Advertise on podcast: PsychChat

The largest-ever four-day workweek trial, involving 2,896 employees, 141 companies, and six countries, found the opposite of what researchers expected. People didn't work faster and burn out. Burnout fell, satisfaction rose, and nothing changed in the control group (Fan et al., 2025, Nature Human Behaviour). But there's a catch: "four-day week" covers two very different policies, and a 2025 systematic review found that the wrong one can just as easily increase sickness absence (Bernstrøm et al., 2025). The benefit isn't the day off. It's who controls the recovery time (Mullens & Laurijssen, 2024, BMC Public Health). References Bernstrøm, V. H., Alves, D. E., Houkes, I., Lillebråten, A., & Nilsen, W. (2025). The consequences of a compressed workweek: A systematic literature review. International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00420-025-02153-8 Fan, W., Schor, J. B., Kelly, O., & Gu, G. (2025). Work time reduction via a 4-day workweek finds improvements in workers' well-being. Nature Human Behaviour. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-025-02259-6 Mullens, F., & Laurijssen, I. (2024). An organizational working time reduction and its impact on three domains of mental well-being of employees: A panel study. BMC Public Health. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-024-19161-x About PsychChat Hosted by Dr Austin Tay, Chartered Psychologist (CPsychol, FBPsS), ICF PCC executive coach and founder of OmniPsi Consulting. Get in touch Thoughts on this one? Email [email protected] or find Austin on X, @psych_chat. New here? Subscribe.

What does addiction really look like — especially in professional life? Most of us carry an outdated picture of addiction. In this episode of PsychChat, Dr Austin Tay is joined by Karen Mills (Business Psychologist, Senior Manager for Adult Care, and PhD researcher in addiction) to unpack what addiction really is, how it hides in high-performing workplaces, and what leaders, managers, and organisations can do about it. In this episode, you will learn: •       The difference between substance addiction and behavioural addiction •       Why addiction is a compulsion — not a choice or moral failure •       The behavioural, emotional, cognitive, and physical signs to look out for •       Why high-performing professionals are particularly at risk — and why they hide it •       How social normalisation (alcohol culture, prescription medication) makes addiction harder to spot •       What UK law says: Equality Act 2010, Health & Safety at Work Act, Employment Rights Act •       What organisations can do — from psychological safety to manager capability to HR policy •       Why the first conversation should never be a formal HR meeting Whether you are an HR professional, a manager, an organisational leader, or someone who wants to better understand addiction — this episode will shift how you see it. About Karen Mills: Karen Mills is a Business Psychologist, Senior Manager for Adult Care, Director of Business and Strategy for Psychology Business Incubator (PBI), author, and PhD student researching addiction. https://www.linkedin.com/in/karen-mills-fmbpss-certbp-1b1a59158/ Resources HSE support for drug and alcohol at work Managing drug and alcohol misuse at work - Overview - HSE NHS search for your nearest services in England Find alcohol addiction support services - NHS AA website- Alcohol support networks alcoholics-anonymous.org.uk CGL- various services including drugs, alcohol and smoking Change Grow Live | Charity | We can help you change your life With You- Drug and alcohol services Drug and Alcohol Support | WithYou About PsychChat: PsychChat is hosted by Dr Austin Tay, Chartered Psychologist (CPsychol) with over 30 years of international experience in organisational psychology. Each episode bridges academic research and real-world practice to help you understand the psychology behind the workplace.

Tune in to this captivating episode featuring Dr Austin Tay as he chats with Dr Hodar Lam, also known as Dr Lonely-Ship. Dr Lam is a Research Assistant Professor at Lingnan University, Hong Kong, and Chair of the Division of Industrial-Organizational Psychology of the Hong Kong Psychological Society. Discover insightful research on loneliness in the workplace and get expert tips for organizations and individuals to combat loneliness. And how can Chicken Soup actually help to alleviate Loneliness? Don't miss out—listen till the end! 🚀🎧 #WorkplaceWellness #Loneliness #MentalHealth #OrganizationalPsychology #HKPsychology #SelfCare References Lam, H., Giessner, S. R., Shemla, M., & Werner, M. D. (2024). Leader and leadership loneliness: A review-based critique and path to future research. The Leadership Quarterly, 35(3), 101780. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2024.101780 Troisi, J. D., & Gabriel, S. (2011). Chicken soup really is good for the soul: “Comfort food” fulfills the need to belong. Psychological Science, 22(6), 747–753. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797611407931

