‘Is Psychological Capital Conditional on Age?’: Role of Meaningful Work and Leadership

Abstract

This study investigates the role of an employee’s age on the development of PsyCap through moderated mediation analysis. It extends by exploring various work characteristics, such as job resource (transformational leadership) and cognitive resource (meaningful work), in the motivational process of the job demand–resource model of psychological capital (PsyCap) at work. The sample of 350 IT/ITeS employees recruited using a purposive sampling technique belonged to major IT hubs in India. The results disconfirm the moderated mediation of an employee’s age on PsyCap; however, it emerges as a statistically significant moderator influencing perceptions of transformational leadership at work culminating into PsyCap. Cognitive resource of meaningful work also emerges as a crucial mediator in the relationship between transformational leadership and PsyCap. The novelty of the finding is attributed to the fact that an increase in age may not always promise increased maturity and ability to draw meaningful inferences, yet it may radically shift perceptions of various job resources and, consequently, hopefulness, optimism, resilience and efficacy related to their organisation. It broadens the scope of organisational literature by conjecturing the developmental perspective to the shift in the importance of different resources over time.

Keywords

Transformational leadership meaningful work psychological capital (PsyCap)millennials India conditional process analysis

Introduction

Organisational psychologists have made significant strides in understanding how to manage employees and are now focused extensively on reducing problematic behaviours at work. At the same time, their work has been instrumental in integrating a traditional approach to occupational health—referred as the ‘business-as-usual model’—in everyday business context (Christensen et al., 2020). Kumar and Jain (2021) also highlighted the dearth of studies exploring ‘positive organisational behaviour’ (POB) in emerging sectors such as the IT industry, while condemning the biases towards traditional corporate environments. Similarly, Desai and Patel (2018) advocated for the need to explore demographic moderators—such as age, gender and education—on the POB. That said, limited focus on workplace positivity and generational differences drew attention to examining various factors contributing to optimal performance among employees (Lambert et al., 2019; Luthans & Youssef-Morgan, 2017; Okros, 2020). Therefore, this article accentuates the conviction in the interpersonal dynamics that foster POB and the psychological alignment between employee and organisation evolving over age, thereby granting organisations a competitive edge (Luthans & Youssef-Morgan, 2017; Swanson & Schneider, 2020).

Based on the POB perspective, the literature identified a combination of four different psychological states, namely hope, efficacy, resilience and optimism, as a higher-order POB construct of ‘psychological capital’ (‘PsyCap’). Some scholars view PsyCap as an essential resource in ‘intellectual capital’. They believe it fosters innovation, drives competitiveness, ensures adaptability and creates value in the dynamic landscape of the information technology (IT) sector (Lopes & Serrasqueiro, 2017). PsyCap is believed to influence well-being at work positively, employee-health outcomes such as lower body mass index (BMI) and cholesterol levels, and good interpersonal relationships (Lorenz et al., 2016), which form an essential asset for IT employees. Yet, Luthans and Youssef-Morgan (2017) pointed out substantial voids within the PsyCap literature, underscoring the importance of examining the predisposing factors impacting PsyCap of IT sector employees in challenging workplaces. As researchers have not reached an agreement on factors contributing to PsyCap growth among millennial employees in the Indian IT industry (Loghman et al., 2022), therefore, it motivates the current study.

Theoretical Foundations and Hypotheses Development

This article is embedded in the theoretical formulations of the job demand–resource (JD-R) model (Bakker & Demerouti, 2017) and the strengths-based POB perspective (Luthans & Youssef-Morgan, 2017). It is equally informed by other theoretical paradigms such as the conservation-of-resource (COR) theory (Hobfoll et al., 2018) and generational cohort theory (Zayko & Vinichenko, 2021). It ventures into the ‘motivational process’ and exploration of age-related changes in development of PsyCap at work among the Indian IT millennial workforce. Indian management literature scantily discusses the JD-R model’s implications on work engagement and performance, usually in semi-urban or rural India (Jose & Mampilly, 2015; Pandey, 2017). The authors advocate that as an alternative to crediting psychological traits for resource gains and fewer losses, other important demographic factors should also be considered.

Sometimes, resource utilisation at work is contingent on the age of employees (Hobfoll et al., 2018), suggesting that older adults at work are more likely to conserve job resources and minimise job demands for optimal functioning at work. Different aspects of POB, for instance, hope, optimism, resilience and efficacy, manifest at a higher degree among older workers, while young workers tend to display low levels of hope, confidence, optimism and resilience in times of adversity (Luthans and Frey, 2017; Quick et al., 2013). Thus, an interplay between POB perspective, JD-R model, generational cohort and COR theory is noteworthy and a pertinent agenda for novel contribution in POB scholarship.

Transformational leadership ‘dominates the leadership landscape’ (Antonakis, 2012); thus, it is crucial to examine its impact as a significant job resource in the contemporary workplace (Bak et al., 2022; Bakker & Demerouti, 2017). Therefore, the present study hypothesised transformational leadership as an organisational antecedent to PsyCap, proposing it as a ‘salutogenic’ job resource. Furthermore, the idea of ‘resource caravans’ introduced by Hobfoll et al. (2018), job resources amplify their influence by multiplying into various other resources available to employees. Interestingly, our cognitive resources—essential for focused thinking—help us interpret and recognise the significance of our experiences and surroundings (Menary, 2010). This concept applies equally to the realms of work and personal life. Indian scholars have paid scant regard to the distinct idea of meaningful work, with only a few recent studies highlighting its positive effects on innovative work behaviors, alleviating technological stressors, fostering organisational trust, enhancing work engagement and reducing intentions to quit (Pradhan & Jena, 2017, 2019; Mahaptra & Pati, 2018; Singh & Rangnekar, 2016). On a global scale, the concept of meaningful work has emerged as a crucial predictor of both work engagement and innovation/creativity in the workplace, suggesting its importance in fortifying the tacit knowledge within an organisation’s human capital (Cai et al., 2018; Klenk et al., 2018; Oprea et al., 2020). The limited literature on resources at work encourages broadening the scope of defining personal resources by including meaningful work as a noteworthy ‘cognitive resource’ (Steger et al., 2012).

