Promoting well-being through happiness at work: a systematic literature review and future research agenda

Abstract

Purpose

Our study aims to understand what is known about happiness at work (HAW) in terms of publication, citations, dimensions and characteristics, as well as how knowledge about HAW is generated regarding theoretical frameworks, context and methods. Additionally, it explores future directions for HAW research.

Design/methodology/approach

This paper conducts a systematic literature review of 56 empirical articles published between 2000 and 2022 to comprehensively explore HAW. It examines publication trends, citation patterns, dimensions, characteristics, theoretical frameworks, contextual factors and research methodologies employed in HAW studies.

Findings

Our findings suggest that while HAW research has gained momentum, there is still a need for exploration, particularly in developing countries. Various theoretical frameworks such as the job demand-resources model, social exchange theory and broaden-and-build theory are identified, with suggestions for the adoption of less popular theories like the positive emotion, engagement, relationships, meaning and accomplishment (PERMA) model and flow theory for future investigations. The review contributes to workplace happiness literature by offering a comprehensive analysis spanning two decades and provides valuable insights for guiding future research toward exploring factors influencing employee well-being.

Originality/value

Our article offers a structured analysis of HAW literature, emphasizing the necessity for more extensive research, especially in developing nations. It provides valuable insights into the theories and dimensions associated with HAW, guiding future research and assisting organizations in formulating strategies to enhance employee happiness and overall well-being.

Citation

Jaswal, N., Sharma, D., Bhardwaj, B. and Kraus, S. (2024), "Promoting well-being through happiness at work: a systematic literature review and future research agenda", Management Decision, Vol. 62 No. 13, pp. 332-369. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-08-2023-1492

1. Introduction

“Happiness” is a widely recognized phenomenon, acknowledged as a fundamental human need across diverse cultures (Aydin, 2012; Fisher, 2010; Roy and Konwar, 2020). The concept traces its origins back to 529 A.D., notably emphasized by Plato and Aristotle, who pioneered the tradition of “eudaimonia”, focusing on ethical goodness to delineate the essence of happiness and its attainment (Junoh et al., 2022).

Happiness encompasses feelings of hope, optimism, and satisfaction, representing a subjective state of human emotions characterized by joy, contentment, and a sense of well-being, derived from perceiving life as meaningful and rewarding (Lyubomirsky et al., 2005). It is intricately linked to an individual’s subjective well-being, encompassing their overall assessment of life, including both emotional and cognitive evaluations of moods and emotions (Kesebir and Diener, 2009). Often, “happiness” and “subjective well-being” are used interchangeably. When people use the term “subjective well-being”, they often imply having a high level of positive affect, a low level of negative affect, and a high level of life satisfaction (Deci and Ryan, 2008). The two well-known stances of happiness are hedonism and eudaimonism (Ryan and Deci, 2001). The hedonic approach points to subjective well-being, which refers to the existence of positive and absence of negative emotions and a feeling of life satisfaction (Diener, 1984; Singh et al., 2023).

On the other hand, eudemonic happiness indicates psychological well-being as a result of living a healthy and meaningful life filled with chances for self-progression (Ryff, 1989; Singh et al., 2023). Happiness is the ultimate term that is used to characterize a healthy and prosperous life. Unfortunately, it is also something that many individuals feel their lives are lacking, and one of the critical causes of its absence is the workplace environment nowadays (Gavin and Mason, 2004). Creating and maintaining a high degree of happiness at work (HAW) has become more vital and relevant due to the intensity of work brought on by economic instability and a rise in rivalry (Roy and Konwar, 2020). Due to the cutthroat competition and excessive workload, the mental as well as emotional health of employees is being affected, as a result of which the focus of research has been shifted towards positive psychology that talks about acknowledging and healing mental health problems (Gavin and Mason, 2004).

In conjunction with positive psychology, happiness and well-being at work have gained popularity over the past 20 years in both academic as well as organizational contexts as firms seek to understand what makes the working environment flourishing and inspiring (Kun and Gadanecz, 2022). The notion of HAW has its genesis in positive psychology, and it became more prominent in 2000 when positive psychology was given considerable attention (Salas-Vallina et al., 2018). Positive psychology studies situations and mechanisms that support the thriving or ideal operation of individuals, communities, and organizations (Gable and Haidt, 2005). The prime focus of positive psychology is to infuse a shift in psychology from one primarily concerned with fixing the negative aspects of life to one that also focuses on developing the positive ones (Seligman, 2002a, b). In positive psychology, happiness is described as a desirable subjective experience along with other positive constructs such as flow, well-being, contentment, and satisfaction (Seligman and Csikszentmihalyi, 2000). In psychology studies, happiness has been drawing more and more attention in the form of pleasant moods and emotions, well-being, and optimistic attitudes.

Along with psychology, the study of happiness has also gained significance in organizational and management research (Fisher, 2010). People’s happiness is greatly influenced by their workplaces, which give them access to resources that meet their primary and secondary needs on material, social, psychological, and emotional levels (Rego et al., 2009). Organizations usually acknowledge that their workforce gives them a competitive advantage. However, most organizations find it challenging to keep their employees inspired and satisfied, as due to the highly competitive business environment, long working hours, excessive workload, and work-life imbalance, employees are constantly struggling to cope with their mental health and happiness (Russell, 2008). Maintaining and sustaining a happy workforce has thus become a key challenge for the contemporary organizational world. This distressing situation has pushed researchers and policymakers to recognize the essence of happiness in the context of work.

HAW is defined as “happy feelings toward the job itself, job characteristics, and the organization as a whole” (Fisher, 2010; Salas-Vallina and Alegre, 2018). Singh and Aggarwal (2018) conceive HAW as a subjective feeling of well-being at work that entails interaction between employee and organizational experiences. They define HAW as “an experience of subjective well-being at work reflected through a high amount of positive individual (e.g. highly valuing one’s work, feeling engaged to work) and organizational (e.g. providing supportive work environment) experiences and low amount of negative individual and organizational experiences.” HAW refers to the degree to which people experience positive emotions and job satisfaction (Choi and Lee, 2014; Youssef and Luthans, 2007). The level of employee happiness directly influences several positive organizational outcomes. Compared to unhappy workers, happy workers are more likely to be active, approachable, enthusiastic, engaged in their work, empathetic toward their co-workers, and tenacious when facing challenges (Joo and Lee, 2017). Employee creativity, leadership skills (Thakur et al., 2019), and innovation escalate when they are at peace or happy at work, which in turn results in a positive influence on organizations (Bani-Melhem et al., 2018). Happy employees demonstrate enhanced performance, displaying heightened focus and enthusiasm for their tasks. They also exhibit deeper dedication to their work (Bednárová-Gibová, 2021; Walsh et al., 2018). Most management scholars and practitioners firmly believe that individuals who are highly committed and motivated inevitably drive organizational success (Thürmer et al., 2020).

In unforeseeable circumstances, it is becoming increasingly important to understand the role of HAW in sustaining the overall well-being of organizations' human capital. Despite a steady rise in scholarly interest in positive psychological constructs, including general happiness and overall well-being, over the last two decades, the literature on happiness, specifically in the work context still needs to be explored.

Various review studies have delved into different facets of HAW, presenting a multifaceted concept (see Table 1). These comprehensive reviews have played a crucial role in synthesizing existing literature, shedding light on various aspects of HAW, including its causes and consequences. However, the concept of HAW remains dynamic and evolving. While these reviews offer valuable insights, they often fall short of capturing contemporary dimensions and theoretical frameworks applied in studying HAW. For instance, (Salas-Vallina et al., 2018) focused solely on knowledge-intensive workers, limiting the scope of their review. Similarly, (Muthuri et al., 2020; Arulappan et al., 2021). Examined happiness among healthcare professionals and nurses respectively, narrowing down the context of their studies. Kirpik (2020) conducted a systematic review of employee happiness, yet their evaluation was confined to articles from the Science Citation Index (SCI) database published in the journal “Human Resource Management Review.” Another review by (Sender et al., 2020) explored happiness and productivity but primarily considered studies where productivity was studied as a consequence of HAW. Thus, to address these gaps, there is a pressing need for a context-specific and comprehensive synthesis of literature on HAW, covering theories, contexts, characteristics, and methodologies. Hence, this study aims to enrich prior systematic literature reviews by providing a unique contribution that incorporates recent research advancements, methodologies, and theoretical foundations employed in studying HAW.

All in all, our paper seeks to (1) identify the current state of knowledge regarding HAW, including its publication trends, citation patterns, dimensions, and characteristics such as antecedents, mediators, moderators, and consequences (RQ1), (2) discover how HAW is understood in terms of theoretical frameworks, contextual influences, and methodological approaches (RQ2), and (3) identify potential future directions for research on HAW (RQ3) by the means of a systematic literature review (Sauer and Seuring, 2023).