Episode Summary Ever found yourself staring at your screen on a Wednesday afternoon wondering, "Why does this organisation even exist? What am I actually doing here that matters?" You're not alone. In this episode, Dr Austin Tay dives deep into the crisis of meaning at work, unpacking two groundbreaking research papers that finally explain what's missing when work feels meaningless—and more importantly, what makes organisations genuinely matter. Learn the five-characteristic framework that helps you distinguish between organisations with a genuine purpose and those just performing it. By the end of this episode, you'll know exactly how to audit your workplace, assess your alignment, and decide your next steps. What You'll Learn 🎯 The Purpose Crisis: Why trust in businesses is at historic lows and more people than ever are asking if their work actually matters 🎯 The VUCA/BANI World: How volatility, uncertainty, complexity, and ambiguity have shattered the old "profit-only" playbook 🎯 The Golden Thread: The three elements that help people genuinely thrive at work (spoiler: it's not just about the salary) 🎯 Five Characteristics Framework: The diagnostic tool for determining if your organisation's purpose is genuine or just window dressing Reason to existGuiding forceCollective endeavourInspirationPursuit of a better world🎯 Purpose-Person Misalignment: Why even good organisations can make you miserable if your purposes don't align 🎯 The Purpose Paradox: Why meaningful work can lead to burnout—and how to avoid that trap Key Takeaways ✅ Your frustration with meaningless work isn't a personal failing—it's actually a sign of something healthy ✅ Real purpose isn't decoration on the wall—it should guide actual decisions, especially when purpose conflicts with profit ✅ Genuine purpose is co-created, not handed down from leadership retreats ✅ You can have an organisation with a real purpose that still isn't YOUR purpose—and that's okay ✅ Even when you find perfect alignment, watch for the purpose paradox: sustainable impact matters more than burning yourself out Who This Episode Is For Anyone feeling disconnected from their workLeaders trying to build genuinely purpose-driven organisationsPeople considering career transitionsHR professionals working on culture and engagementConsultants and coaches supporting organisational developmentFeatured Research Floris, M., Casulli, L., & Ferrari, L. (2023). Editorial: Searching for meaning in work and life: Happiness, wellbeing and the future of organizations. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1287404. van Ingen, R., Peters, P., De Ruiter, M., & Robben, H. (2021). Exploring the meaning of organizational purpose at a new dawn: The development of a conceptual model through expert interviews. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 675543. Quotable Moments 💬 "The question isn't whether purpose matters—research makes it clear that it does. The real question is whether your organisation's purpose is genuine and if it aligns with yours." 💬 "Real purpose isn't decoration hanging on the wall. It shapes resource allocation, strategic priorities, hiring decisions, and how conflicts get resolved." 💬 "When there's a direct conflict between purpose and profit, what wins? If profit always wins, your purpose statement is just window dressing." 💬 "Real purpose should make you want to get up in the morning. It gives you energy rather than draining it." Questions for Reflection After listening to this episode, ask yourself: If my organisation disappeared tomorrow, what would the world actually lose?When purpose conflicts with profit in my organisation, which one actually wins?Was I part of creating our organisation's purpose, or was it handed down to me?Does my organisation's purpose genuinely inspire me, or does it feel like corporate speak?Am I experiencing purpose-person misalignment? If so, what are my options?Take Action Ready to apply what you learned? Here's your next step: Audit Your Organisation: Go through the five characteristics honestly—not what your website says, but what actually happens in practice. Be brutally honest with yourself about the gap between aspirations and reality. Assess Your Alignment: Even if your organisation has a genuine purpose, does it resonate with what matters to YOU? Do you sense that connection in your daily work? Make a Conscious Choice: If there's misalignment, decide: Can you advocate for change? Do you have the energy for that battle? Or is it time to look elsewhere? Connect with PsychChat Enjoyed this episode? Here's how to stay connected: 📧 Email: [email protected] 🐦 Twitter/X: @psych_chat 🎙️ Listen: Available on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, and all major podcast platforms ⭐ Leave a Review: Your reviews help others discover the show and help us understand what content matters most to you 🔔 Subscribe: Don't miss future episodes—hit that subscribe button now Hashtags #PsychChat #OrganisationalPurpose #WorkplaceMeaning #LeadershipDevelopment #OrganisationalPsychology #PurposeDriven #WorkplaceCulture #EmployeeEngagement #MeaningfulWork #OrganisationalDevelopment #WorkplaceWellbeing #LeadershipResearch #HRLeadership #FutureOfWork #WorkplacePsychology About the Host: Dr Austin Tay is a Chartered Industrial Organisational Psychologist who serves as Founder and Principal Consultant of OmniPsi Consulting. He specialises in executive coaching, leadership assessment, and evidence-based organisational psychology interventions. Remember: Your work matters. The question is whether your organisation is helping you see that.

In this conversation, Dr Austin Tay explores the significance of humour in leadership and its impact on workplace dynamics. He discusses the different styles of humour, the strategic use of humour to foster team cohesion, and how humour can serve as a diagnostic tool for understanding organisational challenges. The conversation emphasises the importance of context, trust, and appropriateness in using humour effectively, ultimately highlighting how leaders who leverage humour can create a more engaging and resilient workplace culture. Takeaways Humour can unveil deeper organisational problems. Positive humour boosts team performance and cohesion. Understanding humour styles is vital for effective leadership. Humour can serve as a diagnostic tool for organisational health. Trust is crucial for humour to be impactful. Timing and context are essential when applying humour. Inappropriate humour can harm leadership credibility. Leaders should monitor humour patterns within their teams. Self-deprecating humour promotes psychological safety. Humour can help manage workplace tensions and contradictions.REFERENCES Hatch, M. J., & Ehrlich, S. B. (1993). Spontaneous humour as an indicator of paradox and ambiguity in organisations. Organisation Studies, 14(4), 505-526. https://doi.org/10.1177/017084069301400403 Holmes, J., & Marra, M. (2006). Humour and leadership style. Humor: International Journal of Humor Research, 19(2), 119-138. https://doi.org/10.1515/HUMOR.2006.006 Mao, J. Y., Chiang, J. T. J., Zhang, Y., & Gao, M. (2017). Humour as a relationship lubricant: The implications of leader humour on transformational leadership perceptions and team performance. Journal of Leadership & Organisational Studies, 24(4), 494-506. https://doi.org/10.1177/1548051817707518 Vetter, L., & Gockel, C. (2016). Can't buy me laughter—Humour in organisational change. Gruppe. Interaktion. Organisation. Zeitschrift für Angewandte Organisationspsychologie (GIO), 47(4), 313-320. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11612-016-0341-7 Mesmer-Magnus, J., Glew, D. J., & Viswesvaran, C. (2012). A meta-analysis of positive humour in the workplace. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 27(2), 155-190. https://doi.org/10.1108/02683941211199554 Martin, R. A., Puhlik-Doris, P., Larsen, G., Gray, J., & Weir, K. (2003). Individual differences in uses of humour and their relation to psychological well-being: Development of the Humour Styles Questionnaire. Journal of Research in Personality, 37(1), 48-75. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0092-6566(02)00534-2 Lee, D. (2015). The impact of leader's humour on employees' creativity: The moderating role of trust in leader. Seoul Journal of Business, 21(1), 59-86. https://doi.org/10.35152/snusjb.2015.21.1.003 Tremblay, M. (2017). Humour in teams: Multilevel relationships between humour climate, inclusion, trust, and citizenship behaviours. Journal of Business and Psychology, 32(4), 363-378. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-016-9445-x Rosenberg, C., Walker, A., Leiter, M., & Graffam, J. (2021). Humour in workplace leadership: A systematic search scoping review. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 610795. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.610795 Bitterly, T. B., Brooks, A. W., & Schweitzer, M. E. (2017). Risky business: When humour increases and decreases status. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 112(3), 431-455. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000079 Decker, W. H., & Rotondo, D. M. (2001). Relationships among gender, type of humour, and perceived leader effectiveness. Journal of Managerial Issues, 13(4), 450-465. Yue, X., Jiang, F., Lu, S., & Hiranandani, N. (2016). To be or not to be humorous? Cross-cultural perspectives on humour. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1495. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01495

Ever wondered why some CEOs inspire fierce loyalty while others can't stop their employees from heading for the exit? This episode flips everything you think you know about leadership upside down! We're diving deep into the "humble leadership paradox" - why the leaders who seem least power-hungry might actually be the most powerful of all.🌟 Memorable Quotes "Humility paired with action shows confidence, not weakness. It says, 'I'm so secure in my abilities that I don't need to prove I'm the smartest person in the room.'" "Maybe real power means asking better questions... maybe true authority means making everyone else smarter."🔄 Connect & Share Found this episode helpful? Please share it with someone who needs to hear it! Tag us and let us know your biggest takeaway.📖 Academic References Full research citations available in the episode transcript, featuring work from leading organizational psychology journals and leadership researchers.

🌟 In this exciting episode, I dive into the incredible impact of positivity in the workplace! Discover how Positive Organizational Psychology 2.0 is revolutionizing our work environments. Are you ready to embrace this transformation? Let’s unlock the power of positivity together! 💼✨ #PositiveWorkplace #OrganizationalPsychology #WorkplaceWellness References Avey, J. B., Reichard, R. J., Luthans, F., & Mhatre, K. H. (2011). Meta-analysis of the impact of positive psychological capital on employee attitudes, behaviors, and performance. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 22(2), 127-152. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrdq.20070 Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2007). The Job Demands-Resources model: State of the art. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 22(3), 309-328. https://doi.org/10.1108/02683940710733115 Bakker, A. B., Demerouti, E., & Euwema, M. C. (2005). Job resources buffer the impact of job demands on burnout. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 10(2), 170-180. https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8998.10.2.170 Bakker, A. B., Hakanen, J. J., Demerouti, E., & Xanthopoulou, D. (2007). Job resources boost work engagement, particularly when job demands are high. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(2), 274-284. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.99.2.274 Bakker, A. B., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2008). Positive organizational behavior: Engaged employees in flourishing organizations. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 29(2), 147-154. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.515 Cameron, K. S., & Dutton, J. E. (2003). Positive organizational scholarship: Foundations of a new discipline. Berrett-Koehler Publishers. Fredrickson, B. L., & Losada, M. F. (2005). Positive affect and the complex dynamics of human flourishing. American Psychologist, 60(7), 678-686. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.60.7.678 Hakanen, J. J., Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2005). How dentists cope with their job demands and stay engaged: The moderating role of job resources. European Journal of Oral Sciences, 113(6), 479-487. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0722.2005.00250.x Heinitz, K., Lorenz, T., Schulze, D., & Schorlemmer, J. (2018). Positive organisational psychology: Longitudinal effects on subjective well-being. PLOS ONE, 13(6), e0198588. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0198588 Jafari, F., Salari, N., Hosseinian-Far, A., Abdi, A., & Ezatizadeh, N. (2021). Predicting positive organizational behavior based on structural and psychological empowerment among nurses. Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation, 19(38). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12962-021-00289-1 Luthans, F. (2002). Positive organizational behavior: Developing and managing psychological strengths. Academy of Management Executive, 16(1), 57-72. https://doi.org/10.5465/ame.2002.6640181 Luthans, F., & Youssef, C. M. (2004). Human, social, and now positive psychological capital management: Investing in people for competitive advantage. Organizational Dynamics, 33(2), 143-160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.orgdyn.2004.01.003 Martín-Del-Río, B., Neipp, M. C., García-Selva, A., & Solanes-Puchol, A. (2021). Positive organizational psychology: A bibliometric review and science mapping analysis. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(10), 5222. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18105222 Schaufeli, W. B., & Bakker, A. B. (2004). Job demands, job resources, and their relationship with burnout and engagement: A multi-sample study. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25(3), 293-315. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.248 Seligman, M. E. P., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000). Positive psychology: An introduction. American Psychologist, 55(1), 5-14. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.5 van Zyl, L. E., Dik, B. J., Donaldson, S. I., Klibert, J. J., di Blasi, Z., van Wingerden, J., & Salanova, M. (2024). Positive organisational psychology 2.0: Embracing the technological revolution. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 19(4), 699-711. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2023.2257640 OmniPsi Consulting presents this podcast. For more information about our services, please visit our website here.   Want to explore topics that matter to you? Connect with us on BlueSky or shoot us an email at [email protected]. Don't forget to subscribe to our podcast for insightful discussions that empower you to navigate the complexities of the world of work. Let's dive into the issues that shape your professional journey!  #Podcast #WorkLife #CareerAdvice Join the discussion on Youtube or reply to my post

