Reichard, R 1, Lutans,F, Mba, K. H. (201). Metaanalysis of the impact ‘of postive pychoogical emit on employes aie, behvirs and perfomance. Hanan Resouce Development Quarterty, 222) 127-152 beef 10 002g 20070 ‘vey, Bs Wemsing. T.S.,& Lathan, 2008). Can positive employees help postive ona izations change? Inpact of psychological capital an emaions on elvan tides ad Sebaviors The Joural of Applied BehaviorlSeenr, 44) 48-70. hips of 10.1171) naisasso71470, Babine, A. C012). The input ofan nervenin on he prycholgial capital eel of career ‘allege lamers a quas-expernentl sud. US Capella Unive. andra A: (1997, Selene: The exert of conta. New York: Freeman ‘Baron, KA Fran, RJ, & Hees, K. M. 2013) Why enrerenrs often experience Tom, no high, levels of sess Te jo effec of sletion an pacholopical capital Jounal a Managemen, 201), 1-2. pon 1710492063 1849541. Bauman LV. 2014, The impact ofa prycholagcal capital intervention on college student wel tring, US: Anus Pail Univers. all, 2016), Personal Branding: Inpace om coocing mito veterans. US: Beedtive ‘Unive Bole, L, Haverman, M, Westerhof, G., Ries, . Smit, F,& Bohlmje, (2013) Posie ‘eyhologynervestions:Ametaalysisofrandonizedconialed tubes BMC Public Health, 1X0) 119. peo 101186147 -2688-13119. (Col, ¥,& Lee, D. 20) Psychological capil big five tis, and employee cutomes. Journal (of Monger Payeholgy, 212), 122-10. pede rf 10 LORIMP-O8 2012-0193, Cte, 8 Plaga, ella MJ 2010). Peleg good and doing grat The reason ‘ship benncen pychoogiea opal st wel ing Jmol of Oscypationa Heal Psychol 15(), 421-433 psd og/10.105720020720. Daven S-Matia A, Scot 1 & Sanderson, K (2013), Building onthe posites Apsychometic tevew an cried analysis o the conc of Psychological Capt Journal of Occupational land OrganantonolPeycholgs, 85(3, 8-70, hp: 10.1 joap 12007 rr syslog Capital Development in Organizations ® plo Rss S201, Pycolgel Capit Iteration (PD: A repleaion nd etension to cons Nac de Paco Ptt, Ore t Mat, Soin, pulse &SoykoPG013) Pgchsopl Cal Ieretn PC: Arepaion and nnn. Hanon Rese Developmen Quarry 23), 3-37, Misi 0 1021 = eat Eau an Sali M, Wi U@D1), Assessing te eles ofa “Pr nm acres ang co pycoloil cap tnetcoe at vl-arsoes wea ‘Sema aeeonen Caer Developmen neal, 11), 0-8 pani. ‘Soanot Hora malic 1019) Pchtogial expt A inerention meth for developing organization icterhp nama ell cener US: Benedictine Unies pale Mc RecarR2b1),Aswesing coca il alaonofanew east sal yell cap The ena ra ef Men esc Managem SU) 160-1098, barn. GT, Impact of pgcologel apo he eine to change ing oe ninco’ orci el ara of Ogetrion hogs Manag, 3), $386 mang 10 MRVIOCNC11 209.098 sos 0. Gy Eli; Dei & Alan. (2019,Psve pang apt deve nA Gl st by the Soon far reap dsr Buses Research 1), {nhs T08 blo tha, 8010, 7h hen of reiting pce phlei delopnnt on ‘rnng matin, Lincoln OS: Universy of Nas cate» 2b), aunsn De Un Pista Par El Desarallo Del Capital soi. Te Ori 1298), 4-2 Reeve on psn grees conse 1299027 cas Use M, B22). Amecdes ne oucomes okie ihe Ide trees ‘ingon US: UnvrytTena vay Gnson A. jal A, Mi, A. 2016). Gop nro: A wy to ‘pon working poste eblocal ep Hor owl Pet Asner {Efe 540,587. p/n org0.S28ON. 1ST. Moss. (2010. An expiant lo he hp ofp cpt on performance mgr ane cntagon fer US Viv of Nese Kalman i & Summa M8. O17 Revling he HERO within Teach: An aay ofthe tect fhe PCa elec ein The Qe Rep, 206556. Kenji 3. Spr I-€s 8 Gry A110) The essed A rev and ‘Remon oie cue Jonna Managemen 240), 39-972 plop T0117 aissnoewnsr7s Linen, . 204), oie pcg copa: A comparion ith man ond si expt ‘don anata of hing ierveton, inc US: Univer of Nea Bln Onan W-0,M-2O16, Anpton ne wre: ing tile ‘werkfce rough nial ps psycogeaimrveaons,Paytto Paper 370) ho. {at 013. Mating ft pote aya caitlin Tran’ insures ins. Soil Debra Perso 0, 1-112 hiphop Aka 1. LiperNen Mid el SN, Ve, & Sant Cle, (2019 Capital puscgico Eon aj capa. Aas aoa onan dal CO [spore Sp tal Spach woke: Cofinnatay fact analy of PCO, Keri Tewnmeicon de DupnstcnyEnctin Plots 490), 07. tpt org10218GHRIDEPI 8, Luan F012) Peel xp: Inpitns or HRD expecta an ae dren. Hunan Resse Dertopmet arr 230,18 sng 10. 02h, a100 MM Salinova and A. One Maldonado Lathan, F, Ave: B. Avi, B,J. Norman, S, M.& Combs, G.M. (206) Psychological aia ‘development : Toward micro intervention urna of Orsonztionl Behav 27, 387-393, Luan: F Avey. 1B. Avolo, BJ & Petason, S.J. 2010) The development and resin ‘formance impact posivepaycolopeal capital Haan Resource Development Qiariery, Dit. 41-67, peso. /10 102A Lathan, Fy Avey Je By, Clpp-Sith, Ry Li, W. (2008). Moe evidence the value of hi nese worker” paychologia apt Apoteily unlimited compete resource? Te Iter Iovonl Ira of Buna Resource Management, 143), 18-827. po og10 1080 (9545190801991194, Latans, Fs Ave, J By & Pater, JL (200. Experimental eas of a web-based ining inerveation to develop posive psychological capa. Acaeny of Managemen Leaving & Education, 70), 209-221, pda ef, 46SIAMLE. 200832712518 Luthas,F Avolo, B,J, vey, By & Norman, SM. C07. Posivepayhologcl capita ‘Measurement ad lationship with performance and saison. PrcnnelPseholgy 60. sai-s7 Lathans, Avo, BJ, Norma, 8. M4 Avey JB. 2006). Pschologcl capital: Measivement and rclationshp vith peformonce and sfcton, Lincoln, NE: Gallup Leadership Insta ‘Working Paper Latha Avo, B., Walumba, FO. & LW. 2008). Thepsychological capil of Chinese ‘workers: Exploring the rlionship wih performance Management and Organaton Review, 10),200-21. Latha, B.C. Lathans, KW, & Avey, JB. 2014). Bulli tbe leaders of tmoow: The developmen of team psycholopcl pial Journal of Leaership Oraniatonal Sais, 210), 191-199. pd orf 10.1 17134805181351708, [otha B.C, Laan, KW, & Jensen 5. M.(2012). The impact of bsines schoo tdens payeholopel eat on seadomie porermance Journal of Education for Busines 7(Ot0be), 233-259. ps dor. 108ONR832323.201 1609844 athas,F, Yousef, C. ML, Avi, BJ. 007), Psychologie! eapital: Developing the human ‘competitive edge. Oxford University Pres Lathan, FE, & Youse-Morga, C. Mt (2017). Payehoopial apa An evidence-based post tive approach. Anal Reve of Organizational Paeholoy and Orznionl Behavior, 1), 5399-366. pedo or. 4Gannarev-rgpyeh 0325 16-1328 Lathan, F, Yousc Morgan, CM. & Ava, B.J. (2015). Pychologicl capital and beyond ‘NewYork: Onord University Press Manes, N-E, & Sita, K. A: 2018) Elects of Bis ran emotive beavor therapy on promedon of psychological apt. Pryholgial Resear, 22), 78-94 Masten, A. (201). Oriary magi. Resileacepocescs in evelopment. The American Py ‘chology $6(3), 227-238. pte 010879000. 056X 563.227 Meyers MC, & Van Woestom, M. 2017). Effects of «stents intervention on general and ‘worked wellbeing: The meting role of positive affect Jounal of Hoppnes Stas, 18), 671-489 hpsidiog/10.1071s1092-016 9745. Meyers M,C, Van Woerkom M, De Reaver, RSM, Bak, Z, Ober, DL. 2015). Eahane ing psychological capa a perso prow inaie: Woking on stents o defences. Inara of Counseling Psychology. 62(1), 30-62. pio 0 1031000000050. Moskowit 1. Caco, A. W, Duncan, LG, Coa, M.A, Chean, EO, Bathe, A. Folkman, (3017) Randonee cone alo posta et nrveton or people ny Aignowed with HIV. Journal of Consating ond Clea Paychogy, 833), 409-42. ps, ‘/10.1087eepo000188. Newman, A, Ucbaan,D., Zhu, RA Hist, G. 2014), Psychological capital: A review and ‘syne, Journal of Organizational Boho 25, 120-S138 hp do e0. 100250 1916 [asea,K, Randal. & Christensen, K.B. (2015) Do diferent taining eonitons fai team implementation? A qas-xperinenal mined metbods tay. Journal of Mixed Methods Resear, poo g/t. S$B6H981 5539050, P ppgstoloicl Capital Development in Organizations 01 CrReily, A. 2016), Developing prycholoical capital in a xuent population, Delia Business soo Conegn Maldonado, A. 2018) 1 meso at Empirical fading on how tenhance prcholoical wea blag aml performace through peste itervenons. Spit Universita fume patron, Sls Lathan, F, Avol, BJ. Walumir, FO, & Zhang, Z. 201), Pryhologel apis and employee peormance: Aint growth modsling approach, Persone! Payal, (@H0), A2T-AS0. mips. og1011 1. 1744-6570.2011.012153, ago Ax Marq, Leal, 8 Sous, Fina ¢ Conhs M, (2010, Psychologie capital and evforanoe of Poraguese cul serans: Exploring neutralizes in he catxt a a apis Spat. Ineraional Jounal of Human Resource Management 210), 181-1552. psi ‘p/0,1080109885192 2010 488459, okt Rolle, Me Lau Pgs, (2014), Developmentofros ula pyenog icaleapitalnditsrlationship wih curl itligenceandettncstst Jour of eadership ‘€ Organicional Sas, 212), 10-164. ip: doLor/10.117715480818 13513517 row, Ls Powell T Brown, A, Booka, H & Slestik,N, (207), An invention fo enhance ioychologial capital andl outcomes nkomsesferale yah, Metrm ournalof Maing Research, 393), 386-37. bupsido cr/ 1.1 THO19394391 65861 salon Morn, S.C, & Martner |. M (202), Weneed eo! Towa validation ‘of bo ely and resent orpanization (HERO) mode. Group end Organon Manager, £746) 785-422. psi. 0.117710596011 1247405, Sclgman, ME. P2011. Learned apni: How to change your mind and our ie. New Yok ‘Vitae poor [eo 316.1134 870. eld, KM &Lyubomisky S206). How increas and susan osiveemotion: Meets ‘of expressing rade apd Visualizing best possible sles, The Journal of Poe Psychology 12), 73-82, htpdo a 0.108017435 70500510676 seta Storey, M, Moss, M, & Tinson, 8, 2013). Brie coaching fr eslence during og "soa change An exporacry sy. The Coaching Pacha, 1), 19-26. Soyer C.R. 2000. Hanaboot of hope. San Diego: Academie Pres Syne Br TW, Sawhney. Wiso, CA. & Keith, M, 20M), Savoring ta moderator ‘oth Gail demands and psycologia capita relationship: A daly lary say. The Juma of ‘asive Pehology. Advance nlite pubieaton. ‘on Winger 1. (2016) Job demands runes interventions. ass Universitet Rotem, Tipton 1314078621 1956-703 aa Wingerdet J, Bakke, A.B. & Des, D. (2016) A test of ajob demands esoues nce: Vin-Jeurnal of Managerial Psychology, 313), 68601. biped. or. 10803-2018 ss, ‘Van Winged, J, Deeks. & Bakes, A.B. (2017), The impet of pesoaal resources ad job Craig interventions on werk engagement and pecfonance. Haman Resource Management, Sa) 51-67 tps org0100200m 21738. Wenning, T. 2014. Psychologies epi: Ast of mesirement invariance wross 12 ato tales. Jowna of Leadership & Organicationl Studies, 212), 199-19, Willams. P, Ker ML. & Waters, L. (2016 Exploring eectveexposieandconfirmation bis as processes underlying employee work happiness: An inlrventon tay. Proms i Pryce, 7QUN), 878 up: og/10.389ipsy¢. 2016 00878 ‘Yousef C.M, &Luthans F200 Postive organizational bchavior athe wake: hele 1 pe, opis, and esc Journal of Management, 353), 774-800. Mp6. THT a20630750580, ‘oan Q Lin Sing, &Zang, D.2014), Happy@ Work: Protocol fora web base undone ‘ono a to improve metal wel-sing among an Asan working popalaio, BMC Public Heath, 141), 685. ps 1011867124584, ee02 IM, Sulanovaand A. Oneg-Maldonaty Yon, D. G., & Clapp-Smit,R. 2014). Meacogiion, cultural peycholgia eptl and ma “ational ctrl inaligence. Cons Cultural Menagement, 214), 386-399. ‘hang, Xo Li Yolo Mas Ho, J & Sag. LOUD, A siete eading matras- based “nervemion program o develop he psychological capital of Clnese employers Social Behavior a Personality An ternational Jouaal, 4203), S08-815- do r/10 2224p. 201482 so, Marisa Stanova (Ph.D) ie il professor a Positive Onganizatona Psychology a the Univers ta Jaume I (Caslln, Spin). She is also Dacor of WANT Research Team High Pefomance ‘Grp, Profesor Salanova i member ofthe Earepean Asoction on Work and Organizations Psychology (EAWOP), Imecnatonal Associaton of Applied Psychology GAAP), and Society fr ‘Occupational Health Psychology (SOHP). Carly she esa President ofthe Spanish Soi ty of PosivePaychology (SEPP) (hipdtwwwsepicologaponivacs, al ae collaborates ‘vision advisor ofthe Internationa Pstve Psychology Assoinion (PPA) Work and Organiza. tone Division, She has aout 300 atonal and iteration positon on ocxpaiona health payehology Gob stress, burnout, echastess, wortaholism... a more ecealy she hs Feusad ‘on Positive Psychology applic to werk, ith publication on work engagement ow at work Selene, positive and heathy organiationsorganiatioal eile, and psitve interven tons fr promoting happy a podoetive workers, He has pubihed in oss sch ss our of Happiness Suis, The Jounal of Poste Psychology Journal