**5. Discussion and conclusion**

Happiness has been the subject of growing attention from various academic disciplines, media, and governments. In societal terms, happiness has been hailed as *the* accurate measure of economic, social, and political progress [14, 32, 39]. Happiness has become a ubiquitous topic in all societal domains, and organizations are no exception. As much of adult life is spent in formal work organizations, the happiness *discourse* has received growing attention from organizational scholars. The so-called "*happy-productive worker thesis*" [105–107] has long fascinated scholars and practitioners alike, as it suggests that, all things being equal, happy workers show higher levels of job-related performance behaviors than unhappy workers. Well-being at work is good for the organization *and* the employee, making it not only ethically warranted, but also economically desirable. In other words, the mutually constitutive nature of the "happiness-positive work outcomes" relationship creates *value* for individuals and organizations alike, and eventually also to society at large. Given the

### *Happiness, Value, and Organizational Toughness: Three Concepts in Search of a Theory DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.107333*

apparent connections between happiness and value, both at individual and organizational levels, in this chapter we discuss how individual happiness connects to value creation, and, eventually, to organizational toughness.

In organizations, just like in any other life domain, happiness is not given. At best, it can be seen as resulting from an ongoing interplay between the dispositional characteristics of employees, the contextual, environmental, job-related, and social influences at work. What is more, happiness, positive moods, emotions, and positive attitudes do not result from all these influences directly, but rather from individuals' subjective and transient perceptions, interpretations, and appraisals of those factors. Therefore, if we are to take the prospects and value of happiness to organizations seriously, then attempts to untangle (individual) dispositional traits from (work) processes and (organizational) contexts may fall short of their potential. Happiness at work is likely to be found at the intersection of different yet mutually constitutive layers: the affective (or emotional) and the cognitive (or judgmental) factors; the personal and environmental factors; the objective and subjective perceptions, interpretations, and appraisals; and the individual, group, and organizational levels.

Happy workers are believed to perform better (qualitatively) and more productively (quantitatively) than non-happy workers. Research suggests positive associations between happiness with valuable organizational outcomes. While these outcomes come in many shapes and colors, we find it particularly useful and instructive to order them along a continuum with two extremes: affective and cognitive levels (see **Table 1**). From an *affective* viewpoint, happiness stimulates positive attitudes, values, emotions, or behaviors that are relevant for work-context directly and work processes indirectly. Inversely, from a *cognitive* standpoint, happiness stimulates positive work-processes directly and work-context indirectly.

The potential combined effect of these affective and cognitive influences on workers may ripple out to society at large for at least wo reasons. First, individuals do not live on emotional islands; positive moods influence others' emotions, dynamics, attitudes, and behaviors [104]. Second, workers are also citizens and consumers, who look for and buy products—*viz.* goods, services, ideas, information, experiences—in order to fulfill their needs and desires. This suggests that happy workers might also become happier citizens and better-informed consumers. This is not to say that the reverse influence is immaterial; this is not the case, as clearly outlined earlier in this chapter.


### **Table 1.**

*Affective and cognitive value levels of happiness at work.*

The question we pose ourselves, however, points to a different angle of analysis: how individual happiness connects to value and, eventually, to organizational toughness. Thus, it appears plausible to argue that the absolute, relative, or comparative value that workers ascribe to products (as consumers) is at least partly influenced by their affective and cognitive appraisals of context, utility, and meaning. The combination of these higher-level aspects seems to resonate in the tetra-value theory, as this adds a psychological dimension to the traditional approaches to value, drawing attention to the interrelatedness of economic, social, ecological, and psychological value [130, 131].

Organizational approaches to risk, plasticity, and resilience, that is, the mechanisms organizations adopt to cope with turbulence, uncertainty, and complexity, coalesce around the novel concept of organizational toughness [30]. Relying on the properties of materials, toughness illustrates the capability of materials to absorb energy or withstand shock and plastically deform, without fracturing, as a combination of strength and plasticity [30]. The concept of organizational toughness relies, too, on motivations, behavioral change, adaptive agility, and competences. In other words, organizational toughness rests on a subtle combination of affective (virtually unmanageable) and cognitive (partially manageable) elements. In turbulent or disruptive situations, it takes more than competences to adapt and change. It takes well-being and motivation to change and act [75, 112, 123]. Accordingly, employees' happiness may well be the missing conceptual ingredient link that connects value with organizational toughness, well beyond resilience, flexibility, and plasticity.

In order to provide a foothold for the conceptual relationships addressed in this contribution, which may also serve as a beacon for further conceptual and empirical research in the field, the model "Happiness Value Model" (HAVAM) is proposed (**Figure 1**). This model rests, solely, on the mutually constitutive nature of happiness at work and positive work-related outcomes, and its ripple-out effect to society at large.

**Figure 1.** *Happiness value model—HAVAM.*

*Happiness, Value, and Organizational Toughness: Three Concepts in Search of a Theory DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.107333*

The HAVAM model brings together aspects that acknowledge the conceptual mechanisms through which happiness at work connects to value creation and eventually to organizational toughness. The model concedes that individual happiness relates to organizational life and value in different layers, forms, and textures, and that this has wider implications for how organizations can deal with uncertainty in turbulent periods. The HAVAM provides a novel and complementary view on the relevant implications of happiness to organizations and society.
