The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

https://www.emerald.com/insight/1463-5771.htm

BIJ
30,1 Enhancing employee wellbeing – an
employability perspective
Nimmi P M
Adi Shankara Business School,
102 Adi Shankara Institute of Engineering and Technology, Kalady, India
Received 2 March 2021
K.A. Zakkariya
Revised 9 November 2021 School of Management Studies, Cochin University of Science and Technology,
27 December 2021
19 January 2022 Kochi, India, and
Accepted 20 January 2022
Anju Varghese Philip
SCMS Cochin School of Business, Kochi, India

Abstract
Purpose – Skill obsolescence among employees can be detrimental to organizational performance and can
lead to an ensuing decline in the wellbeing of employees. Today’s organizations bank on the employability
skills of their human capital to stay afloat in business. The current study examines the impact of developing an
employability culture in the organization, the perceived internal employability developed in the employees and
impact on employee wellbeing.
Design/methodology/approach – Research data were gathered from a sample of 421 software engineers in
private IT companies in India. Structural equation modeling using SPSS and AMOS was conducted to examine
the impact of employability culture and perceived internal employability on the three dimensions of employee
wellbeing.
Findings – The study found a positive relationship between employability culture and the components of
employee wellbeing. A partial mediation by perceived internal employability was reported between
employability culture and the three components of employee wellbeing.
Research limitations/implications – The study is a focused attempt on discerning the effect of
organizational elements in the form of employability culture on the employee perceptions and the state of
wellbeing, which are considered valuable resources in the career context. The study reiterates the prominence
of contextual factors in employees’ resource enhancement.
Originality/value – The study is a unique approach to determine the effect of perceived internal
employability and employability culture on employee wellbeing based on the social cognitive career theory and
the conservation of resources theory.
Keywords Employability culture, Perceived internal employability, Employee wellbeing
Paper type Research paper

Benchmarking: An International
Journal
Vol. 30 No. 1, 2023
pp. 102-120
© Emerald Publishing Limited
1463-5771
DOI 10.1108/BIJ-03-2021-0116
Introduction
Businesses flourish in healthy organizations. Healthy and happy employees are an inevitable
part of successful organizations. Employees’ state of health and wellbeing contributes to the
successful performance of organizations (MacDonald, 2005). In this era of leading-edge
technology and cut-throat competition, the welfare of employees is affected mainly by the
new policies undertaken by organizations as well as the adaptive capacity of employees.
Retaining talented employees is a difficult task for any organization. The old deal of
employee-employer relationships, where employee loyalty is rewarded by job security, has
been replaced by new unwritten contracts where organizations provide opportunities for skill
development that could enhance the employability perceptions of employees (Dries et al.,
2014). Career scholars represent this as the New Psychological Contract (Donald et al., 2019).
This is important to both the individual and the organization by creating a “win–win”
scenario since career sustainability and organizational sustainability are often
Funding: The study was funded by the UGC - JRF of Nimmi P M [No. F15-o(DEC. 2015) 201qNET].
complementary and supplementary in nature (Donald et al., 2020), and are based on the Enhancing
wellbeing of employees. An organization that takes care of its employees’ wellbeing has loyal employee
staff with an intention to stay with the organization (Eskildsen and Nussler, 2000). This
understanding entails leading companies to maintain a work environment conducive to
wellbeing
employee wellbeing and growth.
Among the many ways to attract talented youth to an organization, providing a culture of
learning and development is the most sought out by millennials (Eversole et al., 2012; Nolan,
2015). A fresh viewpoint to retaining the talent force focuses on employability (Wong et al., 103
2017). Employability is conceptualized from three different perspectives, i.e. the socio-
economic, the individual and the organizational (Vanhercke et al., 2014). Organizational
employability and employee (individual) employability are critical for succeeding in a highly
competitive business environment. Therefore, organizations try to stimulate their employees’
employability by creating a culture favorable to individual and organizational development.
Employability culture represents the cognitive facet of organizational culture, which is
instrumental for employees’ involvement in work activities and their personal growth
(Ostroff, 1993; Nauta et al., 2009; Wong et al., 2017). In addition, employability culture includes
those HR practices that help an organization to be flexible and to recruit employees who are
ready to stay with the organization (Nauta et al., 2009).
Previous researchers have inquired into the impact of HR practices on employee wellbeing
(Baptiste, 2008; Goncalves and Neves, 2012). However, none of the prior studies looked into
the impact of developing an employability culture on employee wellbeing (vis-a-vis work,
psychological and life wellbeing). There is indeed a dearth of research on the positive impacts
of developing employability culture. Furthermore, research has not investigated how
implementing an employability culture may affect employee wellbeing by examining the
intervening role of positive psychological resources like employability perceptions.
Employability perceptions are beliefs that one can maintain one’s employment or gain new
employment if necessary (Berntson, 2008). Perceived internal employability specifically
explains the employees’ level of confidence that she/he is valued within the organization, and
she/he will be retained even if there is a downsizing (Rothwell and Arnold, 2007; Akkermans
et al., 2020). The present study tries to address this gap and contribute to human resource
literature by depicting the importance of employability culture on developing positive
psychological resources, thereby enhancing employees’ wellbeing. Thus, the study tries to
find answers to the following questions:
(1) Does employability culture predict employee wellbeing?
(2) Does perceived internal employability serve as the intervening mechanism by which
employability culture enhances work wellbeing?
The article is presented in five parts. First, we introduce the three key variables and their
associations, along with the theoretical linkage. Second, we explain the research methodology
adopted for the study. Third, the analysis conducted is described in detail. Fourth, findings
and discussions on findings are presented. Finally, the article is brought to a conclusion with
remarks on the study’s implications and limitations.