o Applied Pychology, Appliod Pjhology: Aa lnwaional Revie, Anxiety, Sess& Coin, Jou of Cros Cultural sy éhology, Compass in Human Behaviour, Work & Stress, Growp & Onaniational Matagene, ‘ong oier She atively involve in competitive projets a ube fn grants doing aso onsaltaney and advisement to companies on applied PosvePayhology and development of Homan Resources She sa mente ofthe editorial ard of onal, uch at Applied Paycha (0g: An International Reve, Enropan Journal of Work and Oriol Psyebolony, kur ‘St Woek nd Organizational Psychology, and Ansodnd y Estes In adn to he aad work ‘nd research, fr several yar esata projet of isemization of Posive Psychology eu ide academia, to share seentfe knoedge ano Belp people and erganizations vo ive nove utiing an meaningful ie and happie. Alberto Ortega-Maldonado (Ph.D) is researcher, teacher and consultant specialized i Po itive Paychology applied to work. His research and practice feces on bow to bul a hap, healt and effecive workforce trghpotve interventions fr devcopin personal eure. psychological wellbeing and peformance at work. Alberto dbes research ad evidence based Trinng and coaching in he seas of poychologial capital, pesoml strengths, positive coins, jeb crafting, meaning-making at work, team-building and werk engagement, Albe's work it focused on effective intervention that combine the developmrat of related personal resources ‘nding iit tnsfrsraepes to sue ssa. His tral optimism snd aby to look onthe right sea inspite him o desin intervention: focused oa acceptance and pos tye apis of adversities o reine the psyetnlogial eapial, psychological well-being and sccomplishneat at work. He sa passionate advocate ofthe evince based practice the aster fat knoledge fom scholars opeatoners. and the diffusion ef scene. Dr Ong Maldonado ‘samemberof the Internationa Oeste Payeolony Associa (IPPA) atthe Spanish Sale (of Posive Psychology (SEPP) . il Job Crafting Interventions: Do They Work and Why? Evangelia Demerouti, Maria C. W. Peeters and Machteld van den He [Abstract The majority of job redesign initiatives Follow a top-down’ approach, in ‘which management optimizes jab demands and resoures to aban successful org rizational outcomes. However, these approaches are not always effective, Lite is ‘known about the effectiveness of interventions, where employees proactively opt ize their work environment inorder to improve their wel-being, motivation, and performance. One such job redesign strategy is jab crafting. Jab crafting is proac- tive behaviour that enables individuals 10 fit dhe job characteristics to their needs and preferences by seeking resources, seeking challenges and reducing demands, ‘The frst im ofthis chapter is to describe the design of the job crafting interven tion, which integrates a two-day crafting workshop intervention, fllowed by 3 or 4 weekly self-st crafting assignments and a reflection session, The second aim of this chapter is to present theoretical explanations regatding how the job erfting intervention leads to desire changes for both employees and organisations, We base ‘our argumentation on social cognitive theory, experiential learning theory and siti ‘ated experiential learning narratives, The final aim isto present an overview ofthe casting evidence regarding the effectiveness ofthe intervention, Its concluded that {te ob crafting intervention is a promising tool t help organisations to support and ‘maintain employee well-being and (1 a somewhat lesser exten! performance, even ‘uring times of organizational change. The chapter ends with several suggestions for Jauee research and practice Keywords. Job crafting intervention + Performance + Well-being EE Demerou (52) MC. W.Pstrs nhoven University of Teshnoogy, Eindhoven, The Nesta email ecdemerowt te M.C.W. Peters ‘Uae University, Ureckt,The Netherlands 1M van den Heuvel University of Amscdam, Amserdam, The Netheracs © Springer Nature Switzerland AG2019 103 LE Van2yl and 8, Rothman Si. (es), Positive Pehl Iervention Design and Protos fr Maal Contexts, Ip orf 101007978: 3-090-20020.6 5. a