Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 317

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 69 of the 69 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Employee Wellbeing, Productivity, and Firm Performance

Open access
Krekel, Christian, Ward, George, De Neve, Jan-Emmanuel·2019·SSRN Electronic Journal
DOI 10.2139/ssrn.3356581
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Does higher employee wellbeing lead to higher productivity, and, ultimately, to tangible benefits to the bottom line of businesses? We survey the evidence and study this question in a meta-analysis of 339 independent research studies, including the wellbeing of 1,882,131 employees and the performance of 82,248 business units, originating from 230 independent organisations across 49 industries in the Gallup client database. We find a significant, strong positive correlation between employees' satisfaction with their company and employee productivity and customer loyalty, and a strong negative correlation with staff turnover. Ultimately, higher wellbeing at work is positively correlated with more business-unit level profitability.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2139/ssrn.3356581

Cites

69 of 69 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 19

  1. S Achor, 2012, Positive Intelligence, Harvard Business Review
  2. S Agrawal, 2010, The Cascade Effect of Employee Engagement: A Longitudinal Study
  3. G A Akerlof, 1988, Job Switching and Job Satisfaction in the U.S. Labor Market, Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 2, 495, 10.2307/2534536 · doi:10.2307/2534536
  4. G L Clore, 1994, Cognitive causes and consequences of emotion, Handbook of Social Cognition
  5. C Cooper, 2013, Management and Happiness, 10.4337/9781784714376 · doi:10.4337/9781784714376
  6. D Coviello, 2017, Effect of Mood on Workplace Productivity
  7. , J.-E De Neve, 2013, The Objective Benefits of Subjective Wellbeing
  8. Gallup, 2017, Employee Engagement and Earnings per Share, Gallup Organization
  9. J K Harter, 2011, Cross-cultural analysis of Gallup's Q12 employee engagement instrument
  10. A M Isen, 1991, Positive affect as a factor in organizational behavior, Research in Organizational Behavior, 13, 1
  11. C Krekel, 2018, Work and Wellbeing: A Global Perspective, Global Happiness Policy Report
  12. A Meier, 2018, Emotions, Risk Attitudes, and Patience
  13. P Moen, Does a
  14. 2014, Balancing paid work, unpaid work and leisure
  15. I know what is expected of me at work
  16. I have the materials and equipment I need to do my work right
  17. At work, I have the opportunity to do what I do best every day
  18. In the last seven days, I have received recognition or praise for doing good work. 5. My supervisor, or someone at work, seems to care about me as a person. 6. There is someone at work who encourages my development
  19. My associates or fellow employees are committed to doing quality work. 10. I have a best friend at work. 11. In the last six months, someone at work has talked to me about my progress. 12. This last year, I have had opportunities at work to learn and grow, They cannot be reprinted or reproduced in any manner without the written consent of Gallup. Copyright 1993-1998, Gallup, 8

Cited by

See all 317

Metadata

Authors
Krekel, C., Ward, G., & De Neve, J.-E.
Venue
SSRN Electronic Journal
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019
ISSN
1556-5068 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.2139/ssrn.3356581
OpenAlex
W2933918915
Cited by
317
References
69
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.