Theoretical development and hypothesis development

Conservation of resources (COR) theory and social cognitive career (SCCT) theory
The COR theory proposed by Hobfoll (1989) views resources as the crucial component in
determining individuals’ assessments of events. That is, human beings will assess any event
in their lives from the viewpoint of resources gained, lost and retained. This assessment and
their appraisal of how they fare in the resource balance will, in turn, lead to their response to
BIJ the event. In addition, resources also influence how individuals are able to cope with any
30,1 situation that might arise (Hobfoll, 1989). Also, COR theory defines resources as objects,
personal characteristics, conditions, or energies and these resources can be internal or
external (Ten Brummelhuis and Bakker, 2012; Bakker, 2015; Bakker and Demerouti, 2007).
The theory suggests that employment-related resource gains will take on greater meaning in
the context of resource losses (Halbesleben et al., 2014). Social resources such as social support
have also been found to help buffer the effects of loss-related events. To extrapolate to a work
104 context, an employee within an organization is always trying to protect self from lay-offs,
demotion, salary cuts and other negative circumstances. The employee will develop
relationships and attachments that seek to protect the self within that particular work culture
context. In such a situation, employees will see any extra training and opportunities to
develop new skills and proficiencies as something that adds to their job competencies and
overall wellbeing. The support system within the organization, which enables the individual
to grow and learn and be their best self is also a kind of resource for the employee. This social
support and perception of employability gains help the employee to withstand the effects of
any loss-related events (Halbesleben et al., 2014).
SCCT is based on Albert Bandura’s general social cognitive theory (Bandura, 1986).
According to SCCT theory, an individual’s career development is affected by several social
conditions (Lent et al., 2002). Factors such as culture, gender, genetic endowment, socio-
structural considerations and disability or health status interact with people’s cognitions,
affecting the nature and range of their career possibilities. The transactions between people
and their environment bring forth vocational outcomes (Osipow, 1990). The immediate
environment of an employee, be it at work or at home, plays a huge role in developing
perceptions regarding self-efficacy and other career prospects like employability (Astin,
1984). In addition, employee career beliefs are affected by background influences such as
opportunities to develop skills, cultural and gender-role socialization processes, exposure to
academic-career role models, etc. These influence employees’ social cognitions and interests,
which further influences the employee career beliefs. SCCT provides a solid framework for
understanding the value of interventions that help employees overcome barriers and advance
in their career orientations.
In light of these two theories, the research explores the effect of environmental aspects
such as the existence of an employability culture in an organization on the perceived internal
employability and well-being of its employees. The following sections explicate the
relationships that are being proposed and tested in the study.

