Journal of Happiness Studies

, Volume 14, Issue 3, pp 965–983 | Cite as

The Application of Signature Character Strengths and Positive Experiences at Work

Research Paper

Abstract

We hypothesized that the amount of positive experiences at work (job satisfaction, pleasure, engagement, meaning) is a function of the extent to which the situational circumstances at the workplace allow for the application of an individual’s signature character strengths. For the description of the individual a reliable and valid instrument already exists, but not for the environment. Hence, the newly developed Applicability of Character Strengths Rating Scales (ACS-RS) with information on its reliability and validity were also presented. A sample of 1,111 adults filled in the ACS-RS and measures for possession of character strengths and positive experiences at work. The ACS-RS was reliable by means of internal consistency and inter-rater reliability. It proved to be valid in several ways being sensitive to: (a) the differences in the applicability of trait-relevant behavior in formal versus informal situations by showing higher applicability of the character strengths in the latter; (b) the differences between traits regarding their applicability across situations; (c) people’s disposition to choose situations fitting their dispositions by showing positive relationships between the degree of possession and applicability. Moreover, correlations between applicability of strengths and positive experiences increased with the individual centrality of the strengths. The more signature strengths were applied at the workplace, the higher the positive experiences at work. This study showed that character strengths matter in vocational environments irrespective of their content. Strengths-congruent activities at the workplace are important for positive experiences at work like job satisfaction and experiencing pleasure, engagement, and meaning fostered by one’s job.

