Numerous factors in the work environment may influence the extent to which employees in customer-contact positions are motivated to perform their roles effectively and remain committed to the organization. There is growing evidence about the importance of supportive organizational climate as a means of enhancing the potential outcomes of employees and in turn, maximizing organizational effectiveness and performance. A supportive climate is one in which an employee perceives support from management, peers and the organization to undertake their work tasks. An organizational climate that is supportive and stimulating is positively associated with increased employee performance.
Research suggests that employees tend to perform better when they perceive that the organization demonstrates concern through the provision of various forms of work-related support (Patterson, et al, 2013). We test two new antecedent variables of psychological capital LMX and training. Using structural equation modeling on a sample of 198 dyads (employees and their supervisors), strong support was found for the theory-driven hypothesized relationships. The results contribute to a better understanding of positive organizational scholarship and behavior in general and specifically to the recently emerging positive construct of employees' thriving at work
In model 1: TW = teamwork, Train = training opportunities, are the antecedents of PsyCap. However, Luthans et al. (2008a) developed a web-based training program to build PsyCap, and there are many interventions to build PsyCap, so training opportunities should be positively linked to PsyCap. However, PsyCap does not build itself and there is much research outlining that a supportive climate (e.g., Luthans et al., 2008b) will build PsyCap. With this in mind, organisations can support employees through training and LMX, and colleagues can support via teamwork. The idea is that we are testing whether a supportive climate in the form of supervisor-subordinate relationships, teamwork and training will contribute to the development of PsyCap. Luthans also called for more research on a supportive organisational climate, but more research is required to examine some specific factors related to a supportive climate. To add strength to my argument, research by Demerouti et al. (2011) found that training positively influenced PsyCap.
Similarly, Rogg, Schmidt, Shull, and Schmitt (2001) found that supportive organizational climate was related to desired organizational outcomes such as customer satisfaction. Although the Rogg et al. (2001) study was conducted at the organizational level rather than at the individual level of analysis as examined here, their results offered the initial foundation for follow up studies to examine the impact of a supportive organizational climate on other desirable outcomes such as performance, job satisfaction, and commitment. In addition, Rogg et al.’s (2001) measure of supportive climate was found to be reliable with adequate evidence for construct validity. We recognized these varied approaches when examining supportive climate in the current study. For example, Eisenberger, et al 1990; Rhoades, et al 2001) have examined supportive climate in terms of the amount of perceived organizational support that one believes is present.
B3 - Organizational Change and the Future of Work in the Public Sector
