Soc Indic Res (2009) 90:441–458

DOI 10.1007/s11205-008-9270-3

The ‘What’, ‘Why’ and ‘How’ of Employee Well-Being:

A New Model

Kathryn M. Page Æ Dianne A. Vella-Brodrick

Accepted: 27 May 2008 / Published online: 1 July 2008

Ó Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Abstract This paper examines the ‘what’, ‘why’ and ‘how’ of employee well-being.
Beginning with the ‘what’ of well-being, the construct of mental health was explored with
the aim of building a model of employee well-being. It was proposed that employee well-
being consists of three core components: (1) subjective well-being; (2) workplace well-
being and (3) psychological well-being. Following this, the ‘why’ of employee well-being
was investigated; that is, why employee well-being should be an important matter for
organisations. It was argued that employee well-being is an important precursor to
organisational well-being, as indicated by its links to employee turnover and performance.
The next section was concerned with the ‘how’ of employee well-being; that is, how well-
being can be reliably enhanced. Drawing on two models of strengths and a practice model
of psychological assessment, it was asserted that strength-based development can reliably
enhance employee well-being. A solid framework for understanding and measuring
employee well-being is offered in the hope that it will foster a more integrated approach to
assessing and optimising employee well-being.

Keywords Mental health
Employee well-being
Performance
Turnover

Strengths
Subjective well-being
Psychological well-being
Positive psychology

1 Introduction

Mental health, defined here as the presence of well-being rather than the absence of illness,
has become an increasingly important consideration for both researchers and practitioners
working in clinical and health contexts over the last several decades. More recently, the
positive mental health movement has extended beyond clinical settings and has also found
an important place in work settings. Notable developments linking well-being with
organisational factors are positive organisational behaviour, which aims to foster positive

K. M. Page
D. A. Vella-Brodrick (&)

School of Psychology, Psychiatry and Psychological Medicine, Monash University, Caufield Campus,
Australia
e-mail: dianne.vella-brodrick@med.monash.edu.au

123
442 K. M. Page, D. A. Vella-Brodrick

phenomena such as hope and resilience among employees (e.g., Luthans 2002; Luthans
and Youssef 2004, 2007), and positive organizational scholarship, which is the study of
what is positive, flourishing and life-giving, at the organisational level (e.g., Cameron and
Caza 2004; Cameron et al. 2003). However, whilst the study of well-being within the
discipline of psychology has been guided by comprehensive, research-based models (e.g.,
Diener 1984; Keyes 2002; Ryff 1989), research on employee well-being has been limited
largely because of its near exclusive focus on the measurement of employee job satis-
faction (Wright and Cropanzano 1997). The aim of this paper is to address this
shortcoming by examining the ‘what’, ‘why’ and ‘how’ of employee well-being and
proposing a model that goes beyond job satisfaction.
Beginning with the ‘what’ of well-being, a comprehensive model of employee well-
being will be created by drawing on the mental health and well-being literature. We posit
subjective and psychological well-being as key criteria for employee mental health. To
apply this model specifically to the domain of work, we add two context-specific con-
structs; namely work-related positive and negative affect and job satisfaction. Next, the
‘why’ of well-being will be discussed; that is, why employee well-being should be a key
consideration for organisations. It is proposed that promoting and preserving employee
mental health leads to improvements in employee performance and turnover, which
demonstrates the importance of the construct. Finally regarding the ‘how’ of employee
well-being, it is argued that strength-based employee development is a reliable strategy for
enhancing well-being.

2 The ‘What’ of Well Workers: A Review of the Mental Health Construct

In the 50 years since Jahoda’s (1958) seminal report outlining the complexity of defining
mental health, significant progress has been made towards the definition and conceptu-
alisation of this important concept. One noteworthy development was the turn away from
definitions of health as the absence of disease (Keyes 2006). Later this was cemented by
the work of authors such as Diener (1984), Ryff (1989), Waterman (1993) and Ryff and
Keyes (1995). Essentially they argued that mental health should be defined as the presence
of wellness rather than the absence of disease.
A comprehensive example of the wellness approach is Keyes’ (2002, 2005, 2007) com-
plete state model of mental health. Keyes’ definition of mental health requires that individuals
possess symptoms of both positive feelings and positive functioning. These criteria mirror the
symptoms of Major Depressive Episode (MDE), as classified by the Diagnostic Statistical
Manual (DSM). To be diagnosed as mentally healthy, individuals must show: (1) symptoms
of hedonia, or positive feelings about one’s life (as opposed to ahedonia in diagnoses of MDE)
and; (2) symptoms of positive psychological functioning in life (as opposed to psychological
impairment or malfunctioning). Within this model, those who meet the criteria for complete
mental health are classified as flourishing. Individuals who report an absence of mental health
(but not necessarily the presence of mental illness) are classified as languishing. Keyes’
model is based on the finding that measures of mental health and mental illness are separate
but correlated dimensions. Keyes (2005) tested this hypothesis using nationally representa-
tive data drawn from the Midlife in the United States (MIDUS) study (N = 3,032; age
range = 25–74 years). Mental illness was measured by the Composite International Diag-
nostic Interview Short Form (CIDI-SF) which detects symptoms of four clinical disorders;
namely: Major Depressive Episode (MDE), generalized anxiety disorder, panic disorder and
alcohol dependence during the last 12 months. Four scales were used to indicate the presence

123
The ‘What’, ‘Why’ and ‘How’ of Employee Well-Being 443

of mental health: (1) positive affect (feeling cheerful, ‘in good spirits’, extremely happy, calm
and peaceful, satisfied and ‘full of life’); (2) life satisfaction (when combined, positive affect
and life satisfaction created the global construct of hedonia); (3) psychological well-being
(self acceptance, positive relations with others, personal growth, purpose in life, environ-
mental mastery and autonomy) and; (4) social well-being (social acceptance, social
actualisation, social contribution, social coherence and social integration). Results of struc-
tural equation modeling showed that the best fitting model was one where measures of mental
health and mental illness were separate but correlated (-.53) factors. Keyes interpreted these
results to mean that the constructs of mental illness and mental health are not bipolar opposites
as had been previously assumed.
Keyes’ (2002, 2005, 2007) diagnosis of mental health as both positive feelings and
positive functioning unifies two previously disparate streams of well-being research. The
first of these streams focuses primarily on the hedonic approach to happiness. According to
the hedonic approach, happiness stems from efforts to maximise pleasure and minimise pain
(Waterman 1993). The primary focus in this research stream is the construct of subjective
well-being. Subjective well-being (SWB), known colloquially as happiness, is described as
a positive state of mind that involves the whole life experience. SWB contrasts with the
eudaimonic approach to happiness. This latter approach views well-being as a derivative of
personal fulfillment and expressiveness (Waterman 1993), self-actualisation (Maslow 1968)
and self-determination (Ryan and Deci 2001). A core construct within this approach is
Ryff’s (1989) notion of psychological well-being (PWB) which identifies positive psy-
chological functioning as the key mark of good mental health. We are proposing that
subjective and psychological well-being should be viewed as core components of employee
mental health and represent positive feelings and positive functions respectively.