In this episode, I discuss the science behind bounded rationality and offer ways to navigate our decision-making process. In this exciting episode, I delve into the fascinating realm of bounded rationality and uncover the hidden factors that influence our choices. Join me as I share insightful strategies that can empower you to make better decisions, enhance your problem-solving skills, and confidently navigate the complexities of daily life. Don’t miss out on these powerful tools that can transform your thoughts and decisions! References 1. Viale, R., Gallagher, S., & Gallese, V. (2023). Bounded rationality, enactive problem solving, and the neuroscience of social interaction. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1152866. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1152866 2. Petracca, E. (2021). Embodying Bounded Rationality: From Embodied Bounded Rationality to Embodied Rationality. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 710607. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.710607 3. Simon, H. A. (1947). Administrative Behavior: A Study of Decision-Making Processes in Administrative Organization. Macmillan. 4. Simon, H. A. (1955). A behavioral model of rational choice. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 69(1), 99-118. https://doi.org/10.2307/1884852 5. Simon, H. A. (1972). Theories of bounded rationality. Decision and Organization, 1(1), 161-176. 6. Simon, H. A. (1981). The Sciences of the Artificial (2nd ed.). MIT Press. 7. Todd, P. M., & Gigerenzer, G. (2012). Ecological rationality: Intelligence in the world. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195315448.001.0001 Join the discussion on Youtube or reply to my post on Bluesky

Imagine stepping into your office and leaving behind the limitations of your physical surroundings. In this episode, we dive into the fascinating world of virtual reality in the workplace. What does the future hold as we integrate immersive technology into our daily tasks? Are we truly ready to embrace this revolutionary shift that could forever transform our work? Join me as we explore the possibilities and challenges of a VR-enhanced work environment! References Macchi, G., & De Pisapia, N. (2024). Virtual reality, face-to-face, and 2D video conferencing differently impact fatigue, creativity, flow, and decision-making in workplace dynamics. Scientific Reports, 14(10260). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-60942-6 Michinov, E., Dodeler, V., Adam, H., & Michinov, N. (2024). Relaxing at work: Does virtual reality work? An exploratory study among employees in their workplace. Frontiers in Organizational Psychology, 20241816. https://doi.org/10.3389/forgp.2024.1441816 Naranjo, J. E., et al. (2020). A scoping review on virtual reality-based industrial training. Applied Sciences, 10(8), 8224. https://doi.org/10.3390/app10228224

In this episode, I had a great conversation with Harleen Grover, Leadership and Menopause in the Workplace Coach. With a very impressive background in the corporate world and acting, Harleen shares how she interweaves both into her coaching work. Apart from focusing on leadership coaching, she highlights the importance of menopause coaching in the workplace. To reach out to Harleen Grover, please click on the following links. https://thespacehq.com/ https://www.linkedin.com/in/harleen-grover/

Everyone experiences envy in the workplace at some point. In this episode, I explore the meaning of envy in the workplace and how we can overcome this green-eyed monster. References González-Navarro, P., Zurriaga-Llorens, R., Tosin Olateju, A., & Llinares-Insa, L. I. (2018). Envy and counterproductive work behavior: The moderation role of leadership in public and private organizations. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 15(7), 1455. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15071455 Li, M., Xu, X., & Kwan, H. K. (2023). The antecedents and consequences of workplace envy: A meta-analytic review. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 40(1), 1-35. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10490-021-09772-y Su, X., & Chen, C. (2023). The influence of workplace envy on employees' knowledge-hiding behavior based on a comparative analysis between generation cohorts. Behavioral Sciences, 13(9), 716. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs13090716 Tai, K., Narayanan, J., & McAllister, D. J. (2012). Envy as pain: Rethinking the nature of envy and its implications for employees and organizations. Academy of Management Review, 37(1), 107-129. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2009.0484 van de Ven, N., Zeelenberg, M., & Pieters, R. (2009). Leveling up and down: The experiences of benign and malicious envy. Emotion, 9(3), 419-429. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015669