Keywords

Character strengths Signature strengths Job satisfaction Positive experiences 

References

  1. Andrews, F. M., & Withey, S. B. (1976). Social indicators of well-being. New York, NY: Plenum Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Brown, D. (Ed.). (2002). Career choice and development. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  3. Butcher, J. M., & Pancheri, P. (1976). A handbook of cross-national MMPI research. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  4. Caplan, R. D. (1987). Person-environment fit theory and organizations: Commensurate dimensions, time perspectives, and mechanisms. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 31, 248–267. doi:10.1016/0001-8791(87)90042-X.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Caspi, A., & Herbener, E. S. (1990). Continuity and change: Assortative marriage and the consistency of personality in adulthood. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 250–258. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.58.2.250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  7. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York, NY: Harper.Google Scholar
  8. Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 71–75. doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa4901_13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Diener, E., Suh, E. M., Lucas, R. E., & Smith, H. L. (1999). Subjective well-being: Three decades of progress. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 276–302. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.125.2.276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Edwards, J. R. (1996). An examination of competing versions of the person-environment fit approach to stress. The Academy of Management Journal, 39, 292–339. doi:10.2307/256782.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (2010). Predicting and changing behavior: The reasoned action approach. New York, NY: Taylor & Francis Group.Google Scholar
  12. Gati, I., Garty, Y., & Fassa, N. (1996). Using career-related aspects to assess person-environment fit. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 43, 196–206. doi:10.1037/0022-0167.43.2.196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Holland, J. L. (1997). Making vocational choices: A theory of work personalities and work environments. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources Inc.Google Scholar
  14. Huta, V., & Hawley, L. (2010). Psychological strengths and cognitive vulnerabilities: Are they two ends of the same continuum or do they have independent relationships with well-being and ill-being? Journal of Happiness Studies, 11, 71–93. doi:10.1007/s10902-008-9123-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 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. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.127.3.376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kenrick, D. T., McCreath, H. E., Gover, J., King, R., & Bordin, J. (1990). Person-environment intersections: Everyday settings and common trait dimensions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 685–698. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.58.4.685.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kristof, A. L. (1996). Person-organization fit: An investigative review of its conceptualizations, measurement, and implication. Personnel Psychology, 49, 1–49. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.1996.tb01790.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. LeBreton, J. M., & Senter, J. L. (2008). Answers to 20 questions about interrater reliability and interrater agreement. Organizational Research Methods, 11, 815–852. doi:10.1177/1094428106296642.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Littman-Ovadia, H., & Steger, M. F. (2010). Character strengths and well-being among volunteers and employees: Toward an integrative model. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 5, 419–430. doi:10.1080/17439760.2010.516765.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lowe, G. (2010). Creating healthy organizations. Toronto, Canada: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
  21. Lyons, H., & O’Brian, K. M. (2006). The role of person-environment fit in the job satisfaction and tenure intentions of African American employees. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 53, 387–396. doi:10.1037/0022-0167.53.4.387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Matthews, M. D., Eid, J., Kelly, D., Bailey, J. K. S., & Peterson, C. (2006). Character strengths and virtues of developing military leaders: An international comparison. Military Psychology, 18(Suppl.), 57–68. doi:10.1207/s15327876mp1803s_5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. McGrath, R. E., Rashid, T., Park, N., & Peterson, C. (2010). Is optimal functioning a distinct state? The Humanistic Psychologist, 38, 159–169. doi:10.1080/08873261003635781.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Park, N., & Peterson, C. (2007). Methodological issues in positive psychology and the assessment of character strengths. In A. D. Ong & M. H. M. van Dulmen (Eds.), Handbook of methods in positive psychology (pp. 292–305). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Peterson, C. (2006). A primer in positive psychology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Peterson, C., & Park, N. (2006). Character strengths in organizations. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27, 1149–1154. doi:10.1002/job.398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Peterson, C., Park, N., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2005a). Assessment of character strengths. In G. P. Koocher, J. C. Norcross, & S. S. Hill III (Eds.), Psychologists’ desk reference (2nd ed., pp. 93–98). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Peterson, C., Park, N., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2005b). Orientations to happiness and life satisfaction: The full versus the empty life. Journal of Happiness Studies, 6, 25–41. doi:10.1007/s10902-004-1278-z.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Peterson, C., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2004). Character strengths and virtues: A handbook and classification. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
  30. Proctor, C., Maltby, J., & Linley, P. A. (2011). Strengths use as a predictor of wellbeing and health-related quality of life. Journal of Happiness Studies, 12, 153–169. doi: 10.1007/s10902-009-9181-2.Google Scholar
  31. Rentsch, J. R., & Steel, R. P. (1992). Construct and concurrent validation of the Andrews and Withey Job Satisfaction Questionnaire. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 52, 357–367. doi:10.1177/0013164492052002011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Ruch, W., Furrer, G., & Huwyler, D. (2004). Work Context Questionnaire (WCQ). Unpublished instrument, Department of Psychology, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.Google Scholar
  33. Ruch, W., Proyer, R. T., Harzer, C., Park, N., Peterson, C., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2010). Values in action inventory of strengths (VIA-IS): Adaptation and validation of the German version and the development of a peer-rating form. Journal of Individual Differences, 31, 138–149. doi:10.1027/1614-0001/a000022 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Saucier, G., Bel-Bahar, T., & Fernandez, C. (2007). What modifies the expression of personality tendencies? Defining basic domains of situation variables. Journal of Personality, 75, 479–503. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.2007.00446.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Seligman, M. E. P. (2002). Authentic happiness. New York, NY: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  36. Seligman, M. E. P., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000). Positive psychology: An introduction. American Psychologist, 55, 5–14. doi:10.1037//0003-066X.55.1.5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Seligman, M. E. P., Steen, T. A., Park, N., & Peterson, C. (2005). Positive psychology progress: Empirical validation of interventions. American Psychologist, 60, 410–421. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.60.5.410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Shimai, S., Otake, K., Park, N., Peterson, C., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2006). Convergence of character strengths in American and Japanese young adults. Journal of Happiness Studies, 7, 311–322. doi:10.1007/s10902-005-3647-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Stairs, M., & Galpin, M. (2010). Positive engagement: From employee engagement to workplace happiness. In P. A. Linley, S. Harrington, & N. Garcea (Eds.), Oxford handbook of positive psychology at work (pp. 155–172). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  40. Steiger, J. H. (1980). Tests for comparing elements of a correlation matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 87, 245–251. doi:10.1037//0033-2909.87.2.245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Ten Berge, M. A., & De Raad, B. (1999). Taxonomies of situations from a trait psychological perspective. A review. European Journal of Personality, 13, 337–360. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1099-0984(199909/10)13:5<337:AID-PER363>3.0.CO;2-F.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Walton, R. E. (1975). Criteria for quality of working life. In L. E. Davis & A. B. Cherns (Eds.), The quality of working life (Vol. 1, pp. 91–104). New York, NY: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  43. Wood, A. M., Linley, A. P., Maltby, J., Kashdan, T. B., & Hurling, R. (2011). Using personal and psychological strengths leads to increases in well-being over time: A longitudinal study and the development of the strengths use questionnaire. Personality and Individual Differences, 50, 15–19. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2010.08.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Section on Personality and Assessment, Department of PsychologyUniversity of ZurichZurichSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations