**2.2 Theoretical model of systemic determination of personnel subjective well-being**

### *2.2.1 Personnel security as a social action*

The application of T. Parsons' fundamental theory of social action opens up the possibility of the most complete research of system-related determinants of SW in labor activity at the levels of society's culture, the culture of the social context in which one or another phenomenon considered as social action is observed, at the level of personality of people in whose actions the phenomenon appears, and finally, at the level of organism in the fullness of significant psychophysiological and physiological characteristics.

**Figure 1** presents a theoretical model of personnel SW determination as a social action. This model allows to understand what complex of influences the person experiences and what at him or at managers there are possibilities to provide his SW. Quite reasonably arise questions about self-management and management of SW.

**Figure 1.** *Theoretical model of system determination of staff subjective well-being as a social action.* *Subjective Well-Being at the Workplace as a Social Action: Opportunities for Management… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.106595*

Certainly, each level of determination includes the whole complex of determinants. Nevertheless, it seems appropriate to consider values as the main components of the determination of well-being at the levels of culture of society, organizational culture, and personality, because they are predictors of behavior. Other indicators determine the individual specificity of manifestation of SW. On psychophysiological level of determination stress as a key factor of emotional representation of well-being and psychological resilience/non-vitalization of personnel is considered.

### *2.2.2 Society's cultural values as a determinant of personnel security*

So, the first level—values of national culture—influences a person very much. Personnel of companies is a natural part of society, so, as any member of society, the culture of society tells a person how to behave properly and under what conditions to feel quite well. Studies of the values of Russians constantly show the priority of values of stability and security, which are in a certain contradiction with the risks that innovations bring. However, a worldwide survey of values shows that most Russians have a positive attitude toward the development of technology: up to 76% of young people and 73.5% in the older group ([37], 15–17). This, of course, does not mean that the majority is ready to work under the organizational changes associated with the introduction of innovation. Using an innovative drug is not the same as learning and restructuring one's activities when introducing it into production.

Studies conducted according to Schwartz's methodology, taking into account the specifics of age groups, showed little value consensus in 2011. This means that the general trends identified in the sociological surveys are not unifying, and especially this applies to the value alternative openness to change (independence, independence, propensity for new and risky actions)—preservation (person's dependence on social and, as a rule, routine behavior programs and in addition the search for social protection) [38]. These data are important for understanding the value heterogeneity of Russian society in relation to the variability of living and working conditions.

The priority of the values of stability and security remains at the present time. The least represented in Russia, as well as in most post-socialist countries, is the class of values of growth (values of openness to change and care), which distinguish the population of more prosperous countries [39].

But still, by 2020, there has been a definite shift toward the values of openness from the traditional values of preservation for Russians. It is the result of several reasons: an increase in the quality of life in Russia and a decrease in the real dangers and risks threatening the population, an increase in the availability of new consumer practices, and the influence of global cultural trends that affirm the values of personal choice and risk. An additional factor is the gradual inclusion in the surveyed population (over 15 years) of new generations of Russians, socialized under the conditions of expanded, in comparison with the Soviet time, personal freedom [39]. Thus, the values of culture determine the SW of the Russian in situations characterized by stability and predictability, the desire for novelty does not imply growth and development if the sense of security is violated. But there are also certain positive attitudes toward innovations among a part of the population, and management can use them, contributing to the development of personnel security in conditions of their implementation, supporting supporters and reorienting opponents in value. But, of course, it is easier to stick to proven practices and not to enter into a value conflict with the majority.

## *2.2.3 Organizational culture as a determinant of the subjective well-being of personnel*

The level of organizational conditions manifested in organizational culture (OC) of the company is influenced by values of national culture. G. Hofstede in his research studies noted that high level of collectivism and negative attitude toward uncertainty with short horizon of future orientation are characteristic for OC of the companies of USSR [40]. By now there have been some changes in the culture of society and the need to maintain the viability and competitiveness of the company prompts to follow the values that do not always coincide with the obvious values of national culture. In modern Russia, there are enterprises successfully entering the new technological mode (hereinafter—innovative companies) and companies with long-term problems of transition to innovative format of development, living at the expense of state protectionism (hereinafter—ordinary companies). The models of OC with a pronounced adhocracy component are typical for innovative companies, while for ordinary companies—clan-hierarchical or hierarchical-clan types of OC, preserved from the Soviet period with the administrative-command type of economy (according to the typology of K. Cameron and R. Quinn [41–43]. These OC types are very stable, because their basic values are fully consistent with the culture of society.

Management, wishing for innovative development, faces the task of changing OC. This is a difficult, but solvable problem. This is evidenced by the very fact that there are innovative companies with appropriate types of OC. The necessity to change the OC for conservative managers is a problem, depriving them of the SW, in which they were staying, being in the unity of society values and the hierarchical-clannish model of OC. The requirements of top management of transition to innovative economy either force them to make unsuccessful attempts of organizational changes for many years, to change themselves, or to give way to managers, for one reason or another (family upbringing, specifics of educational institutions) to adherents of innovative values. Such managers experience SW when there is an opportunity to put their efforts into transferring the company to an innovative format of development.

As values are predictors of behavior and have the function of sense-making, value correspondence provides acceptance of necessity of innovative development of the company and creates motivation-target vectors on behavior providing such development, including own professional development and self-development. S. Duchek's fundamental research sums up the results of company viability research, reveals the role of human capital, personnel training and building an open, trusting and learning-oriented OC, capable of providing the psychological resilience of personnel ([44], 215, 236–238). Such OC, according to K. Cameron and R. Quinn's typology, has at its core the innovative values of a critical mass of personnel, which are predictors of viable behavior with the achievement of new levels of adaptation.

For example, OC tells the employee what to choose as a vector of his labor activity: solidarity or competitiveness? innovativeness or traditionalism? The behavior of employees shows management the success/failure of changing the OC.

The role of higher needs and their corresponding meanings in labor activity remain poorly understood. The formation of subjective well-being in the OC is usually created by requests and reinforcement of correct behavior on the part of managers. The approval of managers creates a sense of SW that the employee wants to retain or reinforce. Therefore, in different types of OC, staff SW can be formed on a different behavioral basis. Innovative demand in the bureaucratic management paradigm generates stress and resistance of the personnel with the meanings of the

*Subjective Well-Being at the Workplace as a Social Action: Opportunities for Management… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.106595*

stable world. Happiness in labor activity and corresponding activity at the level of enthusiasm accompanied by eustress can be expected, if the employee has formed meanings of acceptance of innovations and successfully moves in achievement of the purposes generated by these meanings.

### *2.2.4 Level of personal determination of subjective well-being of the personnel*

At the level of personal determination, individual values of the employee induce him to follow or resist corporate requirements, to aspire to social and organizational safety, or to creative self-realization in work, connected with constant introduction of technological and managerial innovations.

Lack of value conformity generates a value conflict intrapersonal and between the employee and the corporate policy of the company, usually hidden, but very strong [43], especially when such conflict has a massive nature and forms the basis of the organizational culture (OC) of the company. Their latency makes them especially strong, because no one denies the need for innovation, but also to take them in their work most of the staff is not willing. Value conflicts, like any other, violate the SW and cause a desire to return to the attractive conflict-free past.

The very fact of value alignment increases the confidence of the staff in management and the level of employee SW. Moreover, controlled changes in OC can and do reduce the dependence of employee values and behavior on the culture of society. In a certain sense, the issue of reducing such influence may be a cause for controversy of an important worldview nature, but the challenges facing the business, related to the viability of the company in the global economy, contribute to the translation of this issue into a specific plane. In turn, employees who become adherents of innovation have an impact on the culture of society, making it more innovative.

Employees have significant differences in the affective, cognitive, social, professional, and psychosomatic dimensions of SW, depending on individual possession of the necessary set of competencies of all types: from ethical, personal, and cognitive to functional and metacompetencies [45] and differently feel the psychological costs of innovation, examples of which are presented in **Table 1** ([46], 134).


### **Table 1.**

*Examples of the psychological costs of innovation.*

It should be taken into account that in the conditions of innovative development, the content of competences becomes very dynamic; that is why the advanced corporate training acquires special importance. Such training is positively perceived by the personnel as it helps to achieve real value-determined compliance with the requirements of the developing company. Moreover, it makes the future more certain and. therefore, less stressful. Specific competences and the level of their relative importance in the overall competence of an employee naturally differ depending on the type of business, but the value fit remains a systemic factor of an employee's SW.

Value reorientation and the formation of motivation for labor activity and professional development in the conditions of the introduction of innovations are realized without increasing the value conflict and the resistance associated with it, if the changes carried out are not accompanied by a strong stress of change. We are talking about the determination of SW at the psychophysiological level.
