To study and measure the psychological capital and its dimensions among the

employees in the select banks in India

Abstract
Today, in the competitive world employees in most of the business organization are
quite disturbed and dissatisfied both in their professional and personal lives. With increasing
competition in Indian banking sector need for high positive behaviour and employee
engagement has become the need for sustaining the employees. The field of positive
psychology is increasing its interest in psychology and positive organizational behaviour has
given positive results in the organizations and at individual development The psychological
capital is a higher order construct having four dimensions of hope, resiliency, self-efficacy
and optimism. This study measures the psychological capital and its dimensions among the
employees in Indian banking sector. A data of 474 employees working at different
managerial levels was collected. The results showed that psychological capital and its
dimensions are high among the employees working in banking sector in India.

Keywords: Positive Organizational Behaviour, Psychological capital, Indian banking sector.

 To study and measure the psychological capital and its dimensions among the
employees in the select banks in India

Today, in the competitive world employees in most of the business organization are
quite disturbed and dissatisfied both in their professional and personal lives. With the
increase in work pressure and demands has led to lower down in the overall life satisfaction
of the employees which resulted into decrease in organizational efficiency. This has led to
research the new aspects in behavioural sciences to redefine the positive domains of the
employee with respect to his job. It has become a challenge for the modern psychologists and
researchers to define the determinants for a well being and organizational behaviour of the
employee. The psychological capital is an emerging psychological concept having its
conception based on four of its determinants viz., self-efficacy, hope, resiliency and
optimism. As well being of an employee is one of the harmonizing factors between the
different components of life of an employee both at personal and professional level, the
psychological capital plays an important role in achieving the same at both individual and
organizational level.

Psychological Capital
The field of positive psychology is increasing its interest in psychology and has given
positive results in the field of organizational behaviour and its development (Snyder and
Lopez, 2002). Positive psychology has aimed to understand the dynamics of how individuals
flourish at both individual and professional level (Seligman and Csikszentmihalyi, 2000). The
positive psychology has shifted the interest from negative feelings to the positive aspects of
individual personality. Further, (Gable and Haidt, 2005) defined positive psychology as the
study of human happiness: the conditions and processes that contribute to the flourishing or
optimal functioning of people, groups, and institutions, thus promoting the role of positive
emotions and individual strengths that are towards success of the individual.

Luthans et al (2007) proposed that psychological capital of an individual’s is

developed by hope, optimism, self-efficacy and resiliency which constitute a positive
psychological state of an individual. Stajkovic and Luthans (2003) used four constructs of
psychological capacities in core confidence factor for work motivation and psychological
capital represented how hopeful, resilient, confident and optimistic employees are in their
working conditions. Avey et al, (2009) found that the integration of hope, efficacy, resilience,
and optimism represented the core construct psychological capital. Luthans et al (2007) found
that psychological capital was the study of positive organizational behaviour and its
constructs emerged from positive psychological literature. Further, Luthans (2002) defined
positive organizational behaviour as psychological capacities that can be measured,
developed, and effectively managed for improving the performance of an individual that has
positive human resource strengths. Thus, positive organizational behaviour can be defined as
the relationship among the positive psychological capacities of an individual with the efficacy
of the organization.

Luthans (2002) identified from positive psychology literature the various

psychological capacities as self-efficacy, hope, resilience, and optimism as being relevant to
positive organizational behaviour. Luthans et al (2007) defined psychological capital as “an
individual’s positive psychological state of development and is characterized by: having
confidence (self-efficacy) to take on and put in the necessary effort to succeed at challenging
tasks; making a positive attribution (optimism) about succeeding now and in the future;
persevering toward goals and, when necessary, redirecting paths to goals (hope) in order to
succeed; and when beset by problems and adversity, sustaining and bouncing back and even
beyond (resilience) to attain success”.