2. Methodology

Literature of a particular domain represents knowledge expansion and a profound clarity of concepts, variables, and related contexts (Kraus et al., 2022, 2023). A literature review is a summary of academic research on a particular topic that may be conducted as a part of a conceptual or empirical investigation or as an independent study (Lim and Rasul, 2022). The most enlightening and scientific review is the systematic literature review (SLR, hereafter), as it is rigorously executed and well-asserted (Bhardwaj and Sharma, 2023). The application of SLRs has evolved into a well-established methodology and a standard tool for synthesizing the extant literature on a particular domain (Sauer and Seuring, 2023). Well-crafted SLRs benefit policymakers for effective decision-making and for researchers to integrate the available literature (Kraus et al., 2020a, b). The growing field of literature reviews highlights the need for a thorough understanding of existing literature and identifies the theories and methodologies employed to study the specific domain (Kraus et al., 2024). The current study, therefore, employed the SLR approach (Paul and Rosado-Serano, 2019) to critique the existing literature on HAW. According to Lim and Rasul (2022), SLRs are categorized into various types, including theory-based, method-based, domain-based, structured theme-based, meta-analytical, meta-systematic, hybrid, and bibliometric reviews. The current study combines a domain-based review in a systematic way with a framework-based review. Further, our review protocol used in the study provides a thorough and transparent systematic review (Sauer and Seuring, 2023). Our protocol consists of three stages, i.e. assembling, arranging, and assessing as illustrated in Figure 1.

2.1 Assembling

The systematic review begins with the stage of assembling, which includes the identification and acquisition of articles for SLR. The identification stage determines the domain, research questions, source type, and source quality, and the search mechanism, period, and keywords are defined in the acquisition stage (Tuyon et al., 2022).

The domain and the research questions that served as the direction for this review are briefly presented in Figure 1. We chose journal articles as our preferred source type over other academic sources like books, book chapters, conference proceedings, dissertations or theses, etc., because they undergo a rigorous peer review and enhance scholarly quality standards (Reina et al., 2022). We include articles indexed in the Social Science Citation Index (SSCI)-listed journals for source quality due to their adherence to stringent indexing standards (Law et al., 2014). The decision to restrict the inclusion of articles to SSCI-indexed journals was made to ensure that only reliable, relevant, high-quality, and impactful sources are included, as SSCI-indexed journal articles are considered to be rigorously peer-reviewed. Also, the topic of happiness at work pertains to the social sciences; therefore, to maintain quality, rigor, and relevance, SCI and ESCI-indexed articles were excluded.

Next, for acquisition, the search mechanism, period, and keywords were defined. The current review relied on Scopus as a search mechanism for extracting the literature relevant to the field of HAW. The research articles published between 2000 and 2022 were taken for review. We considered 2000 as the starting year for the search as this year is known for the remarkable shift of the research towards positive psychology by a seminal publication of Martin Seligman’s article on positive psychology in which he emphasized positive aspects, including happiness (Salas-Vallina et al., 2018; Seligman and Csikszentmihalyi, 2000).

The keyword search (TITLE-ABS-KEY (“happiness at work” OR “happiness at workplace” OR “workplace happiness” OR “employee happiness” OR “work happiness” OR “job happiness” OR “organizational happiness” OR “organizational happiness” OR “corporate happiness” OR “happiness management” OR “staff happiness”) was developed by reviewing the most influential empirical as well as review studies in the concerned domain (Salas-Vallina et al., 2018) and with the opinions of a research team. 433 articles were retrieved using the keywords mentioned above as of 02/03/2023.

2.2 Arranging

The two sub-stages of arranging are organization using organizing codes and purification of the literature (Harju, 2022). The current study used the TCCM framework for organizing codes, enabling the review to consider different literary facets (Ghorbani et al., 2022).

In the purification stage, the inclusion and exclusion of articles was done based on the following steps:

• Step 1: Filters were applied to find articles relevant to the study domain. As shown in Figure 1, we limit our search to 2000–2022. The subject area was limited to Business, Management, accounting, Social Science, Psychology, and Arts and Humanities. Document type and source type were limited to articles and journals, respectively. Articles published in the English language in their final publication stage were included. After applying the above-stated filters, we were left with 227 articles.

• Step 2: Out of 227 articles, we selected articles listed in SSCI-indexed journals, resulting in the number of articles reaching 92.

• Step 3: This involves excluding and including articles through abstract pruning and full-text reading. Each article’s abstracts and full text were read and evaluated based on the inclusion criteria. Only empirical studies exclusively related to HAW were included to find answers to set research questions. Articles that focused on measuring general life happiness rather than happiness in the context of work were excluded. Conceptual, theoretical review papers and scale development studies were also excluded as they were outside the scope of our research questions. Abstracts in which the words happiness and work were randomly written were also excluded as the key focus of those papers was not HAW. With the abstract and full-text pruning of articles, the final sample left for review was 56.

2.3 Assessing

Assessing is the last stage, which consists of evaluation and reporting. The dimensions, theoretical developments, context, characteristics, and methodology employed in HAW research were addressed through content analysis. By evaluating and analyzing the literature, gaps were identified to find future avenues and suggest practical implications. In the last stage (i.e. reporting), we used tables, charts, and figures to delineate the evaluated literature. Limitations of this SLR are also discussed.

3. Findings

The list of all the 56 articles reviewed in this study is given in Table 2, which shows that the top contributing journal in the field of HAW is Frontiers in Psychology, as the maximum number of studies are published in this journal, followed by Employee Relations, and Applied Research in Quality of Life.

The first two research questions framed in this review, i.e.

RQ1.

What do we know about HAW, and

RQ2.

How do we know about HAW, were addressed by analyzing these publications.

3.1 What do we know about HAW research?

3.1.1 Publication status

Understanding the progression of scholarly research in a specific area is more accessible by looking at the distribution of research papers published over the years in that field (Jebarajakirthy et al., 2021). Figure 2 presents the publication trend of selected research papers on HAW published between 2000 and 2022. The first paper on HAW was published in 2000 among the selected sample of studies. However, from 2001 to 2005, no study was published on HAW, witnessing a constant decline in research on HAW.

The topic again started gaining the interest of researchers in 2006, but the topic gained momentum from 2016 onwards. 43 out of 56 studies were conducted between 2016 and 2022, and the maximum number of studies was done in 2022. This upward trend in HAW research over recent years shows that the topic has great potential in the future.

3.1.2 Citations

The top ten highly cited articles published in the field of HAW are shown in Table 3. Research by Youssef and Luthans (2007) is the most cited article, having 2,928 citations, followed by that of Jensen and Luthans (2006), which has 619 citations. As can be seen, the studies based on HAW published in recent years, for instance, Bani-Melhem et al. (2018), are also gaining more and more research attention.

3.1.3 Dimensions of HAW

HAW is a multi-dimensional concept treated as an umbrella term comprising various constructs (Fisher, 2010). In research, multiple dimensions have been used to measure happiness in the context of work. The present review highlighted the dimensional constructs used to measure HAW as a whole. Of 56 empirical studies, 29 used HAW as a single construct, whereas, in 23, HAW was studied as a multi-dimensional construct. In the remaining 4 studies, HAW has been treated as a sub-dimension of some particular construct.

The majority of the research within our review studied HAW as a holistic construct without specifying particular dimensions. These studies focused on defining and assessing happiness as a comprehensive construct, often employing uni-dimensional scales or single-item questions to measure the HAW. Various methods and instruments were utilized by these studies to measure the overall level of happiness experienced by individuals in their work lives.

Prominently, some studies established customized scales for organizational settings, while others modified the existing measures of life satisfaction or overall life happiness to assess happiness in the context of work. For instance, scales such as the Subjective Happiness Scale (Lyubomirsky and Lepper, 1999), the Oxford Happiness Questionnaire (OHQ) (Hills and Argyle, 2002), and the scale developed by (Fordyce, 1988) are the key measures that were employed to measure HAW. These measures generally reflect individuals’ overall subjective evaluation of happiness within their work settings without explicitly probing into the multifaceted dimensions that integrate the wider concept of workplace happiness. Furthermore, instead of measuring happiness specific to the context of work/workplace, these measures are predominantly focused on assessing the overall life happiness of individuals. Rather than pointing to certain aspects of work, they ask individuals to rate their overall happiness or satisfaction with their lives.

Fisher (2010) conceptualized happiness in the context of work, and highlighted the significance of the multifaceted aspect of HAW, extending beyond the conventional measures of happiness. According to (Fisher, 2010), the most effective approach to measure HAW and to capture its full complexity is to consider the work-related constructs (such as job satisfaction, work engagement, and affective organizational commitment) that represent the notion of happiness as this would enable a more thorough understanding of HAW, encompassing momentary experiences, persistent person-level factors, and other significant aspects of work. After Fisher’s conceptualization of happiness in the context of work, researchers started studying HAW as a multi-dimensional construct and several scales are being developed and validated to measure happiness in work settings (Salas-Vallina and Alegre, 2021; Singh and Aggarwal, 2018).

Research demonstrates that multi-dimensional measures are preferable to conventional uni-dimensional measures of happiness and satisfaction of life as a whole as multi-dimensional measures provide an exhaustive and nuanced understanding of the complex subjective concepts such as happiness, overcoming the constraints of uni-dimensional measures (Ruggeri et al., 2020). Therefore, by studying HAW using multi-dimensional measures, researchers can more thoroughly investigate the complex nature of the topic of happiness. Compared to uni-dimensional measures, these scales provide a more holistic outlook by enabling a thorough examination of several aspects of happiness and well-being. Keeping in mind the significance of the multi-dimensional perspectives, this review offers an overview of the various dimensions that are used to measure HAW.

