Advancing conceptualization and measurement of psychological capital as a collective construct

Abstract

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

The Effect of Entrepreneurial Self-efficacy and Entrepreneurial Competence on The Entrepreneurial Entry Decision and The Success of Start-up MSMEs in Medan City

“…In addition, ESE in this study was measured at the level of individual owners of start-up businesses in Medan City (founder's ESE) without considering the confidence of members in their business. Dawkins, Martin, Scott, & Sanderson (2015) conclude that the founder's ESE alone is not enough to be able to advance a business but requires the collective-efficacy of a team.…”

Psychological Capital: An Evidence-Based Positive Approach

“…However, there is emerging evidence that PsyCap is also relevant at higher levels of analysis. For example, Dawkins et al (2015) and Broad & Luthans (2017) It is not hard to conceptualize PsyCap at higher levels of analysis. In fact, each of PsyCap's constituent resources has been examined in the past at the collective level.…”

Why resilience managers aren’t resilient, and what human resource management can do about it

“…Kossek and Perrigino (2016) argue that 'resilience is individually and occupationally determined as part of a multi-level system' (2016), and in particular their findings emphasise the need for further examination of the impact of occupational and organisational context upon individual resilience. Recent research also suggests that resilience can be spread across levels of an organisation through a process of 'social contagion' (Dawkins et al, 2015). Whilst possible interdependencies across levels of analysis are considered Jaaron and Backhouse (2014) argue that a gap in the literature persists, whilst van der Vegt et al recommend a cautionary approach as 'developing capacity for resilience at lower levels does not automatically increase the overall resilience of the system' (2015).…”