Avey et al. (2009) emphasized that psychological capital and its components are to be
considered as state-like constructs as opposed to trait-like constructs and they have the
developmental potential for an individual. Luthans and Youssef (2007) in their trait-state
continuum explained the difference between state-like and trait like constructs whereas trait-
like constructs refer to relatively stable psychological characteristics, at the other end of the
continuum and its components tended to be malleable and open to development whereas
state-like trait is open to development and improvement by using simple training
interventions which can have long lasting impacts on performance of the employee. To
include any variable in the conception of psychological capital, it should be based on the
theory and research parameters having valid measurement and unique in the field of
organizational behaviour state-like (Luthans, 2002a.b; Luthans and Youssef, 2004; Luthans et
al, 2007). Also, the constructs of psychological capital were found to meet the above said
inclusion criteria and can be developed to increase efficacy of the individual through training
interventions. Psychological capital is a higher order core construct that integrates the various
positive organizational behaviour criteria meeting capacities, not only additively but also
perhaps, synergistically. The sum of the constructs of the psychological capital viz. self-
efficacy, resiliency, optimism and hope are greater than the individual constructs itself. Thus,
by investing in totality in psychological capital as whole shall be yielding better results in
terms of satisfaction and efficacy than on the individual capacities alone (Luthans, et al
2007).

Defining the various distinctions of the Psychology Capital dimensions

A lot of overlapping exists in the definition of the psychological capital dimensions. Table 1,
below, summarises the primary value contributed to psychological capital by each component
affective state.

Table 1.1: Component contributions to psychological capital

Affective State Directionality Contribution

Confidence Present-to- Provides for openness to challenges and a
future focussed willingness to expend effort on the pursuit of
a goal (perhaps because of the expected
return on that investment)
Hope Future focussed Provides goals and desire to attain those
goals (implying a link to motivation), as well
as planning or strategic response to enable
the attainment of those goals
Optimism Future focussed Provides buffers between negative impact of
unfavourable events and (a persistently
positive) expectation for the future, and
enhances or capitalises on the positive
impact of favourable events
Resilience Past-to-present Provides for recovery from previous or
focussed present unfavourable events or stressors and
maintains (or exceeds) the status quo
 
The difference between the factors of psychological capital is very subtle but each
factor when added becomes a unique value which can be measured. Take an example of hope
and optimism which are closely related but when measured in totality can give unique value..
Further, hope and optimism are related to each other as internal resources through which one
can achieve the desired targets. However, the difference in the two existed as hope is more
future oriented (for both short and long term targets and strategies) and optimism is more
present oriented towards various challenges. Also, hope is having internal oriented
motivation to achieve targets and optimism is preparing oneself for the present and future
challenges, which is external driven motivation.
The same difference between self-efficacy and optimism is very subtle. According to
Scheier and Carver(2003), in self-efficacy the individual’s self is defining agent, thus for a
successful outcome the internal resources of the individual is to be judged for the outcome.
But in the case of optimism, an individual can be confident of the positive outcome and they
need not to be internal. Also, self-efficacy is an intention to take actions to meet the
challenges whereas optimism is only a future orientation for the challenge. Thus, even with
these subtle distinctions, the psychological capital determinants when taken into totality give
a unique advantage in measuring the value of the organization along with human and social
capital.
Need of the study

The rise and growth of banking sector has made it imperative now to study these
positive psychological behaviours in the organization to increase efficacy among employees.
As Indian banking sector is undergoing through dynamic changes to become a world leader,
the need to study these concepts have become necessary. Psychological capital has emerged
as a new concept in the field of human resource management. The psychological capital and
its dimensions are need to be measured at an individual level and at the organizational level.
The organization’s productivity and its efficacy are affected by employees’ psychological
capital which is reflected in the behaviour of employees. In Indian context no major research
has been done as compared to other countries especially in the field of psychological capital
and employee behaviour. Further, the studies which have been done are not related to Indian
banking sector. Thus, this study, intended to measure the psychological capital and its
dimensions among the employees in banking sector in India.

Research objectives

To study the psychological capital and its dimensions viz. hope, optimism, self-efficacy and
resilience of the existing employees in the select banks.

Scope of the research study

The research study is on Indian banking sector and northern region banks are covered
under its scope. In total the research study has included seven banks i.e. SBI, two associate
banks of SBI, three nationalized banks and three private sector banks. The various employees
who are working at managerial position in the above banks would be sample frame for the
research study. The various banks included in the study are majorly taken from the states of
Punjab, Haryana, Chandigarh and Himachal Pradesh. The banks were selected according to
their rank as per the list given in the RBI bulletin for the year 2015-16 according to their
deposits as per Annexure II.

