The Effect of Psychological Capital and Workplace Spirituality on Workplace Behaviors: How it differs in Public and Private Sector Organizations

Description

Page: 578-585

Namrata Bhattacharyya¹ and Nishat Afroz² (Department of Psychology, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh¹ and Department of Psychology, MMV, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh²)

Psychological Capital and Workplace Spirituality has emerged as a fairly influential area of study in industries and organization given the dynamic roles workers are required to perform in a complex and ever-changing work environment. The aim of the study was to analyze the effect of positive psychological capital and workplace spirituality on organizational citizenship behavior and counterproductive work behavior in public and private sector banks of India. This cross-sectional study was conducted on 314 employees from various nationalized and private banks in North-east India. Hierarchical regression analysis was used to test the hypothesized relationships and t-test was used to compare the differences between the public and private sectors. The results indicated a positive relationship between psychological capital and workplace spirituality in predicting organizational citizenship behavior and a negative relation between psychological capital, workplace spirituality and counterproductive work behavior. Private sector employees displayed significantly higher levels of psychological capital, workplace spirituality and organizational citizenship behavior; whereas public sector employees were significantly higher on counterproductive work behavior. The state of PsyCap and workplace spirituality and its mitigating effects on negative employee behaviors has been scarcely documented. This is particularly relevant in understanding how spirituality is recognized, and what role it plays in employee well-being in Eastern cultures as compared to Western cultures. This study has tried to capture the complex diversities that exist in Indian spiritual practices from backgrounds and regions, the data from which is still negligible in the literature.