Table 4 and Figure 3 represent the various dimensions of HAW used in the selected studies. The most widely used dimensions are: (1) work engagement, affective organizational commitment, and job satisfaction (used in 10 out of 23 studies), (2) anxiety-comfort, depression-pleasure, boredom-enthusiasm, tiredness-vigor, anger-placidity (used in 4 studies). A detailed list of all the dimensions is given in Table 4.

3.1.4 Characteristics

This section focuses on HAW’s characteristics by synthesizing the relevant literature: its antecedents, consequences, mediators, and moderators. A detailed overview of these variables is presented in Tables 5–7, respectively, and Figure 4 summarizes these characteristics.

3.1.4.1 Antecedents of HAW

Understanding the significant determinants of HAW is noteworthy for fostering the overall well-being of employees and sustaining organizational growth and success. The present review found that HAW is influenced by various antecedents, including motivation and leadership-related antecedents, psychological antecedents, positive organizational behavior antecedents, job-related antecedents, social and ethical antecedents, and other antecedents such as organizational culture and intra-individual work environment. Accordingly, we have grouped all the antecedents of HAW into six broad categories. The major findings of the selected studies related to the key antecedents of HAW which are discussed below. Also, the detailed list of all the antecedents is presented in Table 5.

Motivation and leadership-related antecedents: An organizational environment’s motivational and leadership aspects contribute to employees' sustainable well-being and happiness. For instance, motivational attributes such as self-esteem, availability of motivating job characteristics, and employees' professional motivation and job achievements are positively associated with HAW. Employees who recognize the worth of company benefits (motivating factors) provided to them, such as bonus schemes, medical aid, and pension funds, develop positive feelings for their organizations, resulting in a high degree of HAW (Naudé et al., 2016). Motivated employees are more likely to be involved in their work, feel dedicated and inspired, and have a sense of fulfillment as studies have shown that HAW is fostered when employees are stimulated through inspirational motivation (Salas-Vallina and Fernandez, 2017).

Furthermore, the literature has also witnessed that the types of leadership styles, such as transformational (Salas-Vallina et al., 2017b), inspirational (Salas-Vallina et al., 2020c; Salas-Vallina and Fernandez, 2017), altruistic (Salas-Vallina and Alegre, 2018), and authentic leadership (Jensen and Luthans, 2006), adopted by leaders in organizations, also influence the happiness of employees. Salas-Vallina et al. (2020c) found that when followers' characteristics are more optimistic and positive, inspirational leadership has a significant positive influence on HAW. Based on the empirically tested positive influence of motivational and leadership attributes on HAW, it can be derived that effective leadership styles can nurture a positive and motivating work culture by fostering intrinsic and extrinsic motivation among employees, which could further enhance the well-being and happiness of employees.

Psychological antecedents: Psychological characteristics of employees, such as psychological capital, thriving, authentizotic psychological climate, and psychological contract breach, are also found to be significant predictors of HAW. For instance, PsyCap, which refers to the positive psychological attributes of individuals such as “hope”, “optimism”, “self-efficacy”, and “resilience”, is found to be associated with high-performance outcomes and increased levels of well-being and HAW (Basinska and Rozkwitalska, 2022). By preventing the adverse effects of job stress and high job demands, PsyCap acts as a powerful enabler in promoting the happiness and well-being of employees (Rabenu et al., 2017). Thriving, which is another strong predictor of HAW, refers to the positive state of mind surrounded by a shared sense of learning and vitality (Kleine et al., 2019), which represents individuals' holistic feeling of achievement and well-being in their professional lives. A sense of in employees holds a vital positive impact on their HAW, making their lives more purposeful and satisfying (Basinska and Rozkwitalska, 2022). Thriving employees tend to be more engaged in their work, which further contributes to the positive feeling of satisfaction and dedication, enriching their happiness and well-being at work (Qaiser et al., 2020). While positive psychological aspects such as thriving and PsyCap help organizations in creating a positive work environment by fostering the HAW, it is also found that the persistence of some negative organizational aspects such as psychological contract breach (which refers to the perception of employee regarding the failure of the organization in fulfilling its obligations), hinders the promotion of employee happiness by negatively influencing the level of HAW (Qaiser et al., 2020).

Positive organizational behavior antecedents: The next group of prominent factors influencing HAW consists of the variables that fall under the ambit of positive organizational behavior such as organizational virtuousness, hope, optimism, resilience, spirit of camaraderie, subjective happiness, well-being oriented HRM, and gratitude (Benevene et al., 2019; Garg et al., 2022; Rego et al., 2009; Salas-Vallina et al., 2021; Youssef and Luthans, 2007). The review’s findings emphasized that these positive behaviors displayed by employees promote a supportive work culture of growth and positivity, contributing to the overall well-being and HAW (Youssef and Luthans, 2007). For example, the feeling of gratitude among organizational members is pivotal and essential for escalating HAW (Garg et al., 2022). Similarly, organizational virtuousness (OV), characterized by positive, ethical and moral behaviors, is a crucial promoter of uplifting happiness (Rego et al., 2010; Williams et al., 2016, 2017). When individuals experience virtuousness in organizations, they feel highly valued. Consequently, they cultivate a sense of gratitude towards their organizations and other members, leading to improved levels of well-being including happiness.

Social and ethical antecedents: Positive and constructive work environments that encourage HAW are also influenced by social and ethical factors disseminated and practiced in organizations, such as corporate social responsibility (CSR) (Bibi et al., 2022) ethical institutionalization (Lee et al., 2018), and colleague support (Qaiser et al., 2020). These factors represent the perseverance of organizations towards encouraging moral behavior, ethical practices, and societal betterment, creating a happy and positive work environment for employees and promoting their long-term happiness and well-being. For instance, ethics institutionalization, which refers to the organizational aspect of providing ethical guidelines to the employees for their decision-making (Lee et al., 2018), and CSR, which is the voluntary initiative of organizations to promote societal well-being beyond its set obligations, are the key factors in influencing employee happiness (Bibi et al., 2022).

Job-related antecedents: In this group of antecedents, we have summarized the variables or factors, such as flexible working, job characteristics, job demands, job meaning, job type, activities, competence, and job satisfaction, that are directly attributed to the job or the working environment of the organization and have a potential influence on employees' well-being and HAW. For instance, (Atkinson and Hall, 2011) found that employees who enjoy the flexibility to work comfortably at their own pace have more positive well-being and a high level of HAW. This HAW, in turn, is positively associated with several positive performance outcomes and employees' voluntary or extra-role behavior, which they display by going beyond their formal job roles, resulting in increased overall growth and well-being. Review findings show that, while job characteristics (Sloan, 2012), job satisfaction (Bangun et al., 2021), and job competence (Chen et al., 2022) are the positive predictors of HAW, excessive job demands (such as workload and time pressure) (Tadić et al., 2013), on the other hand, have a negative influence on HAW. However, studies emphasized that to alleviate the negative impact of high job demands on employee happiness, positive and stimulating factors like self-concordant motivation could be used as these are found to buffer the negative consequences of job demands on HAW (Tadić et al., 2013).

Other antecedents: In this group “other antecedents”, we have included a wide range of HAW determinants beyond the more extensively studied categories. Qualitative research conducted on eight happy workers demonstrated that their career happiness is influenced by factors such as the work environment (e.g. freedom and positive social aspects), intra-individual attributes (e.g. self-determination and strength of character), career development and future outlook (Henderson, 2000). The study’s findings imply that employees with a positive orientation for their future and a clear path for their career development are happier at work. Various other employee-oriented factors, including organizational culture (Espasandín-Bustelo et al., 2021), individualistic/collectivistic employee orientations (Rego and Cunha, 2009), high-involvement work system, high commitment human resource management (Kim, 2019), professional prospects and perceived fairness (Chen et al., 2022), are also studied as the strong predictors of HAW. These factors cultivate a positive work environment among employees, leading to high happiness and well-being at work. The gender differences and the socio-demographic and occupational prestige factors also influence HAW, with studies suggesting that women are more open in expressing their happiness as compared to men (Sloan, 2012). Employees having high education, income, and occupational prestige are generally happier at work (Bednárová-Gibová and Majherová, 2021). Situational uncertainty, such as job insecurity, was found to be the negative predictor of HAW (Bassi et al., 2013), as those employees who face situational uncertainties at their workplaces, often experience anxiety and stress, resulting in decreased HAW.

Similarly, sleep deprivation was also found to negatively impact employees' happiness (Edmondson and Matthews, 2020). Several other variables like employees’ attitudes towards technology, brand orientation, and organizational ergonomics, are found to be the significant antecedents of HAW (Bangun et al., 2021; Bednárová-Gibová, 2021; Ravina-Ripoll et al., 2021).

3.1.4.2 Consequences of HAW

The extant HAW research suggests that promoting happiness and well-being among employees results in various positive organizational outcomes. Accordingly, the consequences of HAW are grouped into four categories as discussed below, and the detailed list of all the consequences falling under the broad categories is given in Table 6.

Performance outcomes: Studies have primarily examined HAW as a positive outcome of both individual and organizational performance, including contextual and task performance. Hosie et al. (2012) emphasized that managers who experienced high levels of positive affective well-being (happiness) performed their work more efficiently and effectively than those with low happiness. This implies that happy and satisfied employees are more productive and efficient, positively impacting their organization’s sustainable growth and success. Therefore, organizations can elevate productivity levels and performance standards by promoting a supportive and healthy work environment that encourages HAW.