In today's episode, I will address an important issue impacting workplaces worldwide: workplace depression. This topic affects everyone directly or indirectly through colleagues, friends, or family members. I will discuss how depression manifests in the workplace, the risk factors,  warning signs, and strategies for managing depression at work. I will also share how our mindset about stress can significantly influence our mental health outcomes. References Deady, M., Collins, D. A. J., Johnston, D. A., Glozier, N., Calvo, R. A., Christensen, H., & Harvey, S. B. (2022). A pilot evaluation of a smartphone application for workplace depression. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(6753), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17186753 Greiner, B. A., & Arensman, E. (2022). The role of work in suicidal behavior - uncovering priorities for research and prevention. Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health, 48(6), 419–424. https://doi.org/10.5271/sjweh.4051  Huebschmann, N. A., & Sheets, E. S. (2020). The right mindset: Stress mindset moderates the association between perceived stress and depressive symptoms. Anxiety, Stress, & Coping, 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1080/10615806.2020.1736900 LaMontagne, A. D., Åberg, M., Blomqvist, S., Glozier, N., Greiner, B. A., Gullestrup, J., Harvey, S. B., Kyron, M. J., Madsen, I. E. H., Hanson, L. M., Maheen, H., Mustard, C., Niedhammer, I., Rugulies, R., Smith, P. M., Taouk, Y., Waters, S., Witt, K., & King, T. L. (2024). Work-related suicide: Evolving understandings of etiology & intervention. American Journal of Industrial medicine, 67(8), 679–695. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajim.23624  Moon, J. Y., Choi, T. Y., Won, E. S., Won, G. H., Kim, S. Y., Lee, H. J., & Yoon, S. (2022). The relationship between workplace burnout and male depression symptom assessed by the Korean version of the Gotland Male Depression Scale. American Journal of Men's Health, 16(5), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1177/15579883221123930 Zadow, A. J., Dollard, M. F., Dormann, C., & Landsbergis, P. (2021). Predicting new major depression symptoms from long working hours, psychosocial safety climate and work engagement: A population‐based cohort study. BMJ Open, 11(6), e044133. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-044133 https://www.virtual-college.co.uk/resources/uk-suicides-could-be-work-related-research-suggests https://ahc.leeds.ac.uk/download/downloads/id/678/work-related_suicide_a_qualitative_analysis_of_recent_cases_with_recommendations_for_reform.pdf https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/articles/suicidebyoccupation/england2011to2015

In this episode, I delve into the narcissistic personalities in the workplace.  Who are they? How do they impact organizations and individuals? What can you do to survive such personalities in the workplace? #narcissisticpersonalities #workplace  References Dåderman, A. M., & Kajonius, P. J. (2024). Linking grandiose and vulnerable narcissism to managerial work performance, through the lens of core personality traits and social desirability. Scientific Reports, 14, 12213. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-60202-7 Day, N. J. S., Townsend, M. L., & Grenyer, B. F. S. (2020). Living with pathological narcissism: a qualitative study. Borderline Personality Disorder and Emotion Dysregulation, 7(1), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40479-020-00132-8 Gui, W., Bai, Q., & Wang, L. (2022). Workplace incivility and employees' personal initiative: A moderated mediation model of emotional exhaustion and meaningful work. SAGE Open, 12(1), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440221079899 Jauk, E., Ulbrich, L., Jorschick, P., Höfler, M., & Kaufman, S. B. (2021). The non‐linear association between grandiose and vulnerable narcissism: An individual data meta‐analysis. Journal of Personality, 90(4), 553-566. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12692 Liu, P., Xiao, C., He, J., Wang, X., & Li, A. (2020). Experienced workplace incivility, anger, guilt, and family satisfaction: The double-edged effect of narcissism. Personality and Individual Differences, 154, 109642. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2019.109642 Moon, C., & Morais, C. (2022). The effect of covert narcissism on workplace incivility: The mediating role of self-esteem and norms for respect. Current Psychology, 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-022-02968-5 Ramsey-Haynes, S. (2021). Emotional intelligence and workplace incivility among oncology RNs. Nursing Management, 52(5), 10-14. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.NUMA.0000792060.00298.03 Wang, B., Fiaz, M., Mughal, Y. H., Kiran, A., Ullah, I., & Wisetsri, W. (2022). Gazing the dusty mirror: Joint effect of narcissism and sadism on workplace incivility via indirect effect of paranoia, antagonism, and emotional intelligence. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 944174. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.944174 Weinberg, I., & Ronningstam, E. (2022). Narcissistic personality disorder: Progress in understanding and treatment. Focus, 20(4), 368-377. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.focus.20220052