Scant evidence in literature emphasised the age-related correlations and differences in the occurrence of various work-related phenomena (Zayko & Vinichenko, 2021) such as occupational well-being, emotional regulation at work, job satisfaction and work performance (Dobrow Riza et al., 2018; Kooij et al., 2013; Scheibe & Moghimi, 2021; Sharma, 2017). Likewise, studies focusing on the employee-related micro-elements at work indicated an inverse correlation between age and employees’ memory capacity, training performance and goal orientation (Ng & Feldman, 2008). Thus, the effective use of diverse job resources and cognitive abilities depends not solely on their availability but also on employees’ aging and maturity, enabling them to comprehend, recognise and make optimal use of these resources. Thus, this exploration seeks to assist organisational leaders in comprehending the specific generational requirements to bolster PsyCap. Propelled by the identified gaps in the literature, the aim is to pursue: ‘Does age of the employees moderate the mediation of meaningful work and the relationship between transformational leadership and PsyCap (as depicted in Figure 1)?’

The Mediating Role of Meaningful Work

Transformational leaders positively motivate their subordinates and colleagues by integrating their sense of self and identity into their job roles, ultimately contributing to their collective identity. They direct the team members with incredible flawlessness to grow and flourish professionally, helping them meet all the organisational expectations efficiently by providing some sense of direction and encouraging them to accomplish challenging tasks. Avolio (2004) identified four critical characteristics of a transformational leader: idealised influence (behaviour and attributes), intellectual stimulation, individualised consideration and inspirational motivation. Yavuz (2020) also advocated for transformational leadership style as one of the essential positive organisational scholarship components necessary for promoting the employees’ optimal functioning.

The POB literature establishes transformational leadership as an essential aspect of interpersonal dynamics at work associated significantly with innovative work behaviours, occupational health and well-being (Bak et al., 2022; Karimi et al., 2023). Arnold et al. (2007) asserted an indirect relationship between transformational leadership style and psychological well-being with the mediating role of the meaning employees attach to their work. Nielsen et al. (2009) enlisted various work characteristics that played an equally vital mediational role in the relationship, such as role clarity, development opportunities, and self- and team efficacy. Considering the vast resource pool of transformational leaders, they invest their resources to enhance and promote resource development among their followers (e.g., provide meaning, role clarity and alike), consequently allowing resource gain spirals to foster among employees. Abundant literature showcases the connections between the transformational leadership style and how employees perceive the meaning and significance of their job, establishing a significant correlation (e.g., Frieder et al., 2018; Han et al., 2020; Meng et al., 2020, 2022; Oh & Roh, 2019). Nevertheless, the notable research gaps in comprehending the subtleties of this relationship stem from an inadequate conceptualisation of the construct predominantly.

Additionally, scholars used several terms for ‘meaningful work’ interchangeably, for instance, meaningfulness in work (Tummers & Knies, 2013), work as callings (Berg et al., 2013), meaning in work (Garg et al., 2021) and alike. Providing distinct outlines of these perspectives on meaningful work is essential as a preliminary step towards a deeper comprehension of the construct. Optimally, meaningful work (Steger et al., 2012) concentrates on the mental representations employees make about their work based on their beliefs and value systems culturally imbibed since childhood. This endeavour seeks to reaffirm that meaningful work, unlike emotionally and spiritually charged association, represents an employee’s self-assessment regarding the value of their work. It encompasses an inherent satisfaction derived from their impact within their family or with customers, fostering personal growth. Thus, the authors borrow from Steger et al. (2012), drawing attention to the cognitive perspective of understanding the sense of meaningful work.

Theoretically, transformational leaders contribute significantly to an individual’s sense of meaningful work (Ghadi, 2017; Paul & Jena, 2022). The empirical investigations validating this association are scarce in the Indian context. When conceptualising meaningful work as an outcome of transformational leadership, most scholars instead access workplace spirituality, using spirituality at work and meaningful work as overlapping constructs (Pradhan & Jena, 2019). Yet, the limited literature exploring the interactions of transformational leaders and the subsequent rise in the perception of meaningful work inspire the proposed causal model. The authors presume that meaningful work as a cognitive resource enhances the employees’ experiences of work in the presence of a transformational leader, consequently strengthening their hope, optimism, resiliency and efficacy. These positive psychological states described as PsyCap eventually implicate employees’ career development, organisational growth and sustainability. These are systematic, validly measurable, theory-driven and evidence-based positive psychological states classified as ‘PsyCap’ (Luthans et al., 2015). Popularly known as ‘HERO’, PsyCap is a higher-order construct adopted from different positive psychology constructs. The critical feature of PsyCap constituents shaping their commonalities is their shared sense of intentionality, control and agentic goal orientation (Luthans & Youssef-Morgan, 2017). Therefore, the authors profess PsyCap as a state of positivity in individuals, with implications for their growth, learning, well-being and optimal functioning.

In the presence of supportive, empathetic and motivating leadership, employees tend to retain a positive work attitude and draw favourable inferences about work culture, leading to a growing sense of meaning associated with their role in the organisation. Besides, Hobfoll et al. (2018) suggested that employees who perceive their efforts as less meaningful may experience increased exhaustion. This ever-increasing meaningful association with their work amongst employees affects their positive outlook, enhancing PsyCap (Bhatnagar & Aggarwal, 2020; Meng et al., 2022; Tan et al., 2020). Contemporary literature around the construct associates meaningful work with several organisational outcomes (Tan, 2018), but little emphasis on PsyCap as a significant POB outcome is visible. Indian scholars associate PsyCap with spirituality (Paul & Jena, 2022; Sarkar & Garg, 2020) and thriving as an existential need (Shahid & Muchiri, 2019), drawing implications about meaningful work rather than cognitive outlook. Therefore, the authors empirically test the following hypothesis to bridge the gaps in POB literature.

H₁: Meaningful work mediates the relationship between transformational leadership and PsyCap.