Research design

The determinants of the variables to be studied in the present research study are
psychological capital and its dimensions viz. hope, optimism, self-efficacy and resilience
Population and sample size

The managers who are working at various managerial levels in the banks in the states of
Punjab, Haryana, Chandigarh and Himachal Pradesh are taken as population of the study. A
sample of 474 respondents working at various managerial levels in the banks is the sample
size of the research study.

Source of the Data

The data collection has been done from the primary as well as secondary sources. A
questionnaire was given to the employees of the banks and the responses become the primary
source of the study. The data collected from various books, journals, documented reports,
online resources, researches done on the variables etc. become the secondary source of the
data.

Data collection tools

To collect the data from the various respondents a standardized questionnaire of

psychological capital (PsyCap-24) by (Luthans et al., 2007) was employed to the employees
of the various banks under the study.

Descriptive analysis of the psychological capital and its dimensions among the
employees of the selected banks under study

Psychological capital: Description of the scale: PsyCap was measured on a rating scale of
one to seven, with one suggesting a low score on PsyCap and seven suggesting a high score.
For ease of interpretation, the mean scores were calculated and plotted against the scoring
key to indicate the level of PsyCap, as follows:
 <=56 = Low score on PsyCap or PsyCap dimension

57 – 112 = Medium score on PsyCap or PsyCap dimension

>112 = High score on PsyCap or PsyCap dimension

The scoring key for the self- efficacy, hope, resiliency and optimism dimensions of
the psychological capital is, as follows:
<=14 = Low score on PsyCap dimension
15 – 28 = Medium score on PsyCap dimension
>28 = High score on PsyCap dimension.

Table 2: Descriptive statistics for scores of psychological capital and its dimensions
Std.
Media Deviatio Minimu Maximu
  N Mean n n Skewness Kurtosis m m
Self-efficacy 474 32.43 33.00 5.17 -0.95 1.99 8.00 42.00
Hope 474 32.13 33.00 5.02 -1.07 2.59 6.00 42.00
Resiliency 474 30.81 32.00 5.30 -1.08 1.85 7.00 40.00
Optimism 474 31.45 32.00 4.70 -0.97 1.94 7.00 40.00
Psychological
capital 474 126.83 129.00 16.95 -1.12 3.01 28.00 160.00

As can be seen in Table 2, the mean score for the psychological capital (126.83) falls
into the high range suggesting that, on average, the employees score high on psychological
capital. This is supported by a median of 129.00. It is seen that for the most part, the
employees have high levels of psychological capital. Further, the mean scores of four of the
psychological capital dimensions were namely self-efficacy (32.43), hope (32.13), resilience
(30.81) and optimism (4.15). The psychological capital in total and all the four dimensions of
psychological capital negatively skewed. With all the skewness coefficients displaying
negative signs, it is an indication of a negatively skewed distribution, which in this instance
means that respondents tended to score on the high side.

Table 3: Frequency distribution of scores of psychological capital

  Frequency Percentage
Low Score 1 .2%
Medium Score 81 17.1%
Psychological capital Level
High Score 392 82.7%
Total 474 100.0%
 The frequency distribution Table 3 supports the first descriptive statistics table giving
information about psychological capital level of employees. Looking at the mean value it is
referred that the majority of employees are at high percentage 82.7%, 17.1% employees are at
medium level and .2% are at lower level of psychological capital.

Frequency distribution of scores of the dimension of psychological capital i.e. self-

efficacy
The frequency distribution Table 4 supports the first descriptive statistics table giving
information about the self-efficacy dimension of psychological capital level of employees.
Looking at the mean value it is referred that the majority of employees are at high percentage
80.4%, 19.0% employees are at medium level and .6% are at lower level of self-efficacy
dimension of psychological capital.

Table 4: Frequency distribution of scores of self-efficacy

Frequency Percentage
Low Score 3 .6%
Self-efficacy level Medium Score 90 19.0%
High Score 381 80.4%
Total 474 100.0%

Frequency distribution of scores of the dimension of psychological capital i.e. optimism

The frequency distribution Table 5 supports the first descriptive statistics table giving
information about the optimism dimension of psychological capital level of employees.
Looking at the mean value it is referred that the majority of employees are at high percentage
77.8%, 21.7% employees are at medium level and .4% are at lower level of self-efficacy
dimension of psychological capital.