Employability culture and perceived internal employability

When neo-career attitudes influence knowledge workers’ career preferences, it is a hefty job
for employers to retain their talented resources. Most contemporary career concepts
emphasized the role of individual agency, rooted in neoliberal ideology (Gubler et al., 2014) in
explaining current career preferences and attitudes. Employability Culture also called Person
Culture – “organizational cultures promoting employability” encourages career ownership
among employees. Estienne (1997) defines an organization that supports employee
employability as having a culture that (1) fosters a climate of challenge for employees
while simultaneously empowering and motivating them and; (2) appreciates and promotes
lifelong learning as a vehicle of change for organizational development. Integrating
individual development into organizational culture is considered a strategic decision for
organizational development (Estienne, 1997). The learning curve exhibited by employees
should be in line with organizational learning as this is a mutual benefit for both. Such
investments in employees enhance their internal employability perceptions and their
commitment to the organization.
 Employability perceptions are considered a significant psychological resource that assists Enhancing
employees in pursuing a successful career. Individual employability is defined as recognizing employee
and realizing professional opportunities (Fugate et al., 2004), both inside and outside the
organization, that match their career objectives and attitudes. Specifically, perceived internal
wellbeing
employability (IE) is how employees perceive his/her chances of continuing a career with their
current employer (Rothwell and Arnold, 2007). In addition, Employability Culture (EC) exerts a
great deal of influence on the employability of employees as it is the organization that forms the
immediate environment with which the employee interacts. Consequently, it has a positive 105
impact on the employability orientation of employees (Van Dam, 2004; Boycott et al., 2014).
Employees’ connectedness to an organization with a firmly embedded employability
culture is because the organization promotes employees’ individual development and
provides opportunities to self-learn and experiment with new methods (Nauta et al., 2009).
Owing to the many opportunities and prospects in the current organization and the
challenging work environment, employees are more committed to the organization and
channel their employability orientation within the organization. The association is explained
with the theoretical underpinning of the Social Cognitive Career Theory (Lent et al., 1994).
According to SCCT, employability culture acts as a proximal contextual factor in enhancing
individuals’ resources like skills, knowledge and other positive psychological resources.
These orientations develop the internal employability of the employees and enhance their
employability perceptions inside the organization. Research has shown a positive
relationship between sound employability culture and employees’ willingness to stay in
the organization (Nauta et al., 2009). The investment in employee training and education
would lead to higher internal mobility and reduce external mobility (Groot and De Brink,
2000). Trained employees can be employed in more jobs within the firm with less supervision
(Juhdi et al., 2010). The same is true in the case of low-skilled workers, where studies found
that training participation and task flexibility leads to firm-internal flexibility (Sanders and
De Grip, 2004).
Early research has discussed the associations between employability culture and
employability orientations and organizational commitment (Nauta et al., 2009). There has
been established research on the impact of employee-centric career development practices
and perceived employability (De Vos et al., 2011; Houben et al., 2019). However, the major
drawback of earlier studies is that scant attention is given to employability culture, i.e. the
cognitive part of organizational culture and its impact on employability perceptions,
particularly internal employability. The present article focuses on establishing the link
between employability culture and perceived internal employability in this line of thought.
Thus, based on these theoretical and empirical pieces of evidence, it is hypothesized,
H1. Employability culture is positively related to internal employability perceptions.

