Introduction: Spiritual intelligence (IESP) is the human capacity that awakens in individuals the desire to have a life with meaning and purpose, with work being an opportunity to fulfill this desire. Psychological Capital (CPP) are internal resources that favor the positive performance of workers. Work Readjustment (RT), in turn, is the adaptation of work tasks so that they have meaning and purpose. These approaches (IESP; CPP and RT) have theoretical similarities that correlate them with each other. Based on theory, we chose to empirically investigate the relationships between these variables: IESP, Psychological Capital and Work Readjustment with the intention of verifying whether these conceptual relationships are empirically supported. Objectives: An empirical model was developed to verify an influential relationship between the leader's spiritual intelligence, positive psychological capital and job crafting (work readjustment) in hospital workers in Brazil and Portugal. Methodology: 434 hospital workers in Brazil and Portugal participated in the study, responding to the leader version spiritual intelligence scales, positive psychological capital and job crafting (work readjustment) and sociodemographic data. Results: It was observed that psychological capital has a mediating action in the relationship between the spiritual intelligence of the leader and the occurrence of readjustment of team work. Discussion: This research allows us to reflect on the theoretical and practical relationships between these three constructs, pointing to the positive relevance of these factors and their influence on the work performance of health workers in a productive way. Conclusion: from these findings, it is highlighted that the way of thinking and acting, both of workers and managers in organizations, impacts the way of executing and relating in the work environment. Decision-making that is more connected to the human values and principles (IESP) of leaders leads to positive work performance (CPP) of teams.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Fidelis et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: