Daily eudaimonic well-being as a predictor of daily performance: A dynamic lens

Abstract

Sustaining employees’ well-being and high performance at work is a challenge for organizations in today’s highly competitive environment. This study examines the dynamic reciprocal relationship between the variability in office workers’ eudaimonic well-being (i.e., activity worthwhileness) and their extra-role performance. Eighty-three white-collar employees filled in a diary questionnaire twice a day, once in the morning and once in the afternoon, on four consecutive working days. The results show that eudaimonic well-being displays clear variability in a short time frame. In addition, Bayesian Multilevel Structural Equation Models (MSEMs) reveal a significant positive relationship between the levels of state eudaimonic well-being in the afternoon and the increase in the levels of state extra-role performance from that afternoon to the next morning. Moreover, the overall levels of self-reported state eudaimonic well-being across the diary measurements are significantly and positively related to the overall levels of extra-role performance assessed by the supervisor during the diary measurement. Finally, there is a significant negative relationship between the amount of intra-individual variability in state eudaimonic well-being during the week and the overall levels of self-rated state extra-role performance during the same week. These findings shed light on the dynamic nature of both the eudaimonic component of well-being and performance, highlighting the importance of eudaimonic well-being for extra-role performance and expanding the happy-productive worker thesis. The results suggest that the daily eudaimonic experience of meaning at work should complement the experience of hedonic well-being because it is an important factor in achieving better and more sustainable employee performance on a daily basis.

Revisiting the Happy-Productive Worker Thesis from a Eudaimonic Perspective: A Systematic Review

“…Nevertheless, this does not mean that eudai-monically happy people are not hedonically happy; in other words, the two perspectives are not opposite ends of a continuum per se, but rather two different ways of achieving a double sense of happiness [25,26] that may or may not be related [27]. In fact, the imbalance between hedonic and eudaimonic studies represents an important gap in the research on the HPWT, which has tested the different issues related to its main principle (i.e., happy workers perform better than unhappy ones) in studies that have focused excessively on hedonia and neglected eudaimonia [8,11]. In contemporary western society, pleasure is undoubtedly a component of happiness, but other aspects are also important in considering one's life a full life [27].…”

“…Despite the rapid growth in research on eudaimonia since the beginning of the 21st century, research on the well-being-performance relationship using this conceptualization is still limited, compared to the hedonic perspectives [10,11]. Nevertheless, the many studies carried out to date deserve an integrated review that summarizes the main achievements and identifies relevant gaps and issues for the future research agenda.…”

“…Other issues might also be hampering the understanding of the well-being-performance link, such as the assumed direction of the relationship, where well-being is the antecedent of performance, or a noteworthy bias in the conceptualization of well-being in organizational research, with an overwhelming focus on hedonism to the detriment of eudaimonia [7,8]. A deeper focus on eudaimonic well-being (EWB), which refers to the ideal in the sense of excellence giving meaning and direction to life [9], is necessary in order to more fully understand the relationship between happiness and productivity [10,11]. In addition, the concept of eudaimonia entails different facets that encompass distinct ways of behaving and feeling [12].…”

“…It is important to consider the different facets of the eudaimonic construct of well-being and the theoretical backgrounds of their relationships with different types of performance, without neglecting the possible negative or null results obtained when testing the HPWT in this area and their implications. Another issue that has created considerable debate is the directionality of the well-being-performance causal relationships [11]. Although the traditional research trend has almost exclusively examined the happiness-performance relationships in this sequence, it has been suggested that these links may also have the reverse direction (performance-happiness) or even a reciprocal or spiral relationship over time.…”

The Relationship between Knowledge Characteristics’ Fit and Job Satisfaction and Job Performance: The Mediating Role of Work Engagement

“…Recent studies have reviewed the relationship between wellbeing (e.g., job satisfaction) and job performance from various standpoints, such as sustainable wellbeing at work [9], the happy-productive worker model [10], or eudemonic well-being [11]. However, although each of these studies has contributed to better understanding the relationship between well-being and performance, we also know that this relationship is far more complex that we initially thought.…”