Employability culture and employee wellbeing (life, work and psychological wellbeing)
Mathews and Izquierdo (2009) state that wellbeing is a state of being happy, prosperous, and
healthy, both physically and mentally, psychologically, socioeconomically, and culturally.
Employee wellbeing can be regarded as the quality of employees’ experience and functioning
at work and in life. Employee wellbeing is of high relevance to organizations because it
symbolizes organizational health and wellbeing. The definition of a healthy organization as
put forward by Wilson et al. (2004, p. 567) notes, “A healthy organization is one characterized
by intentional, systematic, and collaborative efforts to maximize employee wellbeing and
productivity by providing well-designed and meaningful jobs, a supportive social-
organizational environment, and accessible and equitable opportunities for career and
work-life enhancement”. Thus, it is imperative to look into the predictive power of
employability culture on the three dimensions of employee wellbeing.
BIJ Employee wellbeing is defined in this research as a combination of three basic aspects: life
30,1 wellbeing (LWB), work wellbeing (WWB) and psychological wellbeing (PWB). Employee
wellbeing is defined by Zheng et al. (2015, p. 628) as “not just employees’ thoughts and
sentiments about their work and life satisfaction, but also their psychological experience and
the amount of satisfaction demonstrated in both their professional and personal lives.” The
paper treats the three aspects of employee wellbeing as three different constructs as each
demonstrates wellbeing in different settings. An important distinction among the types of
106 wellbeing is the level of cognitive processing required, mainly in life evaluations and
meaning. Workplace situations differ extensively from general life situations, even though
the cultural aspect is visible in the work settings (Nimmi and Zakkariya, 2021). Psychological
wellbeing (PWB) and subjective wellbeing (SWB) or job satisfaction have often been used as
proxies to represent employees’ overall wellbeing in organizations (De Cuyper et al., 2008;
Hakanen et al., 2018). However, this does not represent the wellbeing concept in its totality.
The philosophical roots of wellbeing lie in eudaimonism. Eudemonic wellbeing mainly
focuses on judgments about the meaning and purpose of one’s life. Ryff (1989) proposed that
psychological wellbeing involves self-acceptance, personal growth, purpose in life,
environmental mastery, autonomy and positive relations. PWB is highly relevant to
people’s health and quality of life (Baer et al., 2012). Although the concept of psychological
wellbeing stems from Western culture, the general structure of this concept can be applied in
the Asian context as well (Zheng et al., 2015).
Wellbeing at work has been conceptualized variously by authors over a period of time.
Spreitzer’s (Porath et al., 2012) concept of thriving at work hinted that work wellbeing is a
feeling of vivacity and belief that one is learning, developing and making progress toward
self-actualization as well as finding meaning in work. Grant et al. (2007) describe work-related
wellbeing as the overall quality of an employee’s experience and functioning within the work
environment. Work wellbeing refers to employees’ overall experience toward both the job and
the organization (Kooij et al., 2013). For organizations to thrive in a competitive world, it is
inevitable to promote the wellbeing of their employees by enhancing their performance,
thereby ensuring the organization’s survival (Currie, 2001). An empirical investigation by
Baptiste (2008) found that organizational support and development enhance employee
wellbeing at work. Therefore, it is appropriate to propose,
H2. Employability culture is positively related to workplace wellbeing.
Life wellbeing refers to individuals’ overall assessment of their life quality based on their
standards (Diener, 1984). It includes two essential elements: life satisfaction, or the perception
of the quality of one’s life, and emotional experience, including positive and negative
emotions (Diener, 1984). Researchers have proposed that the subjective evaluation of life
wellbeing comprises three major components: high-level positive emotions, low-level
negative emotions and overall satisfaction with life. In addition, the life aspect covers two
categories: personal and family care (reflecting an employee’s emotions) and good family
relations (Zheng et al., 2015). Essential factors leading to organizational and personal
wellbeing from an organizational perspective involve open communication, teamwork,
co-operation, flexibility, support and a balance between work and personal life (Baptiste,
2008). In light of the above observations, we can propose,
H3. Employability culture is positively related to life wellbeing.
Developing employability culture as a part of HRM practices have a significant impact on
employee wellbeing (Baptiste, 2008). A study by Goncalves and Neves (2012) found a
significant positive correlation between HRM practices (training, communication,
performance appraisal, health promotion and opportunity to participate) and comfort,
enthusiasm, affective wellbeing at work and overall work satisfaction. Employee centric HR
practices result in positive work-related attitudes and behavior. The general assumption is Enhancing
that individual workers view employability enhancement practices as a personalized employee
commitment to them, as an investment in them, and a recognition of their contribution, which
enhances their work, life and psychological wellbeing. Accordingly proposing the
wellbeing
hypothesis,
H4. Employability culture is positively related to psychological wellbeing.
107
Perceived internal employability and employee wellbeing with its three dimensions
Perceived employability is considered a personal resource within the purview of COR theory,
where “individuals strive to obtain, retain, protect and foster the things they value” (Hobfoll,
2001, p. 341). Resources can hold value to the extent that they are perceived to help one
achieve his or her goals (Halbesleben et al., 2014). Also, resources can be categorized as
internal as well as external (Ten Brummelhuis and Bakker, 2012). The external resources are
important as it includes policies at the organizational level, work culture, etc. These resources
are not only culturally shared but also context-specific, and these resources are more or less
needed to call upon other resources (Ten Brummelhuis and Bakker, 2012; Halbesleben
et al., 2014).
Obtaining a resource can lead to the acquisition of other resources (gain spiral) (Kirves,
2014). The perception of employability as a valuable resource leads to the acquisition of
numerous resources. It eventually leads to real-life and work results, such as improved overall
health and mental wellbeing (Berntson, 2008) and increased job satisfaction (De Cuyper
et al., 2008).
Previous research has demonstrated that increased perceived employability might
contribute to happiness (Kirves, 2014; Berntson, 2008). As a result, perceived employability is
a vital mechanism for improving employee wellbeing by accumulating resources that can
boost the sense of security (Kirves, 2014). Employability perceptions could be internal or
external. Internal employability of employees specifically signifies employees’ confidence
that he/she is valued in the organization (Rothwell and Arnold, 2007). However, empirical
evidence lags in discerning the prominence of perceived internal employability in
determining employees’ wellbeing in the form of work wellbeing, life wellbeing and
psychological wellbeing. Heightened perceived internal employability within an organization
could enhance employees’ confidence in maintaining their current employment. This could
lead to an enhanced life, work and psychological wellbeing.
H5. Perceived internal employability positively impacts work wellbeing.
H6. Perceived internal employability positively impacts life wellbeing.
H7. Perceived internal employability positively impacts psychological wellbeing

The mediating role of perceived internal employability in the relationship between

employability culture and three dimensions of employee wellbeing
Estienne (1997) popularizes employability culture through her conceptual paper regarding
the importance of developing employee-centric policies in an organization. The concept of
employability culture has been studied in the context of developing employability orientation
among workers (Nauta et al., 2009) and the development of career attitude (Wong et al., 2017).
Employability development is the new watchword for organizations today. Be it
organizational employability or individual employability, these two are synergistic and
contribute to the development and betterment of the organization (Van Dam, 2004).
The employability of employees forms the benchmark against which all developments
should be weighed. Developing an employability culture could enhance the internal
BIJ employability prospects of employees. Enhanced employability perceptions could lead to a
30,1 sense of security among employees, ultimately leading to various levels of work, life, and
psychological wellbeing. Hence, we propose that when the organizations practice an upright
employability culture, the employees develop a heightened sense of employability perception
in line with organizational goals, which ultimately leads to their overall wellbeing. Internal
employability acts as the implicit mechanism through which employee wellbeing is
explained. Hence, putting forward the mediating hypothesis,
108
H8. Perceived internal employability mediates the relationship between employability
culture and work wellbeing.
H9. Perceived internal employability mediates the relationship between employability
culture and life wellbeing.
H10. Perceived internal employability mediates the relationship between employability
culture and psychological wellbeing.
Based on the above arguments, we hypothesize that employability culture and perceived
internal employability significantly impact work, life and psychological wellbeing.
Furthermore, the study also proposes that the association mentioned above between
employability culture and work, life and psychological wellbeing is mediated by perceived
internal employability (see Figure 1). Thus, this research adds to the scholarly literature by
detailing the influence of developing an employee-centric culture in the organization and its
impact on employees’ employability perceptions, leading to a joint impact on their wellbeing.