What is technostress in the workplace? How does this type of stress impact individuals and organizations? Join me in this episode of Psychchat, where I will share strategies to mitigate technostress. References Ayyagari, R., Grover, V., & Purvis, R. (2011). Technostress: Technological antecedents and implications. MIS Quarterly, 35(4), 831-858. https://doi.org/10.2307/41409963 Barber, L. K., & Santuzzi, A. M. (2015). Please respond ASAP: Workplace telepressure and employee recovery. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 20(2), 172-189. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038278 Brod, C. (1984). Technostress: The human cost of the computer revolution. Addison-Wesley. Hauk, N., Göritz, A. S., & Krumm, S. (2019). The mediating role of coping behavior on the age-technostress relationship: A longitudinal multilevel mediation model. PLoS ONE, 14(3), e0213349. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0213349 Maier, C., Laumer, S., Weinert, C., & Weitzel, T. (2015). The effects of technostress and switching stress on discontinued use of social networking services: A study of Facebook use. Information Systems Journal, 25(3), 275-308. https://doi.org/10.1111/isj.12068 Pirkkalainen, H., Salo, M., Tarafdar, M., & Makkonen, M. (2019). Deliberate or instinctive? Proactive and reactive coping for technostress. Journal of Management Information Systems, 36(4), 1179-1212. https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2019.1661092 Ragu-Nathan, T. S., Tarafdar, M., Ragu-Nathan, B. S., & Tu, Q. (2008). The consequences of technostress for end users in organizations: Conceptual development and empirical validation. Information Systems Research, 19(4), 417-433. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.1070.0165 Riedl, R., Kindermann, H., Auinger, A., & Javor, A. (2012). Technostress from a neurobiological perspective. Business & Information Systems Engineering, 4(2), 61-69. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-012-0207-7 Salanova, M., Llorens, S., & Cifre, E. (2013). The dark side of technologies: Technostress among users of information and communication technologies. International Journal of Psychology, 48(3), 422-436. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207594.2012.680460 Tams, S., Legoux, R., & Leger, P. M. (2018). Smartphone withdrawal creates stress: A moderated mediation model of nomophobia, social threat, and phone withdrawal context. Computers in Human Behavior, 81, 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.11.026 Tarafdar, M., Cooper, C. L., & Stich, J. F. (2019). The technostress trifecta‐techno eustress, techno distress and design: Theoretical directions and an agenda for research. Information Systems Journal, 29(1), 6-42. https://doi.org/10.1111/isj.12169 Tarafdar, M., Pullins, E. B., & Ragu‐Nathan, T. S. (2015). Technostress: negative effect on performance and possible mitigations. Information Systems Journal, 25(2), 103-132. https://doi.org/10.1111/isj.12042 Tarafdar, M., Tu, Q., Ragu-Nathan, T. S., & Ragu-Nathan, B. S. (2011). Crossing to the dark side: Examining creators, outcomes, and inhibitors of technostress. Communications of the Association for Computing Machinery, 54(9), 113-120. https://doi.org/10.1145/1995376.1995403 Vischer, J. C. (2007). The effects of the physical environment on job performance: Towards a theoretical model of workspace stress. Stress and Health: Journal of the International Society for the Investigation of Stress, 23(3), 175-184. https://doi.org/10.1002/smi.1134

In this episode of PsychChat, I discuss the pervasive behaviour of defensive decision-making in the workplace. Listen to this episode, where I share tips to mitigate such behaviour in the workplace. References Artinger, F., Petersen, M., Gigerenzer, G., & Weibler, J. (2015). Heuristics as adaptive decision strategies in management. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 36(S1), S33-S52. Brockner, J., & Higgins, E. T. (2001). Regulatory focus theory: Implications for the study of emotions at work. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 86(1), 35-66. Edmondson, A. C. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350-383. Gigerenzer, G. (2014). Risk savvy: How to make good decisions. Penguin. Greenhalgh, L., & Rosenblatt, Z. (1984). Job insecurity: Toward conceptual clarity. Academy of Management Review, 9(3), 438-448. Higgins, E. T. (1998). Promotion and prevention: Regulatory focus as a motivational principle. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 30, 1-46. Hobfoll, S. E. (1989). Conservation of resources: A new attempt at conceptualizing stress. American Psychologist, 44(3), 513-524. Hobfoll, S. E., Halbesleben, J., Neveu, J. P., & Westman, M. (2018). Conservation of resources in the organizational context: The reality of resources and their consequences. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 5, 103-128. Marx-Fleck, S., Junker, N. M., Artinger, F., & van Dick, R. (2021). Defensive decision making: Operationalization and the relevance of psychological safety and job insecurity from a conservation of resources perspective. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology,  Vol 94 (3), 485-788. Mello, M. M., Chandra, A., Gawande, A. A., & Studdert, D. M. (2010). National costs of the medical liability system. Health Affairs, 29(9), 1569-1577.