Behavioral outcomes: HAW is associated with various behavioral outcomes, including organizational citizenship behavior (OCB), discretionary behavior, innovative behavior, and counterproductive work behavior. Studies show that happy employees are more committed to their work and often engage in voluntary activities such as helping others in the organization (Atkinson and Hall, 2011; Bangun et al., 2021; Bani-Melhem et al., 2018). While OCB, discretionary, and innovative behavior of employees are the positive outcomes of HAW, counterproductive work behavior, which is a negative, and destructive work behavior that can be harmful for the organization and its members, results from the lack of HAW (Thompson and Bruk-Lee, 2021). Such destructive employee behaviors raise concerns about highlighting the value of HAW in endorsing a positive work culture characterized by a sense of cooperation and collaboration.

Well-being outcomes: Employee well-being is a subsequent outcome of HAW, representing the positive emotional and mental states and experiences nurtured within the organizational context (Tandler et al., 2020). The well-being outcomes of HAW relate to the existence of positive moods, emotions, and attitudes among employees, which are beneficial for the long-term growth of organizations. HAW is the significant predictor of overall employee well-being, including both subjective (presence of positive affect and absence of negative affect) and psychological well-being (mental health) (Benevene et al., 2019; Sudibjo and Manihuruk, 2022). The research found that HAW is influenced by the organizational working environment and its characteristics, which can further impact employees' mental health, as being happy at work results in better physical and mental health, alleviates stress at work, gives a sense of satisfaction, and reduces the turnover intentions among employees (Siu et al., 2015). Thus, based on these adequate empirical evidence, our review suggests that promoting HAW not only strengthens individual satisfaction but also creates a healthy and supportive work culture that contributes to the long-term growth and success of the organizations.

Other outcomes: In addition to the above discussed outcomes, HAW has been found to have a significant influence on numerous other outcomes including job engagement, organizational commitment, absorptive capacity, knowledge sharing behavior, employee innovativeness, and turnover intention.

Job engagement refers to the degree to which individuals feel enthusiastic and highly devoted to their respective jobs and organizations (Field and Buitendach, 2011). Job engagement is positively influenced by HAW (Kim, 2019), as it brings immense energy and mental perseverance within employees through which they feel dedicated, challenged and inspired. Compared to disengaged employees, they work very hard to put in extra effort to their work, mitigating the negative consequences such as stress and burnout, ultimately leading to the holistic growth of the organization (Bakker and Oerlemans, 2016). In addition to this, absorptive capacity and knowledge-sharing behavior which are the two core products of innovation and knowledge management, are also found to the significant positive outcomes of HAW (Chumg and Huang, 2021; Salas-Vallina et al., 2020a, b, c). While absorptive capacity refers to the acquiring, retaining, and distributing the external knowledge, knowledge sharing behavior on the other side is the intention of individuals to exchange and disseminate their knowledge, skills, ideas, and expertise with the other members of the organization (Chumg and Huang, 2021). By promoting both these outcomes of HAW, organizations can encourage employees' innovative behavior, and, at the same time, can strengthen its knowledge management system to attain sustainable growth in this highly competitive era. HAW is also found to have a high positive impact on organizational commitment (the feeling of attachment and loyalty to the organization) (Thompson and Bruk-Lee, 2021), and employee innovativeness (the ability of employees to showcase their creativity, innovation, and generation of new ideas) (Bibi et al., 2022), as studies suggested when compared to the unhappy ones, that happy employees feel more affection and belongingness to their organization. Also, they are more prone to critical thinking, innovating, and generating creative ideas. HAW is also associated with less employee turnover intentions as it has been found that employees who feel happy and committed at their work are less likely to leave their current jobs, helping organizations to sustain a stable workforce and reducing employee turnover costs (Thompson and Bruk-Lee, 2021).

According to our review, the most frequently used outcome variables of HAW were related to performance, and behavioral aspects of employees. Although the term happiness is a significant source of human well-being in general and specific aspects (e.g. work-life.), the review showed that well-being-related consequences are less focused in the area of HAW, indicating the huge potential for future researchers to study HAW in relation to the well-being aspects such as mental health and employee well-being.

3.1.4.3 Mediators and moderators

In exploring the factors associated with HAW, it is imperative to consider the mediating and moderating variables that influence the association between happiness and other organizational constructs. Mediators and moderators are crucial factors in understanding the complex relationships between the independent and the outcome variable. They offer significant insights about how, when and why a particular phenomenon or relationship occurs (Bennett, 2000). A mediating variable helps understand the mechanism through which two variables are associated, whereas a moderator variable modifies the strength of the relationship between the independent and the outcome variables (MacKinnon, 2011). The role of mediators and moderators in empirical investigations is to enrich a more precise and thorough understanding of a causal relationship between two variables (Wu and Zumbo, 2008).

Our review found that the research on HAW is also guided by integrating several mediation and moderation effects to understand the fundamental mechanisms and context-specific factors influencing workplace happiness and employee well-being. For instance, mediators, such as organizational learning capability, diversity management practices, co-workers’ support, job stress, coping strategies and job satisfaction, explain the mechanisms through which HAW influences positive organizational outcomes like organizational citizenship behavior, employees’ innovative behavior, well-being at work, and positive mental health (Bani-Melhem et al., 2018; Mousa et al., 2020; Salas-Vallina and Alegre et al., 2018; Sudibjo and Manihuruk, 2022; Tandler et al., 2020).

On the other hand, a subset of selected studies employed several moderators to understand the organizational factors influencing the association between HAW and other positive organizational constructs. The spirit of camaraderie (Rego and Cunha, 2009), self-concordant motivation (Tadić et al., 2013), job demands and resources (Wijngaards et al., 2019), psychological capital (Basinska and Rozkwitalska, 2022), and spiritual climate (Garg et al., 2022) are some of the key moderators that are supposed to strengthen the relationship between HAW and its antecedents and consequences. For example, self-concordant motivation can moderate the relationship between job demands and HAW, while spiritual climate in organizations can impact the strength of the association between gratitude and HAW. Job demands and job resources can also play a moderating role in the relationship between HAW and various organizational aspects.

A detailed list of the mediators and moderators used in the selected studies is given in Table 7.

3.2 How do we know about HAW research?

To answer the second RQ, we extended the theory, context, and methodology employed in the concerned field of research.

3.2.1 Theoretical perspectives

A theory is a group of assumptions that might be used to develop a more elemental explanation for a particular phenomenon (Lim et al., 2022a, b). Theory-based research is generally more reliable than research without one because a theory offers a foundation to support the arguments made in the study (Çelik et al., 2022; Lim and Rasul, 2022). The research on HAW has also been guided by a variety of theories, models, and frameworks. This SLR reveals the prominent theoretical frameworks that have been utilized to study HAW research. In total, 33 theoretical frameworks have been employed to study HAW. Out of the selected sample of 56 studies, 35 studies used some theory or/and model as a guiding framework, further out of which 20 studies focused on a single theoretical perspective, whereas 15 studies were there which focused on multiple theoretical frameworks. The theoretical stances that served as the foundation for HAW research are listed in detail in Table 8, and Figure 5 shows widely used theoretical frameworks in HAW research.

3.2.1.1 Widely used theories

As evidenced by Table 8, most articles applied the Job Demands and Resource (JD-R) Model in investigating the relationship of HAW with various organizational constructs. This model has been used in 11 research papers, followed by the Social Exchange Theory (SET), which was used in 7 studies, and Broaden and Build Theory (BBT), which was employed in 5 studies. The wide use of JD-R, SET, and BBT in HAW studies implies that these theories are highly relevant in the concerned domain. These theories are briefly explained subsequently:

Job demands and resource model: This model was developed by (Bakker and Demerouti, 2007), which states that the alliance of job demands (the aspects of a job that call for some physical or mental effort and are associated with some specific psychological outcomes, such as exhaustion) and job resources (those positive aspects of a job that helps in attaining goals and reducing stress) is critical for the emergence of job stress as well as motivation, affecting the level of employee well-being such as happiness (Bakker and Demerouti, 2007; Huynh et al., 2014). This could mean that when employees face challenging job demands such as excessive workload, they pay their whole attention to work, demanding fresh resources, leading to an escalated level of motivation that ultimately results in a high degree of happiness (Aimei et al., 2015).

Social exchange theory: The second prominent theory is the social exchange theory, which was advanced by Sir George Homans et al. (1958) in his article “Social Behavior as Exchange” in 1958 (Homans et al., 1958). This theory is based on the concept of cost and reward analysis to develop a social relationship between individuals, and by differentiating the rewards from costs, people decide either to keep the social relationship or to end it (Jeong and Oh, 2017). From the organizational behavior perspective, the theory postulates that employees feel devoted to their organization when they receive financial and social rewards. In contrast, if financial and social support is not offered to them, they will not give their mental and emotional resources to their work (Kim, 2019). The social interactions and inter-relationships in organizations, such as leader-member exchange (LMX) and team member exchange (TMX), could lead to a high extent of happiness, particularly in work settings (García-Contreras et al., 2022).