2.1 Mental Health Criteria 1: Positive Feelings

2.1.1 Subjective Well-Being (SWB)

Research suggests that SWB has three core components: high levels of positive affect, low
levels of negative affect and a cognitive evaluation of one’s satisfaction with their life as a
whole (Diener et al. 1999, see also Busseri et al. 2007 for a recent validation of this SWB
model).
The set-point theory of happiness which espouses that individual levels of SWB are not
free to vary but are held at a ‘set-point’ has dominated several decades of research (see
Headey 2008 for a review). However, recent studies have shown evidence contrary to set-
point theory. For example, in a large scale longitudinal study Lucas et al. (2003) found
changes in marital status were associated with long-lasting changes in life satisfaction
when individual rather than average trends were examined. Similar results were found in
relation to unemployment (Lucas et al. 2004). Seligman et al. (2005) and Sheldon and
Lyubomirsky (2006a, b) assessed the effectiveness of five positive psychology interven-
tions using a randomly allocated, placebo-controlled design. They collected data using an
online assessment centre and a convenience sample of 577 males and females. Results
showed two of the five interventions (1) using signature strengths in a new way and (2)
being aware of one’s blessings, led to increases in happiness and decreases in depression
for at least 6 months.1 The ‘gratitude visit’ exercise led to large positive changes for one

1
Note: In this study, 6 months was the final assessment period for participants. Changes in well-being and
depression may have lasted beyond this point.

123
444 K. M. Page, D. A. Vella-Brodrick

month post-intervention. The two remaining exercises and one placebo control led to
positive but transient effects on happiness and depression. Sheldon and Lyubomirsky
(2006b) assessed the effect of a four-week happiness intervention (n = 67) on positive
emotions, also using a randomised controlled trial. Results showed that the exercise of
imagining one’s best possible self led to lasting increases in positive affect. These latter
authors interpreted these results to be supportive of Lyubomirsky et al. (2005) sustainable
happiness model. This model asserts that happiness is the result of (a) genetic predispo-
sition; (b) life circumstances and (c) one’s intentional activities. It posits that the essential
ingredient for achieving sustainable changes in happiness is one’s volitional activities and
habitual performance of appropriate strategies such as regular exercise, mediation and/or
counting one’s blessings create sustainable increases in happiness. Indeed, Sheldon and
Lyubomirsky (2006a) empirically support this latter assertion. They found that participants
adapted much more rapidly to changes in life circumstances (e.g., receiving an unexpected
scholarship) than changes in intentional and effortful activity (e.g., taking up piano lessons
or regularly working out at the gym).
These more optimistic accounts of the malleability of well-being have led a number
SWB authors to challenge the set-point theory of happiness (e.g. Diener et al. 2006;
Headey 2006, 2008; Huppert 2005; Norrish and Vella-Brodrick (2008)). Diener et al.
(2006), for example, recommended five key changes to Brickman and Campbell’s (1971)
adaptation level theory (an analogous set-point theory; Headey 2008). The revisions were:
(1) that the set-point of happiness is set at a generally positive rather than neutral level
(e.g., Cummins 1995, 1998); (2) there are considerable inter-individual differences in SWB
set-points, largely due to genetic influences; (3) different components of well-being (i.e.,
positive affect, negative affect and life satisfaction) can move in different directions at
different times, allowing the possibility of multiple individual set-points; (4) set-points can
change under some conditions (e.g., Diener et al. 2006); and (5) inter-individual differ-
ences exist in the degree individuals adapt to objective life circumstances with some
individuals habituating less than others. Although these post-hoc revisions help explain
recent empirical evidence, the necessity of such revisions suggests that the theory is
flawed. This point is also made by Headey (2008) on the basis of longitudinal data drawn
from a large-scale German (SOEP) panel study. He highlighted a large minority of indi-
viduals whose well-being levels had changed significantly during the course of the study
(commenced in 1984), some by as much as two standard deviations. On the basis of these
substantial ‘anomalies’, Headey made strong arguments for the replacement of the set-
point ‘paradigm’. Such suggestions bode favourably for those interested in employee well-
being, indicating that individuals, and thus employees, can volitionally achieve long-
lasting upward changes in well-being.

2.2 Mental Health Criteria 2: Positive Functioning

The second criteria for mental health, as posited by Keyes’ (2002, 2005, 2007) model, is
that an individual reports positive psychological functioning. Although his criteria for
positive functioning includes facets of both psychological and social well-being (Ryff 1989
and Keyes 1998, respectively) only the six dimensions of psychological well-being are
included in the model we propose later in this paper, as Keyes (1998) specific measure on
social well-being has shown poor internal consistency (i.e., alpha coefficients \.70 for
each subscale). However, one dimension of the Scales of Psychological Well-Being,
‘‘Positive Relations with Others’’ assesses social well-being, hence, this important aspect
of mental health will not be omitted altogether.

123
The ‘What’, ‘Why’ and ‘How’ of Employee Well-Being 445

2.2.1 Psychological Well-Being (PWB)

One of the first attempts to explore what is meant by positive psychological functioning
was that of Jahoda (1958). Jahoda reviewed and integrated various perspectives, mostly
clinical, on well-being and mental health. She unearthed six healthy psychological pro-
cesses: (1) acceptance of oneself; (2) accurate perception of reality; (3) autonomy; (4)
environmental mastery; (5) growth and development; (6) integration of personality.
Although Jahoda’s conceptualisation of mental health was a significant contribution to the
field, the concept was not developed further due to her inability to produce a measure
(Peterson 2006). This omission was addressed with Ryff’s (1989) work on psychological
well-being (PWB).
Ryff’s (1995) definition of PWB was heavily influenced by Jahoda’s (1958) work. PWB
includes six core well-being dimensions: self acceptance, purpose in life, environmental
mastery, positive relations with others, autonomy and personal growth. Taken together,
these six dimensions ‘‘encompass a breadth of wellness that includes positive evaluations
of one’s self and one’s life, a sense of continued growth and development as a person, the
belief that life is purposeful and meaningful, the possession of good relationships with
other people, the capacity to manage one’s life and the surrounding world effectively, and a
sense of self-determination’’ (Ryff 1989, p. 99).
Although there has been some vigorous debate about the validity of the PWB construct
as measured by Ryff and Keyes (1995) particularly relating to the abridged scale (e.g.,
Abbott et al. 2006; Springer and Hauser 2006; Springer et al. 2006), some studies have
demonstrated the validity of the PWB construct. For example, Keyes et al. (2002) found
that PWB was distinct from the construct of SWB. They modelled the latent structure of
the two well-being constructs using a national sample of 3,032 Americans (aged 25–
74 years). Factor analysis revealed two correlated (.45) but empirically distinct factors.
While none of the SWB facets (life satisfaction, PA and NA) loaded on the PWB factor,
three PWB dimensions loaded on both factors (self-acceptance, environmental mastery and
positive relations with others). These findings make sense; possessing self acceptance,
environmental mastery and positive relations could reasonably be expected to create
feelings of both hedonic pleasure and eudemonia. In contrast, the dimensions of purpose in
life, autonomy, and personal growth are more existential in nature, thus fitting more closely
to the notion of personal fulfilment or eudemonia.
The relationship between subjective and psychological well-being was also assessed by
Ring et al. (2007). These authors used a sample of 136 students to assess the relative
impact of SWB and PWB on individuals’ quality of life (QOL) assessments. An additional
aim was to replicate Keyes et al.’s (2002) findings. Their results confirmed Keyes et al.’s
model and explained just over 40% of the variance in participant’s individual QOL ratings.
They also extended Keyes et al.’s results with the finding that SWB mediated the effect of
PWB on QOL assessments.
Despite some overlap between the constructs of PWB and SWB, some results support
their distinctiveness. This is evidenced through their having differential patterns of cor-
relations with socio-demographic factors (e.g., age, education), and personality. Keyes
et al. (2002) found adults with high levels of both SWB and PWB were more likely than
adults with low scores on both scales to be highly educated and older. Individuals who
were high on SWB but not on PWB were likely to be older, but were not significantly
different from those scoring low on both variables in terms of education. In contrast,
individuals high on PWB but low on SWB were more likely to be highly educated, but
were not necessarily older.

123
446 K. M. Page, D. A. Vella-Brodrick

2.3 Additions to Keyes’ Complete Health Model: Context-Specific Measurements of

Employee Well-Being

Having reviewed what is meant by subjective and psychological well-being, an important

question remains: to what degree do such judgements reflect our well-being at work?

2.3.1 Subjective Well-Being at Work

The degree to which one’s satisfaction with their job contributes to their overall life
satisfaction has been an important and well-researched topic within the psychology liter-
ature. Some speculation surrounds the causal ordering of these two constructs; some
believe life satisfaction is a determinant of job satisfaction (whereby overall life satis-
faction ‘spills over’ into satisfaction with life domains) whilst others believe job
satisfaction is one of the determinants of overall life satisfaction (Rode 2004). Although
intuition would support the two being strongly and positively related (much like the
contentious happy/productive worker thesis which is discussed later), results have gener-
ally found only a modest correlation between the two (e.g., Judge and Watanabe 1993;
Rode 2004). For example, Rice et al. (1980), in a meta-analysis of 23 studies, found a
correlation of .30. Whilst this work may be criticised in terms of its exclusive focus on the
cognitive component of SWB (the correlation between the two would perhaps increase if
affect was also considered), it lends preliminary support to the assertion that overall
happiness is not an adequate representation of happiness at work. Therefore, whilst SWB is
likely to contribute unique variance to employee well-being (most probably due to their
mutual dependence on positive and negative affect), additional variance may be explained
if such scales were partnered with those specifically measuring well-being at work.
The assertion that context-specific measures of well-being are necessary to capture the
subtleties, complexities and variation of employees’ cognitive and affective experiences at
work has been made by several authors (e.g., Daniels 2000; Warr 1990) and aligns with the
Abstract-Specific Hypothesis which claims that what respondents attend to when asked
questions concerning the quality of their lives is dependent on how abstract or specific the
mode of measurement is (Cummins et al. 2002; Davern et al. 2007; Schwarz and Strack
1999). People do not thoroughly evaluate all aspects of their life when answering global or
abstract questions such as ‘How satisfied are you with your life as a whole?’ Instead, they
make relatively fast decisions via cognitive short cuts called heuristics (Tversky and
Kahneman 1974). For example, Schwarz and Strack found that people tend to rely on their
current mood when responding to well-being assessments. As the level of question spec-
ificity increases, however, individuals may attend more specifically to the domain in
question, such as that of work, and rely less on heuristic judgements, such as current mood.
As such, utilising both work-related and general well-being measures is likely to yield
more accurate assessments of employee well-being than when using SWB measures alone.
A number of context-specific measures and models exist that specifically assess hap-
piness at work. These models, however, represent competitive rather than complementary
measures of the construct. The historical approach, for example, has been to assess
employee job satisfaction, either globally, or as a summation of satisfaction with various
job domains (see Spector (1997) for a review). However, this approach has recently been
criticised as being an inadequate operationalisation of happiness at work (e.g., Wright and
Cropanzano 1997, 2004). These latter authors argued that researchers should replace
typical job satisfaction measures with measures of dispositional affect. Warr (1987, 1990)

123
The ‘What’, ‘Why’ and ‘How’ of Employee Well-Being 447

and Daniels (2000) have adopted a similar approach to Wright and Cropanzano (1997,
2004). Rather than measuring employees’ general or dispositional affect, however, they
assessed employees’ work-related affect. They asserted that such a measurement was a
more specific assessment of well-being at work than measures of general affect. In recent
years, authors such as Cotton and Hart (2003) have employed a multi-measure approach.
Cotton and Hart operationalised employee well-being as consisting of both positive and
negative affect (termed morale and distress respectively) and cognitive evaluations of job
satisfaction.
We therefore argue that employee well-being be measured through SWB (conceptua-
lised as life satisfaction, positive and negative affect), PWB, work-related affect, and job
satisfaction. Although a large body of research has not supported job satisfaction as a
valuable predictor of positive organisational criterion such as performance (e.g., Judge
et al. 2001), a recent study by Wright et al. (2007), who were originally some of the
strongest critics of job satisfaction, gives a more optimistic account of its predictive
validity. Taking a new approach to the happy/productive worker thesis, these authors found
that job satisfaction was a valid predictor of performance. However, this effect was
moderated by employee well-being, which they operationalised as context-free affect.
Taken together, these results provide preliminary support for the inclusion of job satis-
faction as one of the dimensions of employee well-being.
Evidence suggests that work-related affect would also aid the prediction of employee
well-being. Two work-specific models of affect have been posed by Warr (1987, 1990) and
Daniels (2000). Warr’s model of affect describes affective well-being in terms of two
diagonal axes of the circumplex model; that is, anxious-content (tense, uneasy, worried,
calm, contented, relaxed) and depressed-enthusiastic (depressed, gloomy, miserable,
cheerful, enthusiastic, optimistic). The job-related items were preceded by the question:
‘‘Thinking of the past few weeks, how much of the time has your job made you feel each of
the following?’’ Warr (1990) argued that his model of affective well-being was more
relevant to the context of work than the PANAS due to the specific focus of the preface and
the item content. Warr also criticised the PANAS for covering only two of the four
circumplex quadrants (this criticism was also subsequently made by other authors, for
example, Wright and Cropanzano 1997). Warr tested his model of affective well-being
using an occupationally diverse sample of working adults (n = 1,686). Patterns of cor-
relations with demographic and occupational factors revealed evidence of construct
validity. For example, higher occupational levels were correlated positively with depres-
sion-enthusiasm but negatively with anxiety-contentment. That is, higher occupational
levels showed more positive and negative arousal, perhaps reflecting the higher level of
cognitive requirements for these jobs.
However, we argue that Warr’s (1990) model is limited by his decision not to include
the arousal dimension of affective well-being. Examining only a subset of employees’
affective well-being does not make substantive sense; employees are likely to experience a
diverse range of emotions at work, each of which is potentially important for the prediction
of valued organisational outcomes. As such, we argue that Warr’s model may not have
strong predictive validity.
A more comprehensive model of affective well-being is Daniels’ (2000) approach to
work-related affect. His model depicts five axes on the circumplex model; namely: anxi-
ety-comfort, depression-pleasure, bored-enthusiastic, tiredness-vigour and angry-placid
(six-items per axis). Items were prefaced with a similar question to that used by Warr
(1987, 1990). However, participants in Daniels’ study were asked to report work-related
affect from the past week, rather than the past few weeks. Daniels used confirmatory factor

123
448 K. M. Page, D. A. Vella-Brodrick

analysis to assess four alternative structures of the scale. Two samples were utilised: social
workers (n = 871) and university workers (n = 1915). Both samples supported a five-
factor solution (i.e., one factor per axis). Second-order factor analysis revealed two
superordinate factors which corresponded with negative and positive affect. These higher
order factors accounted for the relationships amongst the five first-order factors. Internal
reliabilities of the subscales ranged from .79 to .88 in the two samples. Therefore, Daniels’
model, in addition to job satisfaction, would complement measures of SWB in an
employee well-being model. Together, job satisfaction and work-related affect may con-
stitute an employees’ workplace well-being (WWB).

