Character strengths use and development at work: New interventions and perspectives — ASN Events
  1. Schedule
  2. Symposium - Character strengths use and development at work: New interventions and perspectives
  3. Character strengths use and development at work: New interventions and perspectives

Character strengths use and development at work: New interventions and perspectives (#34)

Philippe Dubreuil 1 , Claudia Harzer 2 , Julie Levesque-Côté 1 , Scott Mitchell 3 , Marc-Antoine Gradito-Dubord 4 , Marylène Gagné 5 , Jacques Forest 4 , Marine Miglianico 1 , Charles Martin-Krumm 6 , Paule Miquelon 1 , Arnold Bakker 7
  1. Universite du Quebec à Trois-Rivieres, Trois-Rivieres, QUEBEC, Canada
  2. Medical School Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany
  3. Open Compliance & Ethics Group (OCEG), Phoenix, USA
  4. Université du Québec à Montréal, Montreal, Canada
  5. Curtin University, Perth, Australia
  6. École de psychologues praticiens de Paris, Paris, France
  7. Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands

Symposium Summary:

Character strengths are positive personality traits that reflect our basic identity, produce positive outcomes for ourselves and others, and contribute to the collective good (Niemiec & Pearce, 2021). Stemming from a scientific endeavour that aimed to provide the field of positive psychology with a foundation for research on what enables and promotes the good life, they are classified in 24 character strengths, which are conceptualized under six broad virtues (Peterson and Seligman, 2004). In the last 20 years, character strengths have been associated with a wide variety of positive outcomes in multiple fields and across different types of populations (Ghielen & al., 2017; Schutte & Malouff, 2019). In the workplace, research has repeatedly shown that character strengths use is associated to various indicators of well-being and performance (Miglianico et al., 2019). Additionally, intervention studies aiming specifically at character strengths development have recently been able to demonstrate significant improvements in well-being (Gradito-Dubord et al., 2022; Harzer & Ruch, 2016; Meyers & Van Woerkom, 2017) and performance (Pang & Ruch, 2019; Peláez et al., 2019). While these studies have provided valuable insights, most scholars in the field still denote the pressing need for additional research using experimental and longitudinal designs, and shedding light on the psychological processes involved in these relations (Bakker & Van Woerkom, 2018; Littman-Ovadia et al., 2021; Mayerson, 2020). Drawing on these recommendations, this symposium presents a study exploring the five PERMA dimensions of well-being as potential mediators in the relation between character strengths application in the workplace and supervisor-rated work performance, and three experimental design studies examining the effects of innovative character strengths development interventions on different indicators of well-being and performance at work.

Symposium Presentation 1: Signature strengths use and work performance: The role of well-being in an integrated perspective

Authors: Philippe Dubreuil, Claudia Harzer, and Julie Levesque-Côté

Presenter: Philippe Dubreuil

Abstract: Character strengths use and development in the workplace has been associated to a wide variety of positive outcomes, such as well-being, engagement and performance (Miglianico et al., 2019; Schutte & Malouff, 2019). So far, while most studies have suggested different underlying processes explaining these relations, very few have adopted an integrative perspective, especially using supervisor-rated measures of work performance (Bakker & Van Woerkom, 2018; Littman-Ovadia et al., 2021). Therefore, the present research was aimed at exploring the relations between signature strengths use, work-related well-being, and job performance. Drawing on the PERMA (Seligman, 2011) and engine (Jayawickreme et al. 2012) models of well-being, our research examined how signature strengths use (as input variables), predict job performance (as output variable) mediated by positive emotions, engagement, positive relationships, meaning and accomplishment at work (as process variables). So far, our two online samples include n = 103 German and n = 123 Canadian workers from a wide variety of professions (additional participants are expected to complete the study). Preliminary results indicate that signature strengths use predicts supervisor-rated job performance as well as self-rated positive emotions, engagement, positive relationships, meaning, and accomplishment at work in both German and Canadian samples. Furthermore, all indirect effects are statistically significant, indicating that the effect of signature strengths use on job performance is mediated by positive emotions, engagement, positive relationships, meaning and accomplishment at work. Limitations and implications of the present research will be discussed. 

Symposium Presentation 2: Using positive technology to promote teams’ motivation in organizations: A quasi-experimental study

Authors: Marc-Antoine Gradito-Dubord, Philippe Dubreuil, Marylène Gagné, and Jacques Forest

Presenter: Marc-Antoine Gradito-Dubord

Abstract: The term Positive Technology (PT), proposed by Botella et al. (2012), refers to the scientific and applied approach focused on the study of the use of technology to improve the quality of personal experiences. This perspective seeks to promote the use of technology to foster personal growth and the development of strengths. Regarding the domain of work, research has demonstrated that digital interventions promoting character strengths can significantly increase various dimensions of employees’ optimal functioning (Gradito Dubord et al., 2022; Harzer et Ruch, 2016). Therefore, what precedes invites the scientific community to study the potential benefits of several virtual platforms that promote employees’ strengths. Recently, a digital platform (Totem; store.totemteam.com) was conceived to promote character strength-oriented feedback in an online team-building activity. More precisely, this virtual experience aims at enhancing teams’ motivation through strength-oriented feedback. The digital platform is akin to the Character Strengths 360° activity (see Niemiec, 2018), which is a prevalent practice in clinical situations involving the patient systematically collecting character strengths feedback from a variety of people in his or her life. The overall functioning of the platform is similar, gathering and giving descriptive feedback on strengths from/to colleagues. Drawing on Self-Determination Theory (Deci & Ryan, 2000), we designed an intervention program where participants were recruited to experience the Totem activity. Three measurement times were included in the study design: 1 – before the intervention 2- directly after the intervention 3- one month after the intervention. To this day, 96 full-time employees have answered all questionnaires. A preliminary intervention study has revealed that strength-oriented feedback fostered by a digital platform (e.g., the totem activity) significantly influences participants’ need satisfaction and autonomous motivation. A discussion will follow arguing that research can rely on digital platforms to promote affordable, scalable, and science-based interventions in organizations.

Symposium Presentation 3: Appreciative Inquiry vs Character strengths development: A comparative study on the effects of two strengths-based interventions on well-being and work performance

Authors: Marine Miglianico, Charles Martin-Krumm, Philippe Dubreuil, Paule Miquelon, and Arnold Bakker

Presenter: Charles Martin-Krumm

Abstract: Strengths development and Appreciative Inquiry (AI) represent two interesting avenues in positive psychology to improve well-being and performance at work (Bushe & Kassam, 2005; Miglianico et al., 2019). However, so far only a limited number of studies have examined their efficacy through experimental designs (Bakker & Van Woerkom, 2018; Miglianico et al., 2021; Littman-Ovadia et al., 2021). Furthermore, despite some notable differences, these two intervention models considerably overlap and the comparison between them remains missing in the scientific literature. The objective of this study is therefore twofold: on the one hand, to validate the effects of strengths development and AI interventions on well-being, engagement, and work performance, and on the other hand to compare these two interventions regarding their respective effects on the aforementioned variables. This study used a quasi-experimental design involving 3 groups (Strengths development intervention; AI intervention; Placebo intervention) and 4 measurement times (Pre, Post, 1 month, 3 months) with a sample of 300 participants from a large organization in the energy sector. Preliminary results from analyses of variance suggest that the strengths development intervention group showed significant improvements in well-being and task performance, whereas the AI intervention group showed significant improvements in engagement and contextual performance. Further analyses will be conducted in order to refine our comprehension of the observed patterns. These results raise the possibility that strengths development and AI interventions may have specific effects on different components of well-being and work performance. Limitations and additional implications for research and practice will be discussed. 

  1. Bakker, A. B., & van Woerkom, M. (2018). Strengths use in organizations: a positive approach of occupational health. Canadian Psychology, 59(1), 38–46. https://doi.org/10.1037/cap0000120
  2. Botella, C., Riva, G., Gaggioli, A., Wiederhold, B. K., Alcaniz, M., & Banos, R. M. (2012). The present and future of positive technologies. Cyberpsychology, Behavior and Social Networking, 15(2), 78–84. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2011.0140
  3. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The” what” and” why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227–268. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01
  4. Ghielen, S. T. S., van Woerkom, M., & Christina Meyers, M. (2017). Promoting positive outcomes through strengths interventions: a literature review. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 13(6), 573-585. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2017.1365164
  5. Gradito Dubord, M. A., Forest, J., Balčiūnaitė, L. M., Raeun, E., & Jungert, T. (2022). The power of strength-oriented feedback enlightened by Self-Determination Theory: A positive technology-based intervention. Journal of Happiness Studies, 23(4). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-022-00524-3
  6. Harzer, C., & Ruch, W. (2016). Your strengths are calling: preliminary results of a web-based strengths intervention to increase calling. Journal of Happiness Studies, 17(6), 2237–2256. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-015-9692-y
  7. Jayawickreme, E., Forgeard, M. J. C., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2012). The engine of well-being. Review of General Psychology, 16(4), 327–342. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027990
  8. Littman-Ovadia, H., Dubreuil, P., Meyers, M. C., & Freidlin, P. (2021). Editorial: VIA character strengths: Theory, research and practice. Frontiers in Psychology, 12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.653941
  9. Mayerson, N. H. (2020). The character strengths response: an urgent call to action. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 2106–2106. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.02106
  10. Meyers, M. C., & van Woerkom, M. (2017). Effects of a strengths intervention on general and work-related well-being: the mediating role of positive affect. Journal of Happiness Studies, 18(3), 671–689. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-016-9745-x
  11. Miglianico, M., Dubreuil, P., Miquelon, P., Martin-Krumm, C., & Bakker, A. B. (2019). Strength use in the workplace: a literature review. Journal of Happiness Studies, 21(2), 737–764. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-019-00095-w
  12. Niemiec, R. M. (2018). Character strengths interventions: A field guide for practitioners. Hogrefe publishing.
  13. Niemiec, R. M., & Pearce, R. (2020). The practice of character strengths: unifying definitions, principles, and exploration of what's soaring, emerging, and ripe with potential in science and in practice. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 590220–590220. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.590220
  14. Schutte, N. S., & Malouff, J. M. (2019). The impact of signature character strengths interventions: a meta-analysis. Journal of Happiness Studies, 20(4), 1179–1196. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-018-9990-2
  15. Pang, D., & Ruch, W. (2019). Fusing character strengths and mindfulness interventions: benefits for job satisfaction and performance. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 24(1), 150–162. https://doi.org/10.1037/ocp0000144
  16. Peláez, M. J., Coo, C., & Salanova, M. (2019). Facilitating work engagement and performance through strengths-based micro-coaching: a controlled trial study. Journal of Happiness Studies, 21(4), 1265–1284. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-019-00127-5
  17. Peterson, C., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2004). Character strengths and virtues: A handbook and classification. Oxford University Press
  18. Seligman, M. E. P. (2011). Flourish: A Visionary New Understanding of Happiness and Well-being. Free Press.
  19. Miglianico, M., Dubreuil, P., Miquelon, P., Bakker, A. B., & Martin-Krumm, C. (2021). L’appreciative Inquiry, une technique d’accompagnement qui donne vie aux entreprises?. In C. Martin-Krumm &, C. Tarquinio (Eds.), Le Grand Manuel de la Psychologie Positive (pp. 539-554), Dunod. https://doi.org/9782100822133
  20. Bushe, G. R., & Kassam, A. F. (2005). When is appreciative inquiry transformational? A meta-case analysis. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 41(2), 161–181. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021886304270337
  • Please select up to 3 keywords from the following list to best describe your submission content: Business and Organizations, Motivation, Strengths
#IPPAWorldCongress