Table 5: Frequency distribution of scores of optimism

Frequency Percentage
Low Score 2 .4%
Optimism level Medium Score 103 21.7%
High Score 369 77.8%
Total 474 100.0%

Frequency distribution of scores of the dimension of psychological capital i.e. hope

The frequency distribution Table 6 supports the first descriptive statistics table giving
information about the hope dimension of psychological capital level of employees. Looking
at the mean value it is referred that the majority of employees are at high percentage 81.2%,
18.1% employees are at medium level and .6% are at lower level of hope dimension of
psychological capital.

Table 6: Frequency distribution of scores of hope

Frequency Percentage
Low Score 3 .6%
Hope level Medium Score 86 18.1%
High Score 385 81.2%
Total 474 100.0%

Frequency distribution of scores of the dimension of psychological capital i.e. resilience

The frequency distribution Table 7 supports the first descriptive statistics table giving
information about the resiliency dimension of psychological capital level of employees.
Looking at the mean value it is referred that the majority of employees are at high percentage
73.4%, 25.1% employees are at medium level and 1.5% are at lower level of resiliency
dimension of psychological capital.

Table 7: Frequency distribution of scores of resilience

Frequency Percentage
Low Score 7 1.5%
Resilience level Medium Score 119 25.1%
High Score 348 73.4%
Total 474 100.0%

Conclusion

The mean score for the psychological capital (126.83) falls into the high range
suggesting that, on an average, the employees working in the banking sector are having score
high on psychological capital. This is supported by a median of 129.00. It is seen that for the
most part, the employees have high levels of psychological capital. Further, the mean scores
of four of the psychological capital dimensions were namely self-efficacy (32.43), hope
(32.13), resilience (30.81) and optimism (4.15). The psychological capital in total and all the
four dimensions of psychological capital negatively skewed. With all the skewness
coefficients displaying negative signs, it is an indication of a negatively skewed distribution,
which in this instance means that respondents tended to score on the high side. One of the
practical implications of psychological capital is identifying the employee’s strengths and use
them to increase and sustain their respective wellness levels in the organization. A better
healthy work environment in the terms of effectiveness and efficiency can be achieved when
psychological capital is applied accurately where the employees get an opportunity to use
their skills in the organization. By changing the working conditions the organization may
increase the stress level of its employees if there is lack of support by the organization in
achieving goals by the employee.

Limitations of the Study

In the research the researcher has to design the research in such a way that all the
possibilities are taken into account so that the planned objectives are successfully attained
with minimum error and better applicability. The intervening variables are controlled in the
research by designing a research plan which minimizes the effect of intervening variables.
However in every research there are some limitations which cannot be controlled as the
research is done on the working population in banking sector only which limits its
generalization on general population and the present study has dealt only with the effect of
positive variables and ignores the effect of negative variables. Lastly, the sample size of the
research study is taken only from the banking sector in Northern India and an effort to study
psychological capital of employees was made. The variables should be studied on larger
sample for better generalization and applicability.

References

Avey, J.B., Luthans, F., and Youssef, C.M. (2009), The additive value of positive psychological
capital in predicting work attitudes and behaviours, Journal of Management, 36, 430-452.
Gable, S.L., and Haidt, J. (2005), What (and why) is positive psychology? Review of General
Psychology, 9, 103-110.
Luthans, F. (2002), The need for and meaning of positive organisational behaviour. Journal of
Organisational Behaviour, 3, 695-706.
Luthans, F. (2002a), The need for and meaning of positive organizational behavior, Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 23: 695-706.

Luthans, F. (2002b). Positive organisational behaviour: Developing and managing psychological

strengths. Academy of Management Executive, 16, 57-72.
Luthans, F., Avolio, B.J., Avey, J.B., and Norman, S.M. (2007), Positive psychological capital:
Measurement and relationship with performance and satisfaction, Personnel Psychology, 60, 541-
57
Scheier, M. F., and Carver, C. S. (2003), Goals and confidence as self-regulatory elements
underlying health and illness behavior. The self-regulation of health and illness behaviour, 17-41.
Seligman, M. E. P., and Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000), Positive psychology: An introduction,
American Psychologist, 55, 5–14.
Snyder C.R. and Lopez S.J. (2002), Handbook of positive psychology (2nd ed.). Oxford, UK:
Oxford University Press.
Stajkovic, A. D., and Luthans, F. (1998), Self-efficacy and work-related performance: A meta-
analysis, Psychological bulletin, 124(2), 240.