2.3.2 Psychological Well-Being at Work

As yet, no comparable scale or construct exists that assesses positive psychological

functioning in the workplace. Although it would be useful to tailor Ryff’s (1989) PWB
scale to apply specifically to the workplace (e.g., sense of purpose at work, positive
relations with colleagues etc.), substantial validation would be required. However, intui-
tively all the domains of PWB could plausibly be filled through work. Therefore it is
proposed that PWB may be sensitive to changes in employee well-being. This proposition,
however, should be tested in future research.

3 The ‘Why’ of Well Workers: Employee Well-Being and its Link to Turnover and
Performance

It is argued that promoting and preserving employee mental health leads to marked
increases in organisational health, as indicated by both performance and turnover. This
aligns with Cotton and Hart’s (2003) occupational health model which espouses that
employee well-being, operationalised as both positive and negative affect, is strongly
linked to organisational health via an interaction between individual and contextual vari-
ables. The links between well-being and both retention and performance will now be
briefly reviewed.

3.1 The Well-Being-Retention Link

Turnover is an important issue for organisations today, largely due to its significant
business costs. According to Cascio’s (2003) formula, the cost of losing an employee can
range between 1.5 and 2.5 times the departing employee’s annual salary. Objective
measurements of turnover are generally achieved through an assessment of company
turnover statistics, with 15% being the generally accepted benchmark (Steel et al. 2002).
Retention may also be assessed subjectively by asking employees about their intention to
leave an organisation. A large-scale meta-analysis by Steel and Ovalle (1984) found a
weighted average correlation of .50 between intentions to and actual turnover. However,
irrespective of whether intention to leave predicts actual turnover, employee’s who harbour
such attitudes are not likely to exhibit high levels of motivation or performance at work. As
such, a healthy organisation is likely to be one in which employees intend to continue
rather than cease their employment.
A growing body of evidence suggests that employees’ intention to turnover is related to
the absence of work-related PA (i.e., languishing) rather than the presence of work-related

123
The ‘What’, ‘Why’ and ‘How’ of Employee Well-Being 449

NA (i.e., ill-being). In a controlled laboratory study, Shoenfelt and Battista (2004) found
that positive job satisfaction and mood states reduced turnover intentions in a sample of
154 undergraduate students. This relationship was not observed in relation to neutral or
negative mood states/satisfaction. In a sample of police workers, Hart and Cooper (2001)
found that employee PA, which they called morale, was negatively and moderately cor-
related with withdrawal intentions (r = -.38). Employee NA, however, which they termed
distress, was not related to withdrawal intentions.
In a more recent study, Wright and Bonett (2007) assessed the relationship between job
satisfaction, well-being and voluntary turnover in a sample of 112 managers. They hy-
pothesised that well-being, operationalised as employees’ general affect, would moderate a
relationship between job satisfaction and job performance. Specifically, they expected that
individuals with low levels of well-being would be more likely to leave their organisation
as a result of job dissatisfaction. This prediction was supported. In addition, both job
satisfaction and well-being showed significant main effects on employee turnover (r = -
.25 and -.39 respectively). Similarly, Judge (1993) found that employees’ affective dis-
position moderated the relationship between job satisfaction and voluntary turnover; as was
noted earlier, research suggests that well-being is primarily driven by one’s dispositional
affect. However, in contrast to Wright and Bonett’s findings, the relationship between job
satisfaction and turnover was strongest for individuals with a positive disposition. That is,
employees’ who were pre-disposed to view life positively were more likely to quit their job
when they were dissatisfied with it. Such findings lend further support to the inclusion of
both work-related affect and job satisfaction (WWB) as dimensions of employee
well-being.

3.2 The Well-Being-Performance Link

The presumption that happy workers are productive workers, often termed the happy/
productive worker thesis, has spanned several decades of organisational psychology
research and practice (Staw 1986). Until the late 1990’s this hypothesis was operationa-
lised and tested by correlating measures of job satisfaction and performance. Although
conceptual evidence seemed to support a relationship between these two constructs, meta-
analyses only weakly supported the hypothesis (e.g., Brayfield and Crockett 1955; Iaff-
aldano and Muchinsky 1985; Judge et al. 2001). The largest and most rigorous meta-
analysis on the topic was conducted by Judge et al. (2001). They reviewed correlations
from 312 samples (N = 54,417), finding a true score correlation of just .30 between job
satisfaction and job performance.
The 1990s saw a new wave of happy/productive worker research. This movement
contended that researchers had not found correlations between job satisfaction and per-
formance because of the erroneous belief that job satisfaction equates to happiness
(Cropanzano and Wright 1999; Wright and Bonett 1997; Wright and Cropanzano, 1997,
2000, 2004; Wright and Staw 1999). Wright and Cropanzano (1997) argued that ‘happi-
ness’ be assessed through an employees’ sense of well-being, as measured by Berkman’s
(1971) psychological well-being scale (described in more detail shortly). They tested this
assertion in two separate samples (study 1: n = 47 human service employees; study 2:
n = 49 public sector professionals). Results supported their hypothesis. Well-being, but
not job satisfaction, was correlated with performance in both studies (r = .32 and .44 for
studies 1 and 2 respectively), when demographic variables (e.g., age, gender, tenure) were
controlled. In a later study using a sample of human service workers (n = 47) and a sample

123
450 K. M. Page, D. A. Vella-Brodrick

of juvenile probation officers (n = 37), Wright and Cropanzano (2000) also controlled
employees’ level of job satisfaction. Results showed that SWB contributed unique variance
to the prediction of job performance over and above that attributable to job satisfaction and
demographic variables (r = .32). Job satisfaction was not related to job performance
(r = -.08). In a subsequent study, the authors also showed that well-being predicted
performance up to a year after well-being was reported (r = .36).
Although Wright, Cropanzano and colleagues’ findings show some support for a rela-
tionship between well-being and performance, the reported correlations are not markedly
higher than the true score correlation found by Judge et al. (2001) in their meta analysis of the
job satisfaction-job performance relationship. This calls into question whether their assess-
ment of the relationship is a significant improvement upon previous conceptualisations of the
happy-productive worker thesis. One possibility for the modest correlations found by Wright,
Cropanzano and colleagues is that their conceptualisation of happiness at work is still not
sufficient. In each of their studies on the happy/productive worker thesis, these authors used
Berkman’s (1971) eight-item measure of psychological well-being. This measure is thought
to assess affective disposition via the unpleasantness-pleasantness dimension of the cir-
cumplex model (Wright and Staw 1999). It asks respondent’s to report how often they have
felt very lonely or remote from other people’’, ‘‘depressed or very unhappy’’, ‘‘bored’’, ‘‘so
restless you couldn’t sit long in a chair’’, ‘‘vaguely uneasy about something without knowing
why’’, ‘‘particularly excited or interested in something’’, ‘‘pleased about having accom-
plished something’’, and ‘‘on top of the world’’. This conceptualisation and measure does not
align with the vast SWB literature. As discussed earlier, SWB is generally defined as the
presence of life satisfaction and positive affect, and the relative absence of negative affect
(Diener et al. 1999). In line with this definition, SWB research generally captures SWB
through both the Satisfaction with Life Scale (Diener et al. 1985) and the Positive and
Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS, Watson et al. (1988)). Whilst they do not directly
account for their departure from previous SWB literature, Wright and colleagues do address
their decision not to use the PANAS (see Wright and Staw 1999). According to these authors,
a fundamental difference between Berkman’s measure of psychological well-being and the
PANAS is that the two measures assess different dimensions of the circumplex with the
PANAS focusing on activation and Berkman’s measure focusing on pleasantness. In a study
that compared the effectiveness of these two approaches to measuring well-being, they found
that the PANAS did not significantly predict job performance. Confirming their previous
findings, Berkman’s measure did predict job performance (Wright and Staw 1999).
Although Wright, Cropanzano and colleagues have found significant correlations between
well-being and performance (e. g., Wright and Staw 1999), we believe correlations would be
strengthened if well-being was defined more comprehensively and included both general and
work specific indicators. It is proposed that both work-related affect (e.g., Daniels 2000
model) and job satisfaction also be assessed when examining employee well-being. Whilst
there are currently no measures of an employee’s positive functioning at work, Ryff’s (1989)
psychological well-being model is likely to be relevant to the workplace. As such, employee
happiness at work may be represented by employees’ SWB, PWB and WWB (refer back to
Fig. 1). In reference to Wright and Staw’s (1999) argument that the PANAS does not ade-
quately predict employee performance, readers should be reminded that Daniels’ (2000)
measure of work-related affect includes all four quadrants of the circumplex. It also assesses
the two higher-order factors of positive and negative affect. As such, it is likely to provide a
more adequate representation of work-related affect than either the PANAS or Berkman’s
(1971) scale. Additionally, although evidence has historically not found job satisfaction to be
a useful predictor of performance, a recent study by Wright et al. (2007) had shed new insight

123
The ‘What’, ‘Why’ and ‘How’ of Employee Well-Being 451

Employee Mental Health

Subjective well-being Workplace well-being Psychological well-being

(SWB) (WWB) (PWB)

Life satisfaction Dispositional affect Job satisfaction Work-related affect

Fig. 1 Model of employee mental health, which consists of three core components: An employee’s
subjective well-being, workplace well-being and psychological well-being. Notes: As per Ryff’s (1989)
conceptualisation, PWB consists of six dimensions: self acceptance, positive relations with others,
environmental mastery, autonomy, personal growth and purpose in life. For simplicity, these dimensions do
not appear in the diagram. Both dispositional affect and work-related affect consist of positive and negative
components

into this phenomenon. In a study of 109 managers employed by a large customer service
company, they found that job satisfaction did predict performance. The key difference from
past studies however (and perhaps an explanation for previous non-significant findings) was
that job satisfaction only predicted the performance of employee’s with high levels of well-
being (measured as dispositional affect). That is, employee well-being moderated the rela-
tionship between job satisfaction and performance. Although this finding should be
interpreted with caution until replicated in a larger sample, it provides additional support for
the inclusion of job satisfaction in an employee well-being model.

4 The ‘How’ of Employee Well-Being: The Strength-based Approach

to Enhancing Well-Being

Although much research has been conducted into the causes and correlates of well-being,
very little research has focused on ways in which well-being can be reliably enhanced
(Sheldon and Lyubomirsky 2006a). Still fewer researchers have specifically investigated
how to enhance well-being in the workplace (notable exceptions are research by the Gallup
Organization; see Harter et al. (2003) for a review; and Cotton, Hart and colleagues; see
Cotton and Hart (2003) for a review). An area that looks particularly promising as a means
to enhancing employee well-being is the study of strengths.

4.1 Conceptual Evidence for the Utility of Strengths

Several theories support the conceptual link between strengths and well-being. One such
example is Deci and Ryan’s (1985) self-determination theory. Research on self-determina-
tion theory examines the factors that facilitate intrinsic motivation, self-regulation and well-
being. The concept of strengths fits well with this paradigm. Specifically, strength-based
employee development may enhance employees’ ability to meet their psychological needs
for competence, autonomy and relatedness; according to SDT, when behaviour is regulated
for the fulfilment of these innate needs, an individual is able to achieve more effective
functioning, leading to psychological growth and well-being (Ryan and Deci 2000. Research
by Sheldon and Lyubomirsky (2006a, b) on the concept of self-concordant motivation also
supports strength-based development as an employee well-being enhancement strategy.
These authors assert that one is more motivated to achieve goals that are congruent with one’s
own values. As such, individuals whom primarily focus their effort on enhancing natural

123
452 K. M. Page, D. A. Vella-Brodrick

strengths may be more likely to feel the intervention is self-concordant, leading to better
adherence to the intervention, and more positive outcomes. Csikszentmihalyi’s (2002) flow
theory aligns with this concept. This theory asserts that optimally balancing one’s skills with
the challenges of a task creates feelings of flow—an innately pleasurable state characterised
by intense feelings of involvement.
Predominantly, research into the utility of strengths has been guided by one of two
frameworks: the character strengths and virtues (CSV) classification by Peterson and Se-
ligman (2004) and the Gallup Organization’s strength framework (Buckingham and Clifton
2001). The CSV classification is based on the tenets of positive psychology; a scientifi-
cally-driven field of research and practice that investigates ‘‘the study of positive subjective
experiences, the study of positive individual traits, and the study of institutions that enable
positive experiences and positive traits’’ (Peterson and Seligman 2004, p. 5). The CSV
framework was developed to answer questions relating to the second of these topics: the
study of positive character traits. It comprises 24 character strengths such as ‘zest,
enthusiasm and energy’, ‘bravery and valour’, and ‘persistence, perseverance and indus-
triousness’. Strengths are thought to exist ubiquitously across cultures and are associated
with feelings of fulfilment and eudemonia.
The Gallup strengths framework (Buckingham and Clifton 2001) is a more concrete
model of strengths than the CSV and is believed to represent situational themes; that is,
‘‘specific habits that lead people to manifest strengths in a given situation’’ (p. 14) such as
work. Hodges and Clifton (2004) defined a strength as ‘‘the ability to provide consistent,
near perfect performance in a given activity’’ (p. 218). Strengths, however, are not inborn.
Rather, strengths are developed on the basis of the development of talent. Talents are
naturally occurring patterns of thought, feeling or behaviour, and are represented via the 34
themes (e.g., ‘adaptability’, ‘command’, ‘positivity’). For a talent to become a strength,
however, it must first be identified and then refined and developed with the appropriate
skills and knowledge.
A lesser known model of strengths that may be useful in the current context is Lopez
et al.’s (2003) practice model. Rather than setting out a specific strengths framework, these
authors put forth a practitioner model which outlines how practitioners can utilise clients’
strengths. In contrast to both the CSV and the Gallup strengths framework, these authors
posit that practitioners should consider clients’ weaknesses as well as strengths. They also
assert that behaviour should be context specific as the environment plays a role in how a
strength manifests.
Although Snyder et al.’s (2003) model was developed within the context of clinical or
counselling psychology, their work is highly relevant to organisational psychology where
employees’ are equally in need of well-being interventions. Work by Keyes (2002), for
example, found that nearly as many adults suffered from the absence of mental health (i.e.,
languishing) as the presence of mental illness (12.1 and 14.1%, respectively). Both groups
were related to higher levels of work absenteeism, psychosocial impairment and distress,
relative to flourishing individuals (i.e., those with complete mental health). In the same
study, just over 17% of the population met the criteria for complete mental health (i.e.,
positive feelings plus positive functioning). The large majority of adults (52.4%) were
considered moderately mentally healthy. These figures were drawn from a nationally
representative study of adults aged between 24 and 75 years (N = 3,032), which provides
evidence for their robustness. Taken together, these findings highlight the need for well-
being interventions to target languishing employees as well as those with mental illnesses.
Focusing on employee strengths, as well as problem areas, may prove a very useful means
to approach such interventions.