Broaden and build theory is another theoretical lens extensively used in studying the concept of HAW. The theory focuses on the role of emotions such as love, joy, interest, and contentment in enhancing a person’s fleeting thoughts and behaviors (Fredrickson, 2004). According to this theory, positive emotions are there to enhance the ideas and actions of individuals. In contrast, negative emotions are believed to confine these ideas and actions, which reduce the resources available for coping. The occurrence of positive emotions could certainly lead to increased coping mechanisms, thus promoting greater well-being (Denovan and Macaskill, 2017).

The wide use of the named theories in HAW studies implies a high relevance of these theories in the concerned domain.

3.2.2 Context

Context of the research refers to the settings in which the research is conducted (Jebarajakirthy et al., 2021; Lim et al., 2021). To analyze the context of the selected studies, the present review considers the geographical dissemination of HAW research, particularly the countries where the research is conducted in the domain of HAW.

3.2.2.1 Countries

In terms of countries, it is found that out of 56 studies, 50 studies had a single country as the context of their research, 3 studies focused on twin country context, and only 1 study had a multiple country context. Also, 2 studies were there which did not mention the specific name of the country. Table 9 and Figure 6 indicate HAW research’s geographic focus. It is found that overall, Spain has dominated the research in the area of HAW with a total of 10 studies, followed by the USA (8 studies), Italy (5 studies), Netherlands (4 studies), and Portugal (4 studies). Countries like India, France, Poland, etc., have yet to conduct much research in HAW and, therefore, deserve great attention in the future.

3.2.3 Methodologies used

To analyze the methodologies used in HAW studies, we considered the research approach, which consisted of the type of research, source of data collection, research design, sampling techniques used, and the data analysis techniques adopted by studies.

Research approach: In terms of the research approach, it was found that out of 56 studies, 50 studies were purely quantitative, 3 studies adopted qualitative methods to study HAW, whereas 3 studies were there that used a mixed method approach. All the studies were based on primary sources of data collection. Not even a single study that collected data through secondary sources was found. Concerning research design, most studies (51 studies) were cross-sectional. 3 studies were intervention-based, 1 study had a multi-level and multi-source time-lagged research design, and 1 was a two-wave full-panel design by nature.

Sampling technique used: We also found various sampling techniques used by researchers to reach the study’s target population. Out of the total selected sample of studies, 26 mentioned the sampling technique used to reach the target population. It is observed that the most commonly used sampling technique was convenience sampling. This technique was employed in 15 studies, followed by random sampling (4 studies), multi-stage random sampling (1 study), and purposive sampling (1 study), whereas 5 studies were found that applied a combination of two or more sampling methods such as snowball, with purposive and intensity sampling, etc. Other sampling techniques used were random sampling, multi-stage random sampling, purposive sampling, snowball sampling, and intensity sampling (Figure 7).

Analysis techniques: The data analysis stage is a crucial part of the research methodology. The credibility and accuracy of the data collected by the researcher depend on the analysis of the data. Several analytical techniques have been used in HAW research to analyze the data. The most frequently applied techniques are regression analysis and structural equation modeling. A few studies have also employed correlational analysis, t-test, ANOVA/MANOVA, descriptive analysis, daily-reconstruction method, and mediation analysis. In only 3 studies, qualitative analysis techniques such as case study and thematic analysis were used. Other methods include trend analysis, fuzzy cluster analysis, process macro, bootstrapping, Sobel test, necessary condition analysis, Chi-square, Mann-Whitney U- Test, and content analysis.

4. Discussion and conclusion

4.1 Concluding remarks

HAW is a relatively novel concept in workplace well-being and positive organizational psychology. Gaining scholarly attention from the positive psychology movement (Seligman and Csikszentmihalyi, 2000), happiness has spread its wings across various disciplines, including psychology and social science. Happiness, the core element of every individual’s life, has become the most crucial concern of contemporary business organizations. The objectives of this study were to systematically examine the extant literature on HAW concerning theories, context, characteristics, and methodologies applied in the concerned area. The current review details significant contributions to the existing literature in the area of workplace happiness from the years 2000–2022. Although the research on HAW has gained momentum in recent years, we found that the topic has yet to receive much attention from management researchers, especially in developing countries.

In accordance with the findings, several variables relating to HAW were identified and classified under different groups. It was found that HAW is majorly studied in relation to positive organizational constructs, where the focus is on analyzing the factors responsible for escalating the happiness of employees. In addition, we found that there is still a knowledge gap in studying the determinants that negatively impact employee happiness. From a theoretical perspective, we found that diverse theories and models were employed to advance HAW research, where the Job demand-resources model, Social exchange theory, and Broaden-and-build theory were the prominent ones. In addition to these well-established theoretical frameworks, looking at other less popular theories, such as the PERMA model of well-being and flow theory, is essential to gain new insights into the field.

Our review highlights various dimensions used to measure HAW, including work satisfaction, engagement, and organizational commitment (Kun and Gadanecz, 2022; Lee et al., 2018) However, over half of the studies have treated HAW as a single construct or utilized general life happiness scales. This approach may overlook specific factors unique to workplace happiness and well-being. Research confirms HAW as a multi-dimensional concept (Fisher, 2010), suggesting that employing work-specific measures allows a more comprehensive evaluation of factors influencing workplace happiness (Salas-Vallina and Alegre, 2021). Furthermore, these scales can provide actionable insights for organizations seeking to enhance employee happiness and overall well-being. Given the precision they offer in assessing well-being within workplace contexts, it is vital to measure HAW using scales tailored to work-related dimensions like job satisfaction and engagement. Future research should prioritize the adoption of happiness measures explicitly designed for workplace settings.

In conclusion, ongoing advancements in this crucial research area can aid organizations in meticulously analyzing the determinants of employees' overall well-being and implementing tailored strategies. Additionally, our review enhances theoretical progress by integrating established theories with less-explored models, fostering a deeper comprehension of HAW. This theoretical integration not only enriches existing knowledge but also provides managerial insights for organizations aiming to cultivate a joyful, constructive, and fulfilling work environment.

4.2 Limitations

Our review represents an initial effort to illuminate the trajectory of HAW research within organizational behavior, comprehensively examining prominent theories, key variables, contexts, and statistical methods utilized in its study. However, like any research endeavor, this review carries certain limitations that warrant acknowledgment for future studies.

Firstly, we relied solely on the Scopus database for article extraction, potentially constraining the breadth of literature covered. To capture a more extensive range of articles, future studies should consider including databases such as Web of Science, EBSCO, among others. Secondly, our inclusion criteria led to the exclusion of numerous studies, resulting in a relatively small sample size of 56 articles. Additionally, the exclusion of articles not published in English may introduce language bias. Thirdly, our focus on peer-reviewed journal articles excluded valuable insights from grey literature, including conference proceedings, reports, and dissertations. Lastly, our review was confined to the years 2000–2022, potentially overlooking significant studies outside this timeframe. Future researchers should consider extending the search period for a more comprehensive analysis.

4.3 Practical implications

Our review provides implications for managers, academics, and policymakers, aiding them in fostering employee well-being and happiness. In today’s complex and turbulent work environment, managers confront numerous challenges in balancing organizational goals with the sustainable well-being of their workforce. In this era of global crises like COVID-19, businesses worldwide continuously face adverse challenges (Kraus et al., 2020a, b). In this post-pandemic scenario, organizations that put the happiness and well-being of their employees first are more likely to become resilient, adaptable, and successful. The findings indicate that organizations must create a work culture promoting positive behaviors and employee aspects, such as happiness and well-being. Creating such a culture at the individual and organizational levels brings the feeling of cooperation, coordination, team spirit, and a sense of belongingness among employees, which further results in increased efficiency and productivity. Various initiatives and programs for employees' overall well-being should be executed in the organizations as these initiatives, such as work-life equilibrium, employee growth and development, employee health and safety, rewards, and recognition, help in improving their mental as well as emotional well-being (Grawitch et al., 2006). Organizations should initiate and implement a system of rewards and appreciation to motivate an efficient workforce, as this will help promote supportive and collaborative work behavior among employees, which would further create a feeling of HAW (Zhang and Min, 2021). Our review, by identifying diverse antecedents and outcomes impacting workplace happiness, could help management and policymakers design their strategies in such a way that leads to a healthy and positive work environment for employees.

One of the most impactful ways to enhance the work environment and promote employee happiness is by nurturing a culture of cohesion and trust among colleagues. This culture should embody values such as equality, cooperation, positivity, honesty, respect, and appreciation (Berdicchia et al., 2023; Fisher, 2010). Encouraging these principles enables organizational members to engage in sharing, supporting, and pro-social behaviors, thereby elevating their levels of happiness and well-being (Berdicchia et al., 2023), ultimately fostering the sustainable growth and success of the organization.

Following the assumptions of Job Demand-Resources theory, which posits that high job demands correlate with reduced happiness, organizations should take proactive measures to alleviate excessive job demands faced by employees on a daily basis. This can be achieved by designing and implementing strategies to foster a happy and positive work environment, thereby enhancing holistic development, work commitment, productive work behaviors, and overall well-being (Thompson and Bruk-Lee, 2021).

Promoting a psychologically content and satisfied workforce through employee-oriented leadership and organizational practices can boost individual performance by cultivating positive emotions among employees in the workplace (Rego and Cunha, 2008). Therefore, organizations must consider individuals' needs, requirements, and perceptions regarding their work environment, which influence their psychological and subjective well-being (Rego et al., 2009).

5. Future research directions

“What potential future avenues HAW research has?” was the final research question of this review. Following the previous systematic reviews (Ghorbani et al., 2022; Jebarajakirthy et al., 2021), this section identifies the research gaps in the existing body of literature and suggests future research directions.

5.1 Theory advancement

The review reveals that the Job Demand-Resources (JD-R) model, Social Exchange Theory (SET), Broaden and Build Theory (BBT), and Job Characteristics Theory (JCT) were the most frequently employed theories in the domain of HAW. However, several other potential theoretical frameworks can be applied to the research in the area of HAW. One such framework is the PERMA model proposed by Seligman (2002a, b) which comprises five core elements of happiness and well-being: positive emotion, engagement, relationships, meaning, and accomplishments (Khaw and Kern, 2015). The theory states that nourishing one or more of these core elements results in happiness and well-being. Assessing the multifaceted aspects of employee well-being, such as happiness, using the PERMA model as a theoretical base could provide more detailed information regarding the crucial components of workplace well-being (Kun et al., 2017). Another theory that can be applied to HAW is the flow theory given by Mihaly Csikszentmihaly (Biasutti, 2011). According to the flow theory, people experience their greatest happiness levels when they are fully immersed and engaged in a challenging task, where their abilities meet the difficulty level, and their attention is directed towards the task (Csikszentmihalyi, 2014). The concept of flow is strongly intertwined with the experiences of happiness and well-being (Zubair and Kamal, 2015), as they have been studied in relation to each other (Fullagar and Kelloway, 2009; Kawalya et al., 2019). Hence, the flow theory could shed light on the importance of positive workplace behavior and provide strong theoretical underpinnings for happiness and well-being. Future research on HAW might also incorporate the theory of Authentic Happiness, propounded by the Eminent Psychologist Martin Seligman. Despite being one of the earliest ideologies of happiness, the theory has not been given much attention in the research domain of happiness (Seligman, 2002a, b).

5.2 Context

Studies on HAW were carried out in 25 different countries. Of all the 56 studies, around 89% were conducted in a single-country context, 5% were based on a twin-country context, and only 2% were focused on a multi-country context. As evidenced from the current review, very few studies have taken two or more than two nations as their context of data collection. Perceptions of workplace happiness can be shaped by cultural diversity, variations in work environments, communication skills, and organizational training practices (Hassi and Storti, 2011). These disparities can yield divergent outcomes across different nations. Investigating HAW within a multi-country framework would be compelling, as differences in cultural norms and organizational values could lead to varied research findings. Therefore, future research should adopt a multi-country approach to studying HAW, enabling a deeper understanding of the role of cultural factors and attributes in influencing happiness.

Earlier studies have shown that HAW is a recognized field of research among Western nations; however, happiness is an essential element of the personal as well as work lives of non-western people, yet studies are scarce in the area of happiness specifically in the work context (Rastogi, 2020). This review also discovered Spain as having the largest share in the HAW research with 10 studies, followed by the USA with 8 studies, Italy with 5 studies, Netherlands and Portugal with 4 studies each. This shows that most of the research on HAW is centered towards developed nations, whereas developing countries such as India and China still have research scarcity in the domain of HAW. Future research should thus examine HAW in developing and other developed countries that have yet to focus on this field.

5.3 Characteristics

In terms of characteristics, it is found that workplace happiness has been predominantly investigated as the positive consequence of positive aspects such as motivational and leadership constructs, but at the same time studying the impact of negative organizational behavior such as workplace aggression, work-life imbalance, workplace bullying, and turnover intentions on the happiness of employees is significantly lacking. Thus, there is a huge need for future researchers to examine the role of negative organizational behavior in alleviating employees' happiness. The review also revealed that HAW has been mainly studied as an outcome variable, whereas comparatively fewer studies have studied it as an antecedent. Hence, future researchers can take happiness as an independent variable along with mediating and moderating mechanisms to explore how and under what conditions HAW influences organizational outcomes. By investigating HAW with the support of mediating and moderating mechanisms, researchers can get an understanding of how different contextual variables affect the association between HAW and its antecedents or consequences. This will enable the implementation of more specific interventions to strengthen HAW and its positive influence on both individuals as well as organizations. Here are some unexplored variables that may be investigated as the consequence of HAW: organizational spontaneity, knowledge-sharing behavior, employee retention, innovative behavior, job creativity, etc. Therefore, the review suggests that future researchers contribute to the domain of HAW by touching upon these unexplored relationships.

As we have grouped the antecedents and consequences of HAW under broader categories, future studies can investigate the interconnections between these macro-categories to enhance the understanding of HAW and the critical factors associated with it. For example, it would be interesting to study how employee motivation and leadership traits interact with psychological constructs such as psychological capital and thriving to influence performance outcomes and employee happiness. Furthermore, future research can also inquire impact of individual differences such as demographic variables, and personality traits on the relationship between the antecedents and outcomes of HAW.

Based on the findings of our SLR, we advocate for future researchers to explore HAW’s potential as both a mediator and a moderator in diverse settings. Examining HAW’s mediating or moderating role can provide valuable insights into the underlying processes and mechanisms by which it influences various organizational outcomes.

5.4 Methodology

The review revealed that HAW studies have, by and large, adopted a quantitative research approach, which indicates the severe lack of qualitative and mixed-method studies in this field, as only 6 such studies are depicted to have used these methods. The inductive nature of qualitative research makes it a powerful tool for thoroughly understanding a phenomenon (Hoepfl, 1997; Redine et al., 2022). Thus, to study subjective human-oriented concepts like happiness, merging qualitative methods such as focus group discussions with quantitative methods could provide an in-depth understanding. Future researchers are, therefore, encouraged to employ these approaches to research in their respective fields.

Regarding research design, most of the studies have employed cross-section research design, leaving a vast scope for applying longitudinal, intervention-based, and time lag studies for future researchers. The biggest drawback of cross-sectional design is that it only collects data at a single point in time, making it impossible to determine a cause-effect relationship among variables. On the other hand, longitudinal designs analyze how variables change over a prolonged period, thus making it possible to establish causal connections between the variables and better understand the temporal sequence of events.

In data collection, all the studies under review used primary sources, which were reached with the help of various sampling techniques, and convenience sampling was widely adopted. A combination of two or more sampling techniques can be applied in future research to get a more accurate and reliable sample.

The most applied techniques for data analysis are structural equation modeling, regression analysis, and correlation analysis. Some rarely used analytical techniques like dairy, daily reconstruction, fuzzy cluster analysis, and other qualitative techniques could be employed to analyze employee happiness (see Table 10).

Figures

Figure 1

The systematic literature review protocol

Figure 2

Publication trend (2000–2022)

Figure 3

Dimensions used in selected studies to measure HAW

Figure 4

Summary of variables studied in the context of HAW

Figure 5

Theoretical perspectives used in HAW research

Figure 6

Geographical focus of HAW research

Figure 7

Methodology adopted in HAW research

Table 1

Reviews on HAW and their contribution

No	Title	Focus	Approach	Database	No. of studies	Year range	Limitation
1	The Concept of Employee’s Happiness in Human Resource Management: A Systematic Literature Review	Employee happiness for the success of organizations	Systematic literature review	SCI (Science Citation Index)	35	1995–2020	The review is solely based on the papers scanned from the SCI (Science Citation Index) database and published in the “Human Resource Management Review.”
2	HAW in knowledge-intensive contexts: Opening the research agenda	HAW in the context of knowledge-intensive workers	Systematic Review (Narrative synthesis method)	SCI-Expanded, SSCI, A&HCI, CPCI-SSH, CCR-Expanded, and IC index	89	2000–2017	The study was limited to Knowledge-intensive contexts
3	Determinants of happiness among health care professionals between 2009 and 2019: A systematic review	Determinants of HAW in the context of healthcare professions	Systematic literature review	EBSCOhost, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science	18	2009–2019	The study was limited to the healthcare context
4	Predictors of nurse’s happiness: a systematic review	Individual and organizational predictors of nurse’s happiness	Systematic literature review	Scopus, Medline, CINAHL, Psych INFO, and Pub med Central	13	August 2010–August 2020	The study context was limited to nurses' happiness
5	In search of the Holy Grail: a 20-year systematic review of the happy productive worker thesis	Current status of the studies related to productivity as a consequence of HAW	Systematic review using Bibliometric analysis and content analysis	Scopus and Web of Science	33	1999–2019	The study context was limited to happiness and productivity

Source(s): Authors’ own elaboration

Table 2

Articles included in the review (n = 56)

Source title	Article	Reference
Frontiers in Psychology	10	Williams et al. (2016) Williams et al. (2017) Benevene et al. (2019) Salas-Vallina et al. (2020a) Tandler et al. (2020) Chumg and Huang (2021) Bangun et al. (2021) Ravina-Ripoll et al. (2021) Garg et al. (2022) Chen et al. (2022)
Employee Relations	5	Atkinson and Hall (2011) Salas-Vallina and Fernandez (2017) Salas-Vallina et al. (2020b) Mousa et al. (2020) Espasandín-Bustelo et al. (2021)
Applied Research in Quality of Life	3	Bassi et al. (2013) Kim (2019) Thompson and Bruk-Lee (2021)
Current Psychology	2	Kun and Gadanecz (2022) Basinska and Rozkwitalska (2022)
Journal of Applied Psychology	2	Oerlemans and Bakker (2018) Berg et al. (2022)
Journal of Business Ethics	2	Rego et al. (2010) Lee et al. (2018)
Journal of Business Research	2	Rego and Cunha (2008) Salas-Vallina et al. (2020c)
Journal of Psychology in Africa	2	Naudé et al. (2016) Toros et al. (2022)
Leadership and Organization Development Journal	2	Jensen and Luthans (2006) Salas-Vallina and Alegre (2018)
Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources	1	Hosie et al. (2012)
Current Issues in Tourism	1	Bibi et al. (2022)
Gender, Work and Organization	1	Sloan (2012)
Geriatrics and Gerontology International	1	Tei-tominaga and Nakanishi (2021)
Human Resource Management	1	Salas-Vallina et al. (2021)
International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management	1	Bani-Melhem et al. (2018)
International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior and Research	1	De Clercq et al. (2022)
International Journal of Hospitality Management	1	Wen and Liu-Lastres (2021)
International Journal of Lean Six Sigma	1	De Koeijer et al. (2022)
International Journal of Manpower	1	Salas-Vallina et al. (2017a)
International Review of Administrative Sciences	1	Mathias et al. (2019)
Journal of Business-to-Business Marketing	1	Edmondson and Matthews (2020)
Journal of Counseling and Development	1	Henderson (2000)
Journal of Happiness Studies	1	Rego and Cunha (2009)
Journal of Management	1	Youssef and Luthans (2007)
Journal of Managerial Psychology	1	Choi and Lee (2014)
Journal of Occupational Health Psychology	1	Rego et al. (2009)
Journal of School Psychology	1	Tadić et al. (2013)
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes	1	Bastos and Barsade (2020)
Personnel Review	1	Salas-Vallina et al. (2017b)
Perspectives: Studies in Translation Theory and Practice	1	Bednárová-Gibová (2021)
Psychology Research and Behavior Management	1	Sudibjo and Manihuruk (2022)
Total Quality Management and Business Excellence	1	Qaiser et al. (2020)
Translation Studies	1	Bednárová-Gibová (2022)
Translator	1	Bednárová-Gibová and Majherová (2021)
Transportation research part a: policy and practice	1	Wijngaards et al. (2019)

Source(s): Authors’ own elaboration

Table 3

Top ten citations

No.	Author	Source journal	Year	Citations*
1	Youssef and Luthans (2007)	Journal of Management	2007	2,928
2	Jensen and Luthans (2006)	Leadership and Organization Development Journal	2006	619
3	Rego et al. (2010)	Journal of Business Ethics	2010	434
4	Rego and Cunha (2008)	Journal of Happiness Studies	2008	307
5	Bani-Melhem et al. (2018)	International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management	2018	237
6	Choi and Lee (2014)	Journal of Managerial Psychology	2014	215
7	Atkinson and Hall (2011)	Employee Relations	2011	183
8	Salas-Vallina et al. (2017a, b)	Personnel Review	2017	160
9	Tadić et al. (2013)	Journal of School Psychology	2013	120
10	Salas-Vallina et al. (2021)	Human Resource Management	2021	109

Note(s): *Citations are based on Google Scholar (as of 23/03/2023)

Source(s): Authors’ own elaboration

Table 4

Dimensions of HAW

Sr No	Dimensions	Articles	References
1	Work engagement Job satisfaction Affective organizational commitment	10	Williams et al. (2016), Salas-Vallina and Fernandez (2017), Salas-Vallina et al. (2017a), Salas-Vallina et al. (2017b), Williams et al. (2017), Salas-Vallina and Alegre (2018), Salas-Vallina et al. (2020a), Salas-Vallina et al. (2020b), Salas-Vallina et al. (2020c), Mousa et al. (2020)
2	Anxiety-Comfort Depression-Pleasure Boredom-Enthusiasm Tiredness-Vigor Anger-Placidity	4	Rego and Cunha (2008), Rego and Cunha (2009), Rego et al. (2009, 2010)
3	Affective well-being Intrinsic job satisfaction	1	Hosie et al. (2012)
4	Job satisfaction Self-perceived performance	1	Mathias et al. (2019)
5	Engagement Meaning Pleasure	1	Tandler et al. (2020)
6	Happiness toward work Contextual job features The entire organization	1	Sudibjo and Manihuruk (2022)
7	Self-validation Pleasure	1	Bednárová-Gibová (2022)
8	Hedonic happiness (Positive affect, Life satisfaction) Eudemonic happiness (Meaningfulness, Autonomy, Personal growth, positive relations, Environmental mastery)	1	Bibi et al. (2022)
9	Results and success Assessment of and feedback on the work Meaningful work Social relationships	1	Kun and Gadanecz (2022)
10	Satisfaction Commitment	1	De Koeijer et al. (2022)
11	Positivity Satisfaction with intercultural interactions	1	Basinska and Rozkwitalska (2022)

Source(s): Authors’ own elaboration

Table 5

Antecedents of HAW

	Antecedents of HAW	No of articles	References
1. Motivation and leadership antecedents		14
	Company benefits	1	Naudé et al. (2016)
	Perceived availability of motivating job characteristics	1	Oerlemans and Bakker (2018)
	Self-esteem	1	Benevene et al. (2019)
	Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation	1	Tei-tominaga and Nakanishi (2021)
	Authentic leadership	1	Jensen and Luthans (2006)
	Inspirational leadership	2	Salas-Vallina and Fernandez (2017), Salas-Vallina et al. (2020c)
	Transformational leadership	1	Salas-Vallina et al. (2017b)
	Altruistic leadership	1	Salas-Vallina and Alegre (2018)
	Leadership-in-government roles	1	Mathias et al. (2019)
	Dual-Growth (Job-growth) mindset	1	Berg et al. (2022)
	Professional identity	1	Chen et al. (2022)
	Professional motivation	1	Chen et al. (2022)
	Job achievements	1	Chen et al. (2022)
2. Psychological antecedents		10
	Psychological capital	6	Choi and Lee (2014), Williams et al. (2016), Williams et al. (2017), Wen and Liu-Lastres (2021), Kun and Gadanecz (2022), Basinska and Rozkwitalska (2022)
	Thriving	2	Qaiser et al. (2020), Basinska and Rozkwitalska (2022)
	Authentizotic psychological climate	1	Rego and Cunha (2008)
	Psychological contract breach	1	Qaiser et al. (2020)
3. Positive organizational behavior antecedents		8
	Hope, Optimism, Resilience	1	Youssef and Luthans (2007)
	Spirit of camaraderie	1	Rego and et al. (2010)
	Organizational virtuousness	3	Rego et al. (2010), Williams et al. (2016, 2017)
	Subjective happiness	1	Benevene et al. (2019)
	Well-being oriented human resource management	1	Salas-Vallina et al. (2021)
	Gratitude	1	Garg et al. (2022)
4. Job-related antecedents		8
	Flexible working	1	Atkinson and Hall (2011)
	Job Characteristics	1	Sloan (2012)
	Job demands	1	Tadić et al. (2013)
	Job meaning	1	Bassi et al. (2013)
	Job activities	1	Kim (2019)
	Job type, Driving, Having passengers	1	Bastos and Barsade (2020)
	Job satisfaction	1	Bangun et al. (2021)
	Job competence	1	Chen et al. (2022)
5. Social and ethical antecedents		3
	Ethics institutionalization	1	Lee et al. (2018)
	Corporate social responsibility	1	Bibi et al. (2022)
	Colleague support	1	Qaiser et al. (2020)
6. Other antecedents		15
	Career development and future outlook, Intra-individual attributes, Work environment	1	Henderson (2000)
	Individualistic/collectivistic orientations of employees	1	Rego and Cunha (2009)
	Gender Differences	1	Sloan (2012)
	Situational uncertainty	1	Bassi et al. (2013)
	High commitment human resource management	1	Kim (2019)
	Sleep deprivation	1	Edmondson and Matthews (2020)
	High-involvement work system	1	Salas-Vallina et al. (2020b)
	Socio-demographic and occupational prestige variables	1	Bednárová-Gibová and Majherová (2021)
	Organizational ergonomics	1	Bednárová-Gibová (2021)
	Attitude towards technology	1	Bangun et al. (2021)
	Organizational culture	1	Espasandín-Bustelo et al. (2021)
	Brand orientation	1	Ravina-Ripoll et al. (2021)
	Lean management and six sigma	1	De Koeijer et al. (2022)
	Fear of COVID-19	1	Toros et al. (2022)
	Professional prospects, Perceived fairness	1	Chen et al. (2022)