The Moderating Role of the Age of Employees

Unprecedented changes in the workforce demographics made business leaders question the age-related concerns in personnel management (McKee-Ryan, 2021). The discernible generational divide due to variations in the historical, socio-economic and political events shaping human behaviour leads to generational conflict and disagreement among employees. For instance, Su Teng (2020) accentuated the organisation’s futuristic goals in the age-diverse workplaces of contemporary times and urged scholars to focus equally on age as an influencer. Occupational health literature established a significant correlation between job satisfaction and age (Warr, 1992), suggesting that more senior employees feel more positively about their jobs than younger employees. Yet, the POB literature has undergone significant evolution in recent decades, exploring the multifaceted differences across generations or age groups concerning various organisational and employee-related outcomes (e.g., Kim & Kang, 2016; von Bonsdorff et al., 2018). Edgar and Geare (2004) highlighted that an employee’s age holds significant connections with their unique life experiences and the accumulation of knowledge. This idea underscores substantial work attitudes and beliefs among various age cohorts (Zayko & Vinichenko, 2021). Hence, to grasp the intricate details of different work-related phenomena in organisational studies, it is essential to concentrate on these variations in causal connections from a perspective that encompasses age-related nuances in management.

Few Indian scholars lately overruled the conventional ideas of marking age as a mere control variable in their statistical analysis. They analysed the conditional effects of age on customer expectations (Antony et al., 2018), usage of cloud computing (Tripathi, 2018) and positive affect at work (Dahiya & Rangnekar, 2019). Another research by Rudolph et al. (2017) suggests that older employees are more likely to show higher resilience because of the accumulated life experiences and coping strategies developed over time. However, age as a developmental marker for employee experience needs further exploration to understand the millennial workforce’s needs and career expectations for strategic management and business sustainability (Prakash & Tiwari, 2021; Weber, 2018). In doing so, the recent literature began to emphasise aging as an essential contextual factor for strategic human resource development (Froidevaux et al., 2020; Sammarra et al., 2017). It necessitates the need to focus on the employees’ demographic characteristics in different workplaces, promoting generational management (Wang & Fang, 2020) to mitigate the current organisational concerns. The present study attempts to further the knowledge by underlining the importance of employee age confounding the occurrence of POB in the millennial workforce in the IT industry.

H₂: Age influences the direct effect of transformational leadership style and the indirect impact of meaningful work on PsyCap.

Methodology

Sample and Data Collection

Employing a purposive sampling technique, the authors contacted various IT companies in India. The primary inclusion criteria defined the target population as entry-level and mid-level IT company employees contacted by their managers. The rationale for the specified inclusion criteria is rooted in the organisations’ existing challenges in retaining millennial employees (Hoffman, 2018). These challenges include high attrition rate, talent acquisition, retention, work engagement and citizenship, having severe organisational growth implications. Gaps between organisational expectations and employees’ career goals and aspirations contribute to the current unrest among the millennials. Therefore, the authors purposefully wanted to study the phenomenon among millennial employees to outline future implications and prospects for managing the present crisis. The online survey portal helped receive responses from the participants in group interactions with various teams while ensuring the ethical considerations of the research data collection process. The response rate of 63.64% culminated in a total of 350 participants (refer Table 1 for details of demographic profile of sample participants).

Measures

Multi-factor Leadership Questionnaire Form 5X-Short

From the Multi-factor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ) form developed by Avolio (2004) to evaluate different leadership styles, the present study utilises the 20-item feedback for the leader form for transformational leadership style. Based upon the 360-degree feedback technique, the items included on this scale utilised a five-point behavioural rating scale, where ‘5 = frequently if not always’ and ‘1 = not at all’. It was initially composed of four dimensions, namely idealised influence (II), inspirational motivation (IM), intellectual stimulation (IS) and individual consideration (IC). The Cronbach’s alpha of 0.90 proved to be a valid and reliable measure.

The Work and Meaning Inventory

A 10-item scale developed by Steger et al. (2012), the Work and Meaning Inventory (WAMI) measures three meaningful work dimensions: the positive meaning of work (PM), meaning-making through work (MM) and greater good motivations (GG). It uses a five-point behavioural rating scale: ‘1 = untrue’ and ‘5 = true’. The internal consistency of the alpha coefficient is 0.89, 0.82 and 0.83 for PM, MM and GG, respectively. The full-scale internal consistency is 0.93 units. One out of 10 items on the scale are reverse-coded.

PsyCap Questionnaire

Developed by Luthans et al. (2007a, b), the PsyCap Questionnaire is a 24-item scale using the Likert-type scaling method, where ‘1 = strongly disagree’ and ‘6 = strongly agree’. It comprises four dimensions, namely hope (H), efficacy/confidence (E), resilience (R) and optimism (O). The reliabilities of each dimension range from 0.82 to 0.87 alpha coefficients. However, Cronbach’s alpha for hope and efficacy usually reported better than those for resilience and optimism (Grobler & Joubert, 2018). These sub-scales adopted from other validated measures, namely the efficacy scale by Parker (1998), the hope scale by Snyder et al. (1996), the resilience scale by Wagnild and Young (1993) and the optimism scale by Scheier and Carver (1985), to create a higher-order latent construct of PsyCap.

Additionally, the age of employees was measured as a continuous variable.

Data Analysis and Results

Descriptive Analysis

Table 2 states the mean, standard deviation and correlation of all the study variables. All the study variables show a statistically significant and positive correlation.

Table 1.

Demographic Information of the Study Sample.

		Frequency	%
Gender
	Male	84	24.0
	Female	266	76.0
Marital Status
	Married	246	70.3
	Unmarried	104	29.7
Educational Qualification
	Graduate	262	74.9
	Post-graduate and above	88	25.1
Religion
	Hindu	291	83.1
	Non-Hindu	27	7.7
	No response preferred	32	9.1

Note: Primary data (n = 350).

Table 2.

Mean, Standard Deviations and Zero-order Correlations Among the Study Variables.

	Mean	SD	Age	Transformational Leadership Style	Meaningful Work	PsyCap
Age	–	–	1	–	–	–
Transformational leadership style	51.42	15.74	0.02	1	–	–
Meaningful work	32.34	8.33	0.18**	0.36**	1	–
PsyCap	65.08	9.95	0.19**	0.44**	0.58**	1

Notes: n = 350.

**Significant at 0.01 level confidence (two-tailed).

Hypothesis Testing

The authors employed the conditional process analysis (CPA) suggested by Hayes (2018) using SPSS v.26 and the PROCESS Macros plug-in. As indicated by Chang et al. (2010), controlling for the effects of a single unmeasured latent method factor substantiated the lack of common method biases. The absence of CMV assures that the data retains a relatively right amount of internal consistency. Table 3 shows the regression coefficients of all the direct, indirect and conditional paths linked to the employees’ PsyCap, also shown in Figure 2. The direct effect of transformational leadership style on PsyCap is a beta coefficient of 0.10 (α = 0.01). It established that the transformational leadership style significantly enhances the employees’ PsyCap, considering other variables constant. The path coefficient of 0.19 (α = 0.001) from transformational leadership style to meaningful work states that perceived transformational leadership as a ‘salutogenic’ job resource enhances an employee’s sense of meaningful work.

Table 3.

Regression-based Model Coefficients for the Conditional Process Analysis (Model 15) as Depicted in Figure 2.

Antecedents	Consequents
	Meaningful Work (M)				PsyCap (Y)
		Coeff	SE	p		Coeff	SE	p
Transformational leadership style (X)	a	0.19	0.03	<.001	c’₁	0.10	0.04	<.01
Meaningful work (M)		–	–	–	b₁	0.55	0.08	<.001
Age (W)		–	–	–	c’₂	−0.61	1.19	.23
X × W		–	–	–	c’₃	0.08	0.04	<.05
M × W		–	–	–	b₂	0.001	0.07	.99
Constant	i_M	22.67	1.43	<.001	i_y	40.80	2.65	<.001
	R² = 0.12				R² = 0.41
	F(1, 348) = 50.23, p < .001				F(5, 344) = 48.90, p < .001

Notes: n = 350.

SE: Standard error of measurement.

coeff: Regression coefficients.

p: Significance level.

a: Effect of X on M.

c’₁: Direct effect of X on Y.

c’₂: Direct effect of W on Y.

c’₃: Interaction effect of X and W on Y.

b₂: Interaction effect of M and W on Y.

Furthermore, the path coefficient of 0.55 (α = 0.001) from meaningful work to PsyCap substantiates that an increased sense of meaningful work enhances PsyCap. The indirect effect of transformational leadership style on PsyCap through meaningful work, with a beta coefficient of 0.11 significant at 95% confidence intervals, supports H₁. It implies that meaningful work significantly mediates the relationship between transformational leadership style and PsyCap.

The interaction effects of transformational leadership style and age of the employees, with a beta coefficient of 0.08 (α = 0.05), upon the PsyCap signify that the effect of perceived transformational leadership style is conditional on an employee’s age. Also, the test of moderation of the direct effect of transformational leadership style on PsyCap with the change in R² by 0.001 (α = 0.05) validates the results. Thus, it affirms that with increased transformational leadership perceptions, PsyCap increases, especially with the rise in employee age.

On the contrary, the interaction effects of the employees’ meaningful work and age, with a beta coefficient of 0.001, upon the PsyCap were statistically insignificant. It implies that the effect of meaningful work on PsyCap is not conditional on employees’ age. Additionally, the conditional indirect effect of the meaningful work on the relationship between transformational leadership style and PsyCap, contingent on the employees’ age, with an index of moderated mediation of 0.0002 with the bootstrap confidence intervals ranging between ±0.03 units, was statistically insignificant. Therefore, H₂ is partially accepted. These results refute the existing literature and indicate that an increase in the age of employees is pertinent to the extent extrinsic or job resources are involved. However, concerning the cognitive resources of employees, any age-related changes have a dormant role in the occurrence of POB at work.

With the help of Figure 3, this finding signifies an essential contribution to the OB literature. It helps the reader understand the relative importance of organisational resources (transformational leadership) and employees’ cognitive resources (meaningful work) in enhancing PsyCap from a generational perspective. In essence, though both job and cognitive resources play an indispensable role in forming PsyCap, with an increase in age, conviction in the job resources is coveted over seeking dependence merely on one’s meaning-making processes.

Discussion

Paralleling Hobfoll et al.’s (2018) concept of ‘resource caravan’, the current results strongly support the notion that the resources tend to exist as intertwined clusters rather than in isolation. Interestingly, these results advance a new proposition to the amalgamation of JD-R, COR and generational cohort theory by emphasising that ‘resource caravans’ do not autonomously lead to motivational processes; there are significant age-related influences on the leadership perception culminating in PsyCap. It advances the JD-R theory’s motivational process from the strengths-based POB perspective, shedding light on the impact of job resources on the employees’ optimal functioning from a top-down approach.

The results unveiled noteworthy effects wherein the advancing age of IT employees in India influenced how transformational leaders affected their PsyCap. They further the notion that millennial IT employees in their early careers may bank exclusively on their beliefs about work and the meaning they associate with it. However, with an increase in age, the advancing maturity of thought and transactional knowledge allows them to appreciate job resources like leadership a great deal. Therefore, organisational leaders must strategically align their interventions with greater generational sensitivity for higher competitive leverage.

Given that transformational leadership emerges as an essential precursor to PsyCap, particularly in the light of generational variations, the authors advocate for innovative, visionary leadership and management strategies. Building trust, intrinsic motivation, team spirit and employee loyalty is paramount in new-age organisations for cutting-edge advancement. Yet, traditional management practices fail to enhance interpersonal interactions in the workplace, offering minimal consideration to leadership’s influence on the followers’ way of thinking and emotions. Besides the organisational and relational dynamics at work, the millennials in global organisations are ahead of the curve with elevated self-expectations, striving for excellence and triumph in the competitive landscape. This pursuit of flawlessness shapes their emotional orientation and cognitions to aspire for meaningful work experiences.

Furthermore, the findings substantiate the assertion that millennial IT employees strive for meaningful work to enjoy contentment, eventually manifesting as PsyCap. These findings reinstate meaningful work as a cognitive resource that nurtures extensively in the presence of transformational leadership, culminating in developed PsyCap. They uphold the basic assumptions of the JD-R theory and the concept of ‘resource caravans’ in COR theory by endorsing one’s subjective states as a utopian vision, particularly about the age-related progression at work. They also undeniably offer a novel and unconventional perspective to the existing knowledge and misnomers about the impact of age on our meaning-making processes.

Theoretical Implications

From a research perspective, the results contribute to the extant POB literature by providing a strengths-based POB and generational cohort perspective to understand the motivational process of JD-R theory, resulting in PsyCap. The novelty in explanation of occurrence of resource gain spirals at work as contingent upon the age of the employees is crucial in revamping the existing knowledge that dismisses the role of demographic confounders. It allows for the potential of further exploration incorporating diverse yet age-appropriate constructs in the proposed JD-R model of PsyCap. Studies suggest resource development involves age as a significant predictor of the influence any job or personal resource may manifest on their optimal functioning at work (Luthans and Frey, 2017; Quick et al., 2013). For instance, the training and development needs of an organisation may benefit by focusing on the role of job-related factors for older employees and inculcation of personal dispositions for early career professionals. Thus, this study offers a fresh perspective by highlighting that resource caravans are not autonomous; rather, various demographic and contextual variables intervene and require adequate scholarly attention.

Practical Implications

Upholding Manacha’s (2020) ideologies about leadership development, the authors emphasise the need to be self-aware and thrive to attain the optimal understanding of one’s inner consciousness for higher emotional stability as an employee. Self-awareness allows one to express themselves creatively, have healthier social relationships and perform better at work (Moneta & Csikszentmihalyi, 1996), allowing them to rationalise their experiences meaningfully and perform optimally. Various psycho-therapeutic techniques such as meditation, self-introspection, self-reflection and cognitive restructuring may help employees understand better and relate to their roles. Hanh (2017) coined the term ‘inter-being’ to propagate the idea behind discovering one’s non-self and interdependent reality. Additionally, the psychological benefits of indulging in ‘karma yoga’ may considerably allow the employees to gain exceptional command over their work lives and interpersonal work dynamics (Pradhan & Pradhan, 2013; Rastogi & Prakash Pati, 2015). Hence, involvement in intellectually stimulating activities over time could enable employees to explore diverse avenues, fostering feelings of hopefulness, optimism, confidence and resilience in their workplace.

Among all crucial resources, this study equally underscores the significance of meaningful work as a cognitive resource for enhancing occupational health. Employees’ self-initiated proactive behaviour to shape their work’s meaning is known as job crafting (Vermooten et al., 2019). Studies reveal a significant association between the top-down leadership approach and employees’ bottom-up approach to job crafting, resulting in a marked enhancement of their performance, well-being and health (Lichtenthaler & Fischbach, 2018). Recent trends in POB literature further add to job crafting to make work meaningful (Berg et al., 2013), gain significantly from their association with the leaders and overcome problems such as job boredom, disengagement and strained performance (Sánchez-Cardona et al., 2020; Vermooten et al., 2019). Hence, the authors suggest that managers consider implementing practices and policies that encourage employees to shape their tasks, relationships and cognitive approaches in their jobs to enhance the sense of meaningfulness.

At an employer’s level, recruiters and managers must appreciate leadership’s role in strengthening employees’ beliefs about their organisation and job roles. Considering the needs of the contemporary millennial IT workforce, managers or supervisors should offer constructive feedback to team members, expressing appreciation for their performance on assigned tasks. Such feedback holds substantial significance for the employees’ sense of self-worth and the value they attribute to their roles. Moreover, enabling employees to better comprehend their responsibilities and clients’ needs or challenges could aid innovative problem-solving and improve overall work efficiency. Such an open communication practice may allow employees to easily relate to the organisational goals and procedures because of the meaning and rationalisations they attach to their flow at work. The authors recommend that leaders cultivate a boundary-less work culture with receptivity for innovative thinking by reducing the employees’ micro-managing for inculcating meaningful work, resulting in improved PsyCap in the contemporary competitive world.

Limitations and Future Research Prospects

Acknowledging the nuanced observations, this study is not without methodological constraints. The authors strongly recommend that future researchers undertake multi-method, multi-source or longitudinal studies with a mixed-methods approach. Second, a better representation of varied sections of working populations in different regions would extend the knowledge base of the present theoretical model. Third, little evidence on the dark side of meaningful work is rare, contributing to the comprehensive evaluation of the POB outcomes. Lastly, the concept of ‘meaningful work’ in Indian organisational literature, highly influenced by Indian philosophical ideas and workplace spirituality, invites apprehensions. Before furthering any generalisations on the concept in the Indian context, the authors warrant detailed exploration and attempts to redefine ‘meaningful work indigenously’.

Conclusion

The current study is a significant foundation in POB and JD-R literature, specifically shedding light on age specificity in influencing PsyCap development through various resource gains. In summary, the authors contend that interventions aimed at improving the occupational health of the millennial workforce should be introduced thoughtfully, considering their age-specific needs and aspirations. While enhancing resources in the IT sector may boost employee performance, a comprehensive understanding of the specific resources that require emphasis based on generational needs could significantly contribute to long-term success.

Data Availability Statement

Due to this research’s nature, participants of this study did not agree for their data to be shared publicly, so supporting data is not available.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iDs

Kannu Priya Kamboj

Pooja Garg

References

Antonakis

(2012). Transformational and charismatic leadership. In

Day

D. D.

& Antonakis

(Eds.), The nature of leadership (2nd ed., pp. 256–288). Sage Publications.

Antony

, Khanapuri

V. B.

, & Jain

(2018). Customer expectations and moderating role of demographics in fresh food retail: A study among Indian consumers. International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management , 46(9), 870–890. https://doi.org.10.1108/IJRDM-05-2017-0104

Arnold

K. A.

, Turner

, Barling

, Kelloway

E. K.

, & McKee

M. C.

(2007). Transformational leadership and psychological well-being: The mediating role of meaningful work. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology , 12(3), 193–203. https://doi.org.10.1037/1076-8998.12.3.193

Avolio

B. J.

(2004). Examining the full range model of leadership: Looking back to transform forward. In

Day

D. V.

, Zaccaro

S. J.

& Halpin

S. M.

(Eds.), Leader development for transforming organizations: Growing leaders for tomorrow (pp. 71–98). Lawerence Erlbaum Associates.

Bak

H. U.

, Jin

M. H.

, & McDonald

B. D.

(2022). Unpacking the transformational leadership-innovative work behavior relationship: The mediating role of psychological capital. Public Performance and Management Review , 45(1), 80–105. https://doi.org.10.1080/15309576.2021.1939737

Bakker

A. B.

, & Demerouti

(2017). Job demands–resources theory: Taking stock and looking forward. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology , 22(3), 273–285.

Berg

J. M.

, Dutton

J. E.

, & Wrzesniewski

(2013). Job crafting and meaningful work. In

Dik

B. J.

, Byrne

Z. S.

, & Steger

M. F.

(Eds.), Purpose and meaning in the workplace (pp. 81–104). American Psychological Association.

Bhatnagar

, & Aggarwal

(2020). Meaningful work as a mediator between perceived organizational support for environment and employee eco-initiatives, psychological capital and alienation. Employee Relations: The International Journal , 42(6), 1487–1511. https://doi.org.10.1108/ER-04-2019-0187

Cai

, Lysova

E. I.

, Khapova

S. N.

, & Bossink

B. A. G.

(2018). Servant leadership and innovative work behavior in Chinese high-tech firms: A moderated mediation model of meaningful work and job autonomy. Frontiers in Psychology , 9(October), 1767. https://doi.org.10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01767

10.

Chang

S. J.

, Van Witteloostuijn

, & Eden

(2010). From the editors: Common method variance in international business research. Journal of International Business Studies , 8(February). https://doi.org.10.1057/jibs.2009.88

11.

Christensen

, Aarøe

, Baekgaard

, Herd

, & Moynihan

D. P.

(2020). Human capital and administrative burden: The role of cognitive resources in citizen-state interactions. Public Administration Review , 80(1), 127–136. https://doi.org.10.1111/puar.13134

12.

Dahiya

, & Rangnekar

(2019). Relationship between forgiveness at work and positive affect: The role of age as a moderator. International Journal of Environment, Workplace and Employment , 5(3), 247–268. https://doi.org.10.1504/IJEWE.2019.103399

13.

Desai

, & Patel

(2018). Demographic moderators in the relationship between positive behavior and performance: A study from India. Indian Journal of Industrial Relations , 54(1), 76–89.

14.

Dobrow Riza

, Ganzach

, & Liu

(2018). Time and job satisfaction: A longitudinal study of the differential roles of age and tenure. Journal of Management , 44(7), 2558–2579. https://doi.org.10.1177/0149206315624962

15.

Edgar

, & Geare

(2004). Employee demographics in human resource management research. Research and Practice in Human Resource Management , 12(1), 61–91.

16.

Frieder

R. E.

, Wang

, & Oh

I. S.

(2018). Linking job-relevant personality traits, transformational leadership, and job performance via perceived meaningfulness at work: A moderated mediation model. Journal of Applied Psychology , 103(3), 324–333. https://doi.org.10.1037/apl0000274

17.

Froidevaux

, Alterman

, & Wang

(2020). Leveraging aging workforce and age diversity to achieve organizational goals: A human resource management perspective. Current and Emerging Trends in Aging and Work , 33–58. https://doi.org.10.1007/978-3-030-24135-3_3

18.

Garg

, Han

K. S.

, & Malik

(2021). Exploring the nexus between job design and work engagement: mediating role of meaning in work. International Journal of Business Excellence , 23(3), 389–414.

19.

Ghadi

M. Y.

(2017). Transformational leadership, job satisfaction, and intention to quit: A sequential mediation model of meaning in work and work engagement. DLSU Business & Economics Review , 27(1), 145–164.

20.

Grobler

, & Joubert

Y. T.

(2018). Psychological capital: Convergent and discriminant validity of a reconfigured measure. South African Journal of Economic and Management Sciences , 21(10), 1–14. https://doi.org.10.4102/sajems.v21i1.1715

21.

Han

S. H.

, Oh

E. G.

, & Kang

S. Pil

. (2020). The link between transformational leadership and work-related performance: Moderated-mediating roles of meaningfulness and job characteristics. Leadership and Organization Development Journal , 41(4), 519–533. https://doi.org.10.1108/LODJ-04-2019-0181

22.

Hanh

T. N.

(2017). The art of living . Penguin Books.

23.

Hayes

A. F.

(2018). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach (2nd ed.). The Guilford Press.

24.

Hobfoll

S. E.

, Halbesleben

, Neveu

J.-P.

, & Westman

(2018). Conservation of resources in the organizational context: The reality of resources and their consequences. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior , 5(1), 103–128. https://doi.org.10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032117-104640

25.

Hoffman

(2018). Why millennials quit. Journal of Property Management , 83(3), 42–45.

26.

Jose

, & Mampilly

S. R.

(2015). Relationships among perceived supervisor support, psychological empowerment and employee engagement in Indian workplaces. Journal of Workplace Behavioral Health , 30(3), 231–250. https://doi.org.10.1080/15555240.2015.1047498

27.

Karimi

, Ahmadi Malek

, Yaghoubi Farani

, & Liobikienė

(2023). The role of transformational leadership in developing innovative work behaviors: The mediating role of employees’ psychological capital. Sustainability , 15(2), 1267. https://doi.org.10.3390/su15021267

28.

Kim

, & Kang

S.-W.

(2016). Older and more engaged: The mediating role of age-linked resources on work engagement. Human Resource Management , 1–16. https://doi.org.10.1002/hrm.21802

29.

Klenk

, Bjorklund

, Gilmartin

, & Sheppard

(2018). Early-career engineers at the workplace: Meaningful highs, lows, and innovative work efforts . Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference, June 24–27, 2018. Salt Lake City, Utah.

30.

Kooij

D. T.

, Guest

D. E.

, Clinton

, Knight

, Jansen

P. G.

, & Dikkers

J. S.

(2013). How the impact of HR practices on employee well-being and performance changes with age. Human Resource Management Journal , 23(1), 18–35.

31.

Kumar

, & Jain

(2021). Sector-specific dynamics of positive organizational behavior: Evidence from India’s IT and service sectors. Journal of Business Research , 29(4), 210–228.

32.

Lambert

, Topolskaya

, Warren

M. A.

, & Habib

M. A.

(2019). Positivity at work: It’s not a contradiction! In

Lambert

& Pasha-Zaidi

(Eds.), Positive psychology in the Middle East/North Africa: Research, policy, and practise (pp. 133–156). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org.10.1007/978-3-030-13921-6_7

33.

Lichtenthaler

P. W.

, & Fischbach

(2018). Leadership, job crafting, and employee health and performance. Leadership and Organization Development Journal , 39(5), 620–632. https://doi.org.10.1108/LODJ-07-2017-0191

34.

Loghman

, Quinn

, Dawkins

, Woods

, Sharma

S. O.

, & Scott

(2022). A comprehensive meta-analyses of the nomological network of psychological capital. Psychological Capital . https://doi.org.10.1177/15480518221107998

35.

Lopes

I. T.

, & Serrasqueiro

R. M.

(2017). Editorial for the special issue on linking theory and practice in intellectual capital—Proquest. Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management , 15(3), 145–146.

36.

Lorenz

, Beer

, Pütz

, & Heinitz

(2016). Measuring psychological capital: Construction and validation of the compound PsyCap scale (CPC-12). PLoS One , 11(4), e0152892. https://doi.org.10.1371/journal.pone.0152892

37.

Luthans

, Avolio

B. J.

, Avey

J. B.

, & Norman

S. M.

(2007a). Psychological capital development: Toward a micro-intervention. Journal of Organizational Behavior , 28(2), 143–165.

38.

Luthans

, & Frey

(2017). Positive psychology in the workplace: The important role of psychological capital (PsyCap). In Positive psychology (pp. 169–196). Routledge.

39.

Luthans

, Youssef-Morgan

C. M.

, & Avolio

B. J.

(2015). Psychological capital and beyond . Oxford university Press.

40.

Luthans

, & Youssef-Morgan

C. M.

(2017). Psychological capital: An evidence-based positive approach. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior , 4, 339–366. https://doi.org.10.1146/annurev-orgpsych

41.

Luthans

, Youssef

C. M.

, & Avolio

B. J.

(2007b). Psychological capital: Developing the human competitive edge . Oxford University Press.

42.

Mahaptra

, & Pati

S. P.

(2018). Can meaningful work mitigate the impact of techno stress creators? Evidence from India (Working papers, 243).

43.

Manacha

(2020), Step up: Women’s journey to identity, success and power . Sage Publications.

44.

McKee-Ryan

F. M.

(2021). Coming of age in a global pandemic: HRM perspectives on generation Z’s workforce entry. In Research in personnel and human resources management (Vol. 39, pp. 99–128). Emerald Publishing Limited.

45.

Menary

(Ed.). (2010). The extended mind, a Bradford book . The MIT Press.

46.

Meng

, Wang

, Xu

, Ye

, Peng

, & Gao

(2020). The diminishing effect of transformational leadership on the relationship between task characteristics, perceived meaningfulness, and work engagement. Frontiers in Psychology , 11, 585031. https://doi.org.10.3389/fpsyg.2020.585031

47.

Meng

, Xu

, Liu

, Zhang

, Tong

, & Lin

(2022). Linkages between transformational leadership, work meaningfulness and work engagement: A multilevel cross-sectional study. Psychology Research and Behavior Management , 15, 367–380. https://doi.org.10.2147/PRBM.S344624

48.

Moneta

G. B.

, & Csikszentmihalyi

(1996). The effect of perceived challenges and skills on the quality of subjective experience. Journal of Personality , 64(2), 275–310. https://doi.org.10.1111/j.1467-6494.1996.tb00512.x

49.

T. W. H.

, & Feldman

D. C.

(2008). The relationship of age to ten dimensions of job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology , 93(2), 392–423. https://doi.org.10.1037/0021-9010.93.2.392

50.

Nielsen

, Yarker

, Randall

, & Munir

(2009). The mediating effects of team and self-efficacy on the relationship between transformational leadership, and job satisfaction and psychological well-being in healthcare professionals: A cross-sectional questionnaire survey. International Journal of Nursing Studies , 46(9), 1236–1244. https://doi.org.10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2009.03.001

51.

, & Roh

S.-C.

(2019). A moderated mediation model of self-concept clarity, transformational leadership, perceived work meaningfulness, and work motivation. Frontiers in Psychology , 10(July), 1756. https://doi.org.10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01756

52.

Okros

(2020). Generational theory and cohort analysis. In Harnessing the potential of digital post-millennials in the future workplace (pp. 33–51). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-25726-2_2

53.

Oprea

, Păduraru

, & Iliescu

(2020). Job crafting and intent to leave: The mediating role of meaningful work and engagement. Journal of Career Development , 089484532091866. https://doi.org.10.1177/0894845320918666

54.

Pandey

(2017). Job performance of women at work in rural India: Job demands-resources (JD-R) perspective . Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad.

55.

Parker

S. K.

(1998). Enhancing role breadth self-efficacy: the roles of job enrichment and other organizational interventions. Journal of Applied Psychology , 83(6), 835.

56.

Paul

, & Jena

L. K.

(2022). Workplace spirituality, teachers’ professional well-being and mediating role of positive psychological capital: An empirical validation in the Indian context. International Journal of Ethics and Systems , 38(4), 633–660. https://doi.org.10.1108/IJOES-08-2021-0163/FULL/PDF

57.

Pradhan

, & Jena

L. K.

(2017). Effect of abusive supervision on employee’s intention to quit and the neutralizing role of meaningful work in Indian IT organizations. International Journal of Organizational Analysis , 25(5), 825–838. https://doi.org.10.1108/IJOA-01-2017-1107

58.

Pradhan

, & Jena

L. K.

(2019). Does meaningful work explain the relationship between transformational leadership and innovative work behaviour? VIKALPA: The Journal of Decision Makers , 44(1), 30–40. https://doi.org.10.1177/0256090919832434

59.

Pradhan

, & Pradhan

R. K.

(2013). Karma-yoga (spirit at work) and job attitudes: Applying Indian wisdom to today’s business problems . IIM HR Summit 2013, Indian Institute of Management.

60.

Prakash

, & Tiwari

(2021). Millennials and post millennials: A systematic literature review. Publishing Research Quarterly , 1–18. https://doi.org.10.1007/s12109-021-09794-w

61.