123
The ‘What’, ‘Why’ and ‘How’ of Employee Well-Being 453

4.2 Empirical Evidence for the Utility of Strengths

A growing body of empirical evidence supports the use of strengths to facilitate well-being.
For example, in their review of the effectiveness of positive psychology interventions,
Seligman et al. (2005) found that participants’ directed to utilise their character strengths
in a new way, every day, for one week experienced increases in well-being and decreases
in depression for up to 6 months. This finding is congruent with Peterson and Seligman’s
(2004) initial expectations that exercising one’s character strengths leads to feelings of
fulfilment akin to the notion of eudaimonic well-being. As previously described, eudai-
monic well-being is thought to stem from feelings of being true to the self (Waterman
1993). Given that one’s character strengths are indicative of one’s authentic self (Peterson
and Seligman 2004) it is intuitive that better understanding and utilisation of one’s sig-
nature strengths will enhance feelings of psychological well-being. Positive changes in
general and work-related affect may also be expected.
The Gallup strengths framework also has empirical support (e.g., Clifton and Harter
2003; Harter et al. 2002, 2003; Hodges and Clifton 2004). These studies show strong links
between strengths-based development and employee engagement (which Harter et al.
2003, described as being analogous to the concept of employee well-being). Clifton and
Harter (2003), for example, meta-analysed the findings of 65 firms involved in employee
engagement interventions. Of these organisations, four had utilised strength-based inter-
ventions (study group) whilst the remaining 61 had not (control group). Results showed
substantial support for the association between utilising employee strengths and employee
engagement with the study group reporting significantly higher levels of engagement than
those in the control group from year one to year two (d = .65). This effect was further
enhanced from year one to year three (d = 1.15). Utility analyses showed an increase in
annual per employee productivity of more than US$1000 (i.e. US$1 million for a company
of 1000 employees). Research has also shown that engagement is a significant predictor of
employee turnover (p = -.30) and business-unit performance (p = .38). Again assigning a
dollar value to these effects, utility analysis revealed that highly engaged business units
accrued $80–$120 K more per month than the least engaged business units (i.e., $960 K
per year) (Clifton and Harter 2003).

4.3 An Important Point Regarding Weaknesses in Strength-based Models

Positive psychology is just as focused on human illness, disease and malfunction as it is on

strengths, virtues and fulfilment. Rather than replace the illness-focused model of psy-
chology, the positive psychology movement aims to provide a greater balance to research
and practice within the field, whereby both health and illness are considered (e.g. Keyes
2002; Lopez et al. 2003; Ryff 1989; Seligman et al. 2005). An important component of the
strengths versus weaknesses debate is their roots in positive and negative affect. Whilst
focusing on one’s strengths is likely to engender positive feelings such as joy or happiness,
focusing on one’s areas of weakness may engender negative feelings such as frustration,
anxiety or irritation. According to research by Fredrickson and Losada (2005), an indi-
vidual’s experience of affective (i.e., emotionally laden) events accrues over time. This
‘build up’ becomes a positivity ratio or a ratio of good to bad events. Their research suggests
that a positivity ratio of between 7:1 and 3:1 predicts flourishing, or complete mental health.
The effect of the positivity ratio on team performance indicators has also been inves-
tigated. Losada and Heaphy (2004) observed the interactions of teams in team meetings.
Sixty teams of employees (eight employees per group) were drawn from a large company.

123
454 K. M. Page, D. A. Vella-Brodrick

Speech acts (i.e., phrases or sentences) occurring within each team were observed and
coded by the research team along three bipolar dimensions: (1) positivity to negativity
(e.g., encouraging versus disparaging remarks amongst team members respectively); (2)
inquiry to advocacy (e.g., exploring versus supporting a proposal, respectively); (3) other
to self (e.g., speech act of group versus speech act of a speaker). Each team was then
independently classified as being high-performers (15 teams), medium performers (26
teams) or low performers (19 teams) on the basis of objective data such as profitably,
customer satisfaction and 360 degree evaluations. It was predicted that teams showing
higher positivity to negativity ratios, comparable inquiry to advocacy ratios and compa-
rable other to self ratios, would fall into the high performing category. Teams who showed
higher negativity to positivity ratios and unequal inquiry to advocacy and other to self
ratios, were predicted to fall into the low performing category. All other teams would fall
in the medium performer category. These hypotheses were supported. Specifically, results
suggested that a 5:1 ratio of positive to negative speech acts characterised high performing
teams. Losada and Heaphy inferred that positive speech acts in team interactions broaden
emotional space allowing the possibility of action. In contrast, negative emotional acts
restrict emotional space and close possibilities for action. These conclusions further sup-
port the ideal positivity ratio suggested by Fredrickson and Losada (2005). Together, these
studies suggest that an effective well-being intervention may be one in which employees’
focus approximately 5:1 on developing strengths and weaknesses, respectively.

5 Summary and Conclusion

The aim of this paper was to expand the mental health literature by reviewing the ‘what’,
‘why’ and ‘how’ of employee well-being. Specifically, three topics were addressed: (1)
what it is that constitutes employee well-being; (2) why employee well-being is important
for organisations and; (3) how well-being can be reliably enhanced. First it was argued that
employee well-being consists of subjective well-being (life satisfaction plus dispositional
affect), workplace well-being (job satisfaction plus work-related affect) and psychological
well-being (self acceptance, positive relations with others, environmental mastery,
autonomy, purpose in life and personal growth). Following this, the ‘why’ of employee
well-being was examined. Two core criteria of organisational well-being were posed: low
employee turnover and high employee performance (Cotton and Hart 2003). Strong,
negative correlations were found between well-being and turnover. Although moderate,
positive correlations were found between well-being and performance, it was argued that
these correlations would increase if well-being was conceptualised more comprehensively.
Specifically, it was argued that employee well-being should be conceptualised on the basis
of the model described here. The next section examined how well-being can be reliably
enhanced. It was asserted that strength-based employee development would provide an
effective means for fostering well-being. Such an intervention should focus on both
strengths and weaknesses with a positivity ratio of 5:1. This comprehensive operation-
alisation of well-being in the workplace represents an integration and extension of what
previous researchers have undertaken in the field. Uniting various streams of research on
the topic may allow researchers to progress the area at a more rapid pace. It may also lead
to greater agreement regarding the conceptualisation of employee well-being.
Employee well-being is an important academic and practical pursuit due to its links to
performance and turnover and may prove to be a valuable tool for demonstrating return on
investment (ROI) for employee well-being enhancement programs. Furthermore, such a

123
The ‘What’, ‘Why’ and ‘How’ of Employee Well-Being 455

model, and its associated measures, may be used by practitioners to track employee
reactions to workplace changes in management or HR policy. Thus, this paper may foster
increased recognition of the importance of employee mental health. This should not imply,
however, that the construct is not important in and of itself.
In the last several years, the world has seen a trend towards more socially-based
indicators. Similarly, social metrics, such as employee well-being, would also complement
more dollar-based metrics in the business world. Continual research on the causes, cor-
relates and consequences of employee mental health will lead to additional insight into the
factors that may enhance employee well-being. Such a task is socially as well as scien-
tifically valuable.
This paper examined one potentially important means to enhancing employee well-
being—employee strengths. However, strength-based development is not necessarily the
only means for enhancing employee well-being. Others have also examined the potential
utility of expressing kindness and gratitude (e.g., Norrish and Vella-Brodrick (2008)),
visualising best possible self (Sheldon and Lyubomirsky 2006b) and savouring (Bryant and
Veroff 2007). Authors working on positive organizational behaviour (e.g., Luthans and
Youssef 2007; Youssef and Luthans 2007) and positive organizational scholarship (e.g.,
Cameron and Caza 2004) have also made significant progress in this regard. It is hoped that
this paper may add to what is fast becoming an ‘upward spiral’ of research aiming to
improve quality of life by offering a solid framework for understanding and measuring
employee well-being.

References

Abbott, R. A., Ploubidis, G. B., Huppert, F. A., Kuh, D., Wadsworth, M. E., & Croudace, T. J. (2006). Psychometric
evaluation and predictive validity of Ryff’s psychological well-being items in a UK birth cohort sample of
women. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 4(76). Available at http://www.hqlo.com/content/4/1/76.
Berkman, P. L. (1971). Measurement of mental health in a general population survey. American Journal of
Epidemiology, 94, 105–111.
Brayfield, A. H., & Crockett, W. H. (1955). Employee attitudes and employee performance. Psychological
Bulletin, 52, 396–424.
Brickman, P., & Campbell, D. T. (1971). Hedonic relativism and planning the good society. In M. H. Appley
(Ed.), Adaptation level theory: A symposium (pp. 287–305). New York: Academic Press.
Bryant, F. B., & Veroff, J. (2007). Savoring: A new model of positive experience. Mahwah, NJ, US:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Buckingham, M., & Clifton, D. O. (2001). Now, discover your strengths. Great Britain: Pocket Books.
Busseri, M. A., Sadava, S. W., & Decourville, N. (2007). A hybrid model for research on subjective well-
being: Examining common- and component-specific sources of variance in life satisfaction, positive
affect, and negative affect. Social Indicators Research, 83, 413–445.
Cameron, K. S., & Caza, A. (2004). Contributions to the discipline of positive organizational scholarship.
American Behavioral Scientist, 47, 731–739.
Cameron, K. S., Dutton, J., & Quinn, R. (2003). Positive organizational scholarship. San Francisco: Berrett-
Kelder Publishers.
Cascio, W. F. (2003). Managing human resource: Productivity, quality of work life, profits. New York:
McGraw-Hill.
Clifton, D. O., & Harter, J. K. (2003). Investing in strengths. In K. S. Cameron, B. J. E. Dutton, & C. R. E.
Quinn (Eds.), Positive organizational scholarship. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
Cotton, P., & Hart, P. M. (2003). Occupational wellbeing and performance. A review of organisational
health research. Australian Psychologist, 38, 118–127.
Cropanzano, R., & Wright, T. A. (1999). A 5-year study of change in the relationship between well-being
and job performance. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 51, 252–265.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2002). Flow: The classic work on how to achieve happiness. London: Rider.
Cummins, R. A. (1995). On the trail of the gold standard for subjective well-being. Social Indicators
Research, 35, 179–200.

123
456 K. M. Page, D. A. Vella-Brodrick

Cummins, R. A. (1998). The second approximation to an international standard for life satisfaction. Social
Indicators Research, 43, 307–334.
Cummins, R. A., Gullone, E., & Lau, A. L. D. (2002). A model of subjective wellbeing homeostasis: The
role of personality. In E. Gullone & R. A. Cummins (Eds.), The universality of subjective wellbeing
indicators: Social Indicators Research Series (pp. 7–46). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Daniels, K. (2000). Measures of five aspects of affective well-being at work. Human Relations, 53, 275–294.
Davern, M., Cummins, R. A., & Stokes, M. (2007). Subjective wellbeing as an affective-cognitive construct.
Journal of Happiness Studies, 8, 429–449.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behaviour. New
York: Plenum Press.
Diener, E. (1984). Subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 95(3), 542–575.
Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of
Personality Assessment, 49, 71–75.
Diener, E., Lucas, R. E., & Scollon, C. (2006). Beyond the hedonic treadmill: Revising the adaptation theory
of well-being. American Psychologist, 61(4), 305–314.
Diener, E., Suh, E. M., Lucas, R. E., & Smith, H. E. (1999). Subjective wellbeing: Three decades of
progress. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 276–302.
Fredrickson, B. L., & Losada, M. F. (2005). Positive affect and the complex dynamics of human flourishing.
American Psychologist, 60, 678–686.
Hart, P. M., & Cooper, C. L. (2001). Occupational stress: Toward a more integrated framework. In N.
Anderson, D. S. Ones, H. K. Sinangil, & C. Viswesvaran (Eds.), Handbook of industrial and organ-
isational psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 93–114). London: Sage.
Harter, J. K., Schmidt, F. L., & Keyes, C. L. M. (2003). Well-being in the workplace and its relationship to
business outcomes: A review of the Gallup studies. In C. L. M. Keyes & J. Haidt (Eds.), Flourishing:
The positive person and the good life. Washington, DC: American Psychological Society.
Harter, J. K., Schmidt, F. L., & Hayes, T. L. (2002). Business-unit level relationship between employee
satisfaction, employee engagement, and business outcomes: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 87, 268–279.
Headey, B. (2006). Revisions to dynamic equilibrium theory using panel data and panel regression methods.
Social Indicators Research, 79, 369–403.
Headey, B. (2008). The set-point theory of well-being: Negative results and consequent revisions. Social
Indicators Research, 85, 389–403.
Hodges, T. D., & Clifton, D. O. (2004). Strength-based development in practice. In P. A. Linley & S. Joseph
(Eds.), International Handbook of Positive Psychology: From research to application. New Jersey:
Wiley and Sons.
Huppert, F. (2005). Positive mental health in individuals and populations. In F. Huppert, N. Baylis, & B.
Keverne (Eds.), The science of well-being (pp. 307–340). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Iaffaldano, M. T., & Muchinsky, P. M. (1985). Job satisfaction and job performance: A meta-analysis.
Psychological Bulletin, 97, 251–273.
Jahoda, M. (1958). Current concepts of positive mental health. New York: Basic Books.
Judge, T. A. (1993). Does affective disposition moderate the relationship between job satisfaction and
voluntary turnover? Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 395–401.
Judge, T. A., Thoresen, C. J., Bono, J. E., & Patton, G. K. (2001). The job satisfaction-job performance
relationship: A qualitative and quantitative review. Psychological Bulletin, 127, 376–407.
Judge, T. A., & Watanabe, S. (1993). Another look at the job satisfaction-life satisfaction relationship.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 939–948.
Keyes, C. L. M. (1998). Social well-being. Social Psychology Quarterly, 61, 121–140.
Keyes, C. L. M. (2002). The mental health continuum: From languishing to flourishing in life. Journal of
Health and Social Behavior, 43, 207–222.
Keyes, C. L. M. (2005). Mental illness and/or mental health? Investigating axioms of the complete state
model of health. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 73, 539–548.
Keyes, C. L. M. (2006). Subjective well-being in mental health and human development research world-
wide: An introduction. Social Indicators Research, 77, 1–10.
Keyes, C. L. M. (2007). Promoting and protecting mental health as flourishing: A complementary strategy
for improving national mental health. American Psychologist, 62, 95–108.
Keyes, C. L. M., Shmotkin, D., & Ryff, C. D. (2002). Optimizing well-being: The empirical encounter of
two traditions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 1007–1022.
Lopez, S. J., Snyder, C. R., & Rasmussen, H. N. (2003). Striking a vital balance: Developing a comple-
mentary focus on human weakness and strength through positive psychological assessment. In

123
The ‘What’, ‘Why’ and ‘How’ of Employee Well-Being 457

S. J. Lopez & C. R. Snyder (Eds.), Positive psychological assessment: A handbook of models and
measures. Washington: American Psychological Association.
Losada, M., & Heaphy, E. (2004). The role of positivity and connectivity in the performance of business
teams. A non linear dynamics model. American Behavioral Scientist, 47, 740–765.
Lucas, R. E., Clark, A. E., Georgellis, Y., & Diener, E. (2003). Reexamining adaptation and the set-point
model of happiness: Reactions to changes in marital status. Journal of Personality and Social Psy-
chology, 84, 527–539.
Lucas, R. E., Clark, A. E., Georgellis, Y., & Diener, E. (2004). Unemployment alters the set-point for life
satisfaction. Psychological Science, 15, 8–13.
Luthans, F. (2002). The need for and meaning of positive organizational behavior. Journal of Organiza-
tional Behavior, 23, 695–706.
Luthans, F., & Youssef, C. M. (2004). Human, social and now positive psychological management:
Investing in people for competitive advantage. Organizational Dynamics, 33, 143–160.
Luthans, F., & Youssef, C. M. (2007). Emerging positive organisational behavior. Journal of Management,
33, 321–349.
Lyubomirsky, S., Sheldon, K. M., & Schkade, D. (2005). Pursuing happiness: The architecture of sus-
tainable change. Review of General Psychology, 9, 111–131.
Maslow, A. H. (1968). Toward a psychology of being. Princeton, NJ: Van Nostrand.
Norrish, J. M., & Vella-Brodrick, D. A. (2008). Is the study of happiness a worthy scientific pursuit? Social
Indicators Research, 87, 393–407.
Peterson, C. (2006). A primer in positive psychology. New York: Oxford University Press.
Peterson, C., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2004). Character, strengths and virtues: A handbook and classification.
New York: Oxford University Press.
Rice, R. W., Near, J. P., & Hunt, R. G. (1980). The job-satisfaction/life-satisfaction relationship: A review of
empirical research. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 1, 37–64.
Ring, L., Höfer, S., McGee Hickey, A., & O’Boyle, C. A. (2007). Individual quality of life: Can it be
accounted for by psychological or subjective well-being? Social Indicators Research, 82, 443–461.
Rode, J. C. (2004). Job satisfaction and life satisfaction: A longitudinal test of an integrated model. Human
Relations, 57, 1205–1230.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation,
social development and well-being. American Psychologist, 55, 68–78.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2001). On happiness and human potentials: A review of research on hedonic and
eudaimonic well-being. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 141–166.
Ryff, C. D. (1989). Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning of psychological well-
being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 1069–1081.
Ryff, C. D. (1995). Psychological well-being in adult life. Current directions in Psychological Science, 4,
99–104.
Ryff, C. D., & Keyes, C. L. M. (1995). The structure of psychological well-being revisited. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 719–727.
Schwarz, N., & Strack, F. (1999). Reports of subjective well-being: Judgment processes and their meth-
odological implications. In D. Kahneman, E. Diener, & N. Schwarz (Eds.), Foundations of hedonic
psychology: Scientific perspectives on enjoyment and suffering (pp. 61–84). New York: Russell Sage
Foundation.
Seligman, M. E. P., Steen, T. A., Park, N., & Peterson, C. (2005). Positive Psychology progress: Empirical
validation of interventions. American Psychologist, 60, 410–421.
Sheldon, K. M., & Lyubomirsky, S. (2006a). Achieving sustainable gains in happiness: Change your actions
not your circumstances. Journal of Happiness Studies, 7, 55–86.
Sheldon, K. M., & Lyubomirsky, S. (2006b). How to increase and sustain positive emotion: The effects of
expressing gratitude and visualizing best possible selves. Journal of Positive Psychology, 1, 73–82.
Shoenfelt, E. L., & Battista, L. (2004). A laboratory study of satisfaction effects on mood state, withdrawal
intentions and organizational citizenship behaviour. Psychological Reports, 95, 803–820.
Snyder, C. R., Lopez, S. J., Edwards, L. M., Pedrotti, J. T., Prosser, E. C., Walton, S. L., et al. (2003).
Measuring and labelling the positive and the negative. In S. J. Lopez & C. R. Snyder (Eds.), Positive
Psychological Assessment: A handbook of models and measures. Washington: American Psychological
Association.
Spector, P. E. (1997). Job satisfaction: Application, assessment, causes and consequences. CA: Sage
Publications.
Springer, K. W., & Hauser, R. M. (2006). An assessment of the construct validity of Ryff’s scales of
psychological well-being: Method, mode, and measurement effects. Social Science Research, 35,
1079–1101.

123
458 K. M. Page, D. A. Vella-Brodrick

Springer, K. W., Hauser, R. M., & Freese, J. (2006). Bad news indeed for Ryff’s six factor model of well-
being. Social Science Research, 35, 1120–1131.
Staw, B. M. (1986). Organizational Psychology and the pursuit of the happy/productive worker. California
Management Review, XXVIII(4), 40–53.
Steel, R. P., Griffeth, R. W., & Hom, P. W. (2002). Practical retention policy for the practical manager.
Academy of Management Executive, 16, 149–162.
Steel, R. P., & Ovalle, N. K. (1984). A review and meta-analysis of research on the relationship between
behavioural intentions and employee turnover. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69, 673–686.
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Biases in judg-
ment reveal some heuristics of thinking under uncertainty. Science, 185, 1124–1131.
Warr, P. (1987). Work, unemployment and mental health. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Warr, P. (1990). The measurement of well-being and other aspects of mental health. Journal of Occupa-
tional Psychology, 63, 193–210.
Waterman, A. S. (1993). Two conceptions of happiness: Contrasts of personal expressiveness (eudaimonia)
and hedonic enjoyment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 678–691.
Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measure of positive
and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 1063–1070.
Wright, T. A., & Bonett, D. G. (1997). The role of pleasantness and activation-based well-being in per-
formance prediction. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 2, 212–219.
Wright, T. A., & Bonett, D. G. (2007). Job satisfaction and psychological well-being as nonadditive
predictors of workplace turnover. Journal of Management, 33, 141–160.
Wright, T.A. & Cropanzano, R. (1997). Well-being, satisfaction and job performance: Another look at the
happy/productive worker relationship. In L. N. Dosier & J. B. Keys (Eds.), Academy of Management
Proceedings (364–368). Statesboro, GA: Office of Publications and Faculty Research Services in the
College of Business Administration at Georgia Southern University.
Wright, T. A., & Cropanzano, R. (2000). Psychological well-being and job satisfaction as predictors of job
performance. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 5, 84–94.
Wright, T. A., & Cropanzano, R. (2004). The role of psychological well-being in job performance.
Organizational Dynamics, 33, 338–351.
Wright, T. A., Cropanzano, R., & Bonett, D. G. (2007). The moderating effects of employee positive well
being in the relation between job satisfaction and job performance. Journal of Occupational Health
Psychology, 12, 93–104.
Wright, T. A., & Staw, B. B. (1999). Affect and favorable work outcomes: Two longitudinal tests of the
happy-productive worker thesis. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20, 1–23.
Youssef, C. M., & Luthans, F. (2007). Positive organizational behaviour in the workplace. Journal of
Management, 33, 774–800.

123