The concept of psychological ownership (PO) reflects a state in which individuals feel as though the target of ownership (e.g., job or organization) is theirs. In recent years, there has been an expansion of research linking PO with a range of desirable employee attitudes and behaviors. However, the theoretical foundations of the construct, its measurement, the factors that influence its development, and when and how it influences outcomes are areas of continued debate in the literature. In this article, we provide a narrative review of extant PO literature with the aim of developing a research agenda that encourages scholars to target opportunities for future research. In particular, we highlight the need for continued refinement of the conceptualization and measurement of PO, and development of its nomological network. In addition, we call for greater investigation of PO towards different objects or foci; examination of possible multilevel applications of PO research; identification of potential boundary conditions of PO; and exploration of the influence of culture and individual differences on the development and influence of PO. We also introduce alternative theoretical approaches for understanding and investigating PO. In doing so, we provide a roadmap for scholars to progress the development of the field.

The construct of Psychological Capital (PsyCap) focuses on the positive psychological capacities of self‐efficacy, hope, optimism and resilience and their relationship with a range of desirable work attitudes, behaviours and organizational outcomes. There is now almost a decade of accumulated PsyCap research. However, a critical and synthesized analysis of the construct in terms of its theoretical conceptualization and psychometric properties is yet to appear in the literature. Consequently, this article aims to provide a comprehensive review and analysis of the PsyCap literature, focusing in particular on issues relevant to the psychometric profile of PsyCap as it is currently assessed. Six directives for advancing PsyCap research are proposed as part of an integrated research agenda aimed towards strengthening the conceptualization and measurement of PsyCap. Practitioner points This article provides a critical and synthesized psychometric‐focused review of the PsyCap construct and its application in the workplace. Several shortcomings of the construct and its primary measure are highlighted. Directives are proposed to further enhance the conceptualization and measurement of the construct and thus enhance its utility in the workplace.

Psychological capital (PsyCap) has been conceptualized as an individual-level construct concerned with an employee’s state of positive psychological development. However, research has now started to examine PsyCap as a collective phenomenon. Although positive associations between team-level PsyCap and team-level functioning have been demonstrated empirically, there has been limited synopsis regarding the theoretical and measurement foundations of PsyCap at higher levels of analysis. This conceptual article extends collective PsyCap scholarship by applying a multilevel-multireferent framework to explore alternate conceptualizations of collective PsyCap. The framework furthers understanding of PsyCap at higher levels by exploring unique antecedents and emergent processes relating to five proposed forms of collective PsyCap. A series of testable propositions pertaining to the antecedent network of collective PsyCap are offered to guide empirical multilevel PsyCap research

No abstract

The aim of this systematic review was to determine the quality and comprehensiveness of guidelines developed for employers to detect, prevent, and manage mental health problems in the workplace. An integrated approach that combined expertise from medicine, psychology, public health, management, and occupational health and safety was identified as a best practice framework to assess guideline comprehensiveness. An iterative search strategy of the grey literature was used plus consultation with experts in psychology, public health, and mental health promotion. Inclusion criteria were documents published in English and developed specifically for employers to detect, prevent, and manage mental health problems in the workplace. A total of 20 guidelines met these criteria and were reviewed. Development documents were included to inform quality assessment. This was performed using the AGREE II rating system. Our results indicated that low scores were often due to a lack of focus on prevention and rather a focus on the detection and treatment of mental health problems in the workplace. When prevention recommendations were included they were often individually focused and did not include practical tools or advice to implement. An inconsistency in language, lack of consultation with relevant population groups in the development process and a failure to outline and differentiate between the legal/minimum requirements of a region were also observed. The findings from this systematic review will inform translation of scientific evidence into practical recommendations to prevent mental health problems within the workplace. It will also direct employers, clinicians, and policy-makers towards examples of best-practice guidelines.