Source(s): Authors’ own elaboration

Table 6

Consequences of HAW

Consequences of HAW	No of articles	Reference
Performance outcomes
• Self-rated individualperformance	1	Rego and Cunha (2008)
• Performance	1	Atkinson and Hall (2011)
• Contextual and taskperformance	1	Hosie et al. (2012)
• Cross-selling performance	1	Salas-Vallina et al. (2020a)
• Job performance	2	Bangun et al. (2021), Thompson and Bruk-Lee (2021)
• Individual performance	1	Salas-Vallina et al. (2021)
Behavioral outcomes
• Organizational citizenship behavior	3	Rego et al. (2009), Salas-Vallina et al. (2017a, b), Bangun et al. (2021)
• Discretionary behavior	1	Atkinson and Hall (2011)
• Innovative behavior	1	Bani-Melhem et al. (2018)
• Counterproductive work behavior	1	Thompson and Bruk-Lee (2021)
Well-being outcomes
• Subjective well-being	1	Bassi et al. (2013)
• Teacher’s health	1	Benevene et al. (2019)
• Mental health	1	Sudibjo and Manihuruk (2022)
Other outcomes
• Job engagement	1	Kim (2019)
• Absorptive capacity	1	Salas-Vallina et al. (2020b)
• Knowledge management (knowledge sharing)	1	Chumg and Huang (2021)
• Organizational commitment	1	Thompson and Bruk-Lee (2021)
• Turnover intention	1	Thompson and Bruk-Lee (2021)
• Employee Innovativeness	1	Bibi et al. (2022)

Source(s): Authors’ own elaboration

Table 7

Mediators and moderators of HAW

Variables	No of articles	Reference	Variables	No of articles	Reference
Mediating variables			Moderating variables
Feelings about the company	1	Naudé et al. (2016)	Spirit of camaraderie	1	Rego and Cunha (2009)
Participative decision making	1	Salas-Vallina and Fernandez (2017)	Need to belong	1	Rego et al. (2009)
Organizational learning capability	3	Salas-Vallina et al. (2017a), Salas-Vallina et al. (2017b), Salas-Vallina and Alegre (2018)	Self-concordant motivation	1	Tadić et al. (2013)
Co-worker support	1	Bani-Melhem et al. (2018)	Job meaning	1	Bassi et al. (2013)
Stress	1	Bani-Melhem et al. (2018)	Work-family life conflict	1	Lee et al. (2018)
Employee work experiences	1	Lee et al. (2018)	Motivating job characteristics at the job level, Individual differences in trait positive affect	1	Oerlemans and Bakker (2018)
Thriving	2	Qaiser et al. (2020), Basinska and Rozkwitalska (2022)	Job demands and resources	1	Wijngaards et al. (2019)
Followers' characteristics	1	Salas-Vallina et al. (2020c)	Outcome valence	1	Bastos and Barsade (2020)
Service-skill use	1	Salas-Vallina et al. (2020a)	Engaging leadership	1	Salas-Vallina et al. (2021)
Coping strategies	1	Tandler et al. (2020)	Psychological capital	1	Basinska and Rozkwitalska (2022)
Diversity management practices	1	Mousa et al. (2020)	Spiritual Climate	1	Garg et al. (2022)
Involvement of the self with the good, Perceived positive impact on others, Job meaningfulness	1	Bastos and Barsade (2020)
Internal corporate social responsibility	1	Espasandín-Bustelo et al. (2021)
Job satisfaction	1	Sudibjo and Manihuruk (2022)
Human resource management	1	De Koeijer et al. (2022)
Psychological capital, Social capital	1	Garg et al. (2022)

Source(s): Authors’ own elaboration

Table 8

Theoretical perspectives used in HAW research

Sr No	Theory/Model	No. of articles	Citation
1	Job Demand Resources (JD-R) Model	11	Tadić et al. (2013), Salas-Vallina and Fernandez (2017)
			Salas-Vallina et al. (2017a), Salas-Vallina et al. (2017b)
			Salas-Vallina and Alegre (2018), Wijngaards et al. (2019)
			Salas-Vallina et al. (2020a), Salas-Vallina et al. (2020b)
			Salas-Vallina et al. (2020c), Salas-Vallina et al. (2021)
			Thompson and Bruk-Lee (2021)
2	Social Exchange Theory	7	Salas-Vallina et al. (2017a), Bani-Melhem et al. (2018)
			Kim (2019), Salas-Vallina et al. (2020b), Mousa et al. (2020)
			Wen and Liu-Lastres (2021), Salas-Vallina et al. (2021)
3	Broaden and Build Theory	5	Salas-Vallina et al. (2017a), Benevene et al. (2019), Kim (2019)
			Tandler et al. (2020), Garg et al. (2022)
4	Job Characteristics Theory (JCT)	4	Salas-Vallina et al. (2017b), Salas-Vallina and Alegre (2018)
			Oerlemans and Bakker (2018), Salas-Vallina et al. (2020b)
5	Conservation of Resources (COR) Theory	4	Salas-Vallina et al. (2017a), Edmondson and Matthews (2020) Basinska and Rozkwitalska (2022), De Clercq et al. (2022)
6	The Inside-Out, Outside-In Model of Work Happiness	2	Williams et al. (2016, 2017),
7	Equity Theory	2	Mousa et al. (2020), Wen and Liu-Lastres (2021)
8	Self Determination Theory	2	Tadić et al. (2013), Bibi et al. (2022)
9	Adaption Level Theory	1	Oerlemans and Bakker (2018)
10	AMO (Abilities, Enhancing Motivation, Promoting Opportunities to participate) Framework	1	Salas-Vallina et al. (2020b)
11	Embeddedness theory	1	Chumg and Huang (2021)
12	High-Performance Work Systems (HPWS)	1	Atkinson and Hall (2011)
13	Institutional and Stakeholder Theories	1	Espasandín-Bustelo et al. (2021)
14	Interactional Theories	1	Salas-Vallina and Alegre (2018)
15	Iterative Reprocessing Model	1	Williams et al. (2017)
16	Campbell (1968) paradigms of the Hero’s Journey and “follow your bliss.” (Framework)	1	Henderson (2000)
17	Mutual Gains Model	1	Salas-Vallina et al. (2020b)
18	Need Satisfaction Theory	1	Bibi et al. (2022)
19	PERMA model (Positive emotions, Engagement, Positive relationships, Meaning and Accomplishment)	1	Kun and Gadanecz (2022)
20	Positive Psychology Framework	1	Bassi et al. (2013)
21	Psychological Capital Theory	1	Kun and Gadanecz (2022)
22	Quality of Working Life Theory	1	Salas-Vallina and Alegre (2018)
23	Signal Theory	1	Kim (2019)
24	Social Cognitive Theory	1	Salas-Vallina et al. (2020b)
25	Structural Theories of Emotion	1	Sloan (2012)
26	The Authentic Leadership Conceptual Model	1	Jensen and Luthans (2006)
27	The Bottom-up Theory of Life Satisfaction	1	Salas-Vallina and Alegre (2018)
28	The Effort-Recovery model	1	Salas-Vallina et al. (2017b)
29	The Leader-Member Exchange Theory (LMX)	1	Salas-Vallina and Alegre (2018)
30	Transactional Model of Stress	1	Tandler et al. (2020)
31	Transactional Theory	1	Benevene et al. (2019)
32	Veenhoven’s happiness framework	1	Bednárová-Gibová (2022)
33	Peter's (1987) Vitamin Model	1	Salas-Vallina and Alegre (2018)

Source(s): Authors’ own elaboration

Table 9

Geographical focus of HAW research

Country	Single country context	Twin country context	Multiple country context	Total
Spain	8	2	–	10
USA	7	1	–	8
Italy	3	2	–	5
Netherlands	3	–	1	4
Portugal	4	–	–	4
Australia	3	–	–	3
Slovakia	3	–	–	3
Indonesia		2	–	2
South Korea	2	–	–	2
United Arab Emirates	2	–	–	2
United Kingdom	1	–	1	2
China	2	–	–	2
Canada	–	1	–	1
Egypt	1	–	–	1
France	–	–	1	1
Germany	–	–	1	1
Hungary	1	–	–	1
India	1	–	–	1
Japan	1	–	–	1
Poland	1	–	–	1
South Africa	1	–	–	1
Switzerland	1	–	–	1
Taiwan	1	–	–	1
Turkey	1	–	–	1
Denmark	1	–	–	1
Not specified	–	–	–	2

Source(s): Authors’ own elaboration

Table 10

Summary of future research suggestions

Theory advancement	• Future studies can adopt the PERMA model to measure happiness in terms of positive emotions, engagement, relationships, meaning, and accomplishment to have a holistic view of happiness as well-being • Flow theory can be applied to comprehend the level of happiness in challenging circumstances
Context	• Studying HAW in a multi-country context is recommended to generalize the research • More studies can be done in developing and underdeveloped nations
Characteristics	• Future researchers are recommended to study the impact of negative organizational practices such as workplace bullying, work-life imbalance, workplace aggression, and employee turnover intentions in reducing the level of HAW. • Future studies can be undertaken to investigate the role of HAW as a mediating/moderating variable • Future studies can investigate the interconnections between the identified macro-categories of HAW’s antecedents and outcomes
Methodology	• Qualitative and mixed methods can be applied, e.g. focus group discussions and case studies • Longitudinal and intervention-based study designs can be adopted to check the consistency of results
Measurement of Happiness in the Work Context	• Being a multi-dimensional construct, employee happiness can be assessed using scales constructed specific to the work context rather than using general life happiness scales

Source(s): Authors’ own elaboration