Quick

J. C.

, Wright

T. A.

, Adkins

J. A.

, Nelson

D. L.

, & Quick

J. D.

(2013). Preventive stress management in organizations (2nd ed.). American Psychological Association.

62.

Rastogi

, & Prakash Pati

(2015). Towards a conceptualization of karma yoga. Journal of Human Values , 21(1), 51–63. https://doi.org.10.1177/0971685815579985

63.

Rudolph

C. W.

, Lavigne

K. N.

, & Zacher

(2017). Career adaptation: A review and future agenda for understanding proactive career behaviors. Journal of Management , 43(1), 225–247.

64.

Sammarra

, Profili

, Maimone

, & Gabrielli

(2017). Enhancing knowledge sharing in age-diverse organizations: The role of HRM practices. Age Diversity in the Workplace (Advanced Series in Management) , 17, 161–187. https://doi.org.10.1108/S1877-636120170000017009

65.

Sánchez-Cardona

, Vera

, Martínez-Lugo

, Rodríguez-Montalbán

, & Marrero-Centeno

(2020). When the job does not fit: The moderating role of job crafting and meaningful work in the relation between employees’ perceived overqualification and job boredom. Journal of Career Assessment , 28(2), 257–276. https://doi.org.10.1177/1069072719857174

66.

Sarkar

, & Garg

(2020). ‘Peaceful workplace’ only a myth? Examining the mediating role of psychological capital on spirituality and nonviolence behaviour at the workplace. International Journal of Conflict Management , 31(5), 709–728. https://doi.org.10.1108/IJCMA-11-2019-0217

67.

Scheibe

, & Moghimi

(2021). Age and context effects in daily emotion regulation and well-being at work. In

Wang

(Ed.), Work, aging and retirement (Vol. 7, pp. 31–45). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org.10.1093/workar/waz014

68.

Scheier

M. F.

, & Carver

C. S.

(1985). Optimism, coping, and health: Sssessment and implications of generalized outcome expectancies. Health Psychology , 4(3), 219.

69.

Shahid

, & Muchiri

M. K.

(2019). Positivity at the workplace: Conceptualising the relationships between authentic leadership, psychological capital, organisational virtuousness, thriving and job performance. International Journal of Organizational Analysis , 27(3), 494–523. https://doi.org.10.1108/IJOA-05-2017-1167

70.

Sharma

(2017). Organizational culture as a predictor of job satisfaction: The role of age and gender. Management: Journal of Contemporary Management Issues , 22(1), 35–48.

71.

Singh

, & Rangnekar

(2016). Relationship between meaningful work and organizational trust a study of techno-managers in the Indian power sector relationship between meaningful work and organizational trust: A study of techno-managers in the Indian power sector. Proceedings of GLOGIFT , 16, 247–255.

72.

Steger

M. F.

, Dik

B. J.

, & Duffy

R. D.

(2012). Measuring meaningful work: The work and meaning inventory (WAMI). Journal of Career Assessment , 20(3), 322–337. https://doi.org.10.1177/1069072711436160

73.

Su Teng

(2020). Bracing for the multi-generational workforce: What we need to know. Management Revue , 31(3), 324–345. https://doi.org.10.5771/0935-9915-2020-3-324

74.

Swanson

J. L.

, & Schneider

(2020). The theory of work adjustment. In Brown

S. D.

& Lent

R. W.

(Eds.) Career development and counseling: Putting theory and research to work (pp. 33–60). John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

75.

Snyder

C. R.

, Sympson

S. C.

, Ybasco

F. C.

, Borders

T. F.

, Babyak

M. A.

, & Higgins

R. L.

(1996). Development and validation of the State Hope Scale. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 70(2), 321.

76.

Tan

K. L.

(2018). Effects of psychological capital on the relationship between meaningful work, job burnout and employee engagement of social workers in Singapore . Curtin University.

77.

Tan

K.-L.

, Lew

T.-Y.

, & Sim

A. K. S.

(2020). Effect of work engagement on meaningful work and psychological capital: Perspectives from social workers in New Zealand. Employee Relations: The International Journal . https://doi.org.10.1108/ER-11-2019-0433

78.

Tripathi

(2018). Moderating effects of age and experience on the factors influencing the actual usage of cloud computing. Journal of International Technology and Information Management , 27(2). https://doi.org/10.58729/1941-6679.1373

79.

Tummers

L. G.

, & Knies

(2013). Leadership and meaningful work in the public sector. Public Administration Review , 73(6), 859–868. https://doi.org.10.1111/puar.12138

80.

Vermooten

, Boonzaier

, & Kidd

(2019). Job crafting, proactive personality and meaningful work: Implications for employee engagement and turnover intention. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology , 45(1), 1–13. https://doi.org.10.4102/sajip.v45i0.1567

81.

von Bonsdorff

M. E.

, Zhou

, Wang

, Vanhala

, von Bonsdorff

M. B.

, & Rantanen

(2018). Employee age and company performance: An integrated model of aging and human resource management practices. Journal of Management , 44(8), 3124–3150.

82.

Wang

, & Fang

(2020). Age diversity in the workplace: Facilitating opportunities with organizational practices. Public Policy & Aging Report , 30(3), 119–123. https://doi.org.10.1093/ppar/praa015

83.

Wagnild

G. M.

, & Young

H. M.

(1993). Development and psychometric. Journal of Nursing Measurement , 1(2), 165–17847.

84.

Warr

(1992). Age and occupational well-being. Psychology and Aging , 7(1), 37.

85.

Weber

(2018), Millennials expect less and more: Workplace writing for today’s workforce , technical communication capstone course . Mankato.

86.

Yavuz

(2020). Transformational leadership and authentic leadership as practical implications of positive organizational psychology. In Alayoğlu

, Bayraktar

, Torres

F. N. C.

(Eds.), Handbook of Research on Positive Organizational Behavior for Improved Workplace Performance (pp. 122–139). IGI Global Scientific Publishing.

87.

Zayko

, & Vinichenko

(2021, May). Generational theory: An overview of the research conducted. In

Manakov

& Edigarian

(Eds), International scientific Siberian transport forum (pp. 802–809). Springer International Publishing.