Research methodology
Study context and sample
The researchers selected one of the developing nations with economic growth- India, as the
appropriate context for the study. India’s IT industry is a particularly good setting to
examine this phenomenon. The sector has been a significant contributor to the economic
growth in India and has emerged as the largest private-sector employer (Upadhyay et al.,
2016; Menon, 2017). Global competition, high reliance on IT-enabled services and the

Figure 1.
Proposed
conceptual model
availability of a large pool of human resources have increased the sheen of the IT industry in Enhancing
India. In addition, the IT industry has the peculiarity that the companies provide an employee
opportunity for employees to explore multiple occupations within an organization as part of
the job structure (Ortega, 2001).
wellbeing
The other side of this story is that the IT industry is plagued with high annual employee
turnover rates. Thereby, talent management and employee retention have become a major
challenge for the industry (Naim and Lenka, 2017). The resulting high talent mobility has
burdened HR with the serious challenge of curtailing the high turnover rate. The study by 109
Nimmi et al. (2020) reveals that millennial knowledge workers enjoy working in places where
they get ample growth, learning and development opportunities. New age workers look
forward to organizations that provide challenging tasks rather than sticking to routine tasks
(Indira and Shani, 2016). Millennial software engineers expect their organizations to use their
skill set to the fullest possible extent and engage them in continuous learning rather than
being obsolete after a short period (Nimmi et al., 2020).
The present study was conducted among software engineers of private IT companies
from February 2019 to July 2019. This period was characterized by reasonably stable job
market conditions in the IT sector. The data were collected mainly from three cities in South
India that have a maximum concentration of IT companies. A survey research design was
implemented, and both online and offline survey methods were used. A total of 421 useable
responses were collected.

Measures
For measuring different variables of the study uniformly, data were collected from the
respondents through a structured questionnaire using Likert’s five-point scale, which varies
from 1 5 strongly disagree to 5 5 strongly agree. In addition, previously developed scales
were used to ensure adequate reliability and validity. A brief explanation of all the measures
used is mentioned in the following paragraphs.
Employability Culture (EC): Employability culture was measured by a scale developed by
Nauta et al. (2009) with six items which include: “My organization encourages people to
change their job roles on a regular basis.”
Perceived Internal Employability (IE): The perceived value of occupation in the current
organization (internal employability) was assessed with four items from a scale developed by
Rothwell and Arnold (2007). A sample item was, “Even if there was downsizing in this
organization, I am confident that I would be retained.”
Wellbeing Constructs: The three constructs measuring different facets of wellbeing were
measured by scales developed by Zheng et al. (2015). Work wellbeing (WWB) was measured
with six items. Items include, “In general, I feel fairly satisfied with my present job.”
Psychological wellbeing (PWB) was assessed with a six-item scale with statements like ‘I
handle daily affairs well’. Life wellbeing (LWB was also assessed similarly with a six-item
scale including statements like “I feel satisfied with my life.”
The final instrument used captured various information from the sample respondents,
such as demographic and psychographic characteristics, as well as the concepts under
consideration. The various demographic and psychographic information captured during the
survey are gender, experience, job position, age, job type, etc. As previous empirical studies
have established that respondents’ age, experience and gender influence their employability
perceptions and wellbeing, the study considered these as control variables in the data
analysis stage. Therefore, age and experience were measured as a continuous variable
(in years), and gender was modeled as a categorical variable.
BIJ Data analysis and results
30,1 Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 23.0 and AMOS statistical
software was used to analyze the data. Structural equation modeling (SEM) was used to
examine the model. SEM allows us to assess the extent to which perceived internal
employability acts as a mediator between employability culture and employee wellbeing.
The main objective of using SEM is to find a statistically relevant theoretical model with
both practical and substantive meaning. Validation of the measurement model is done by
110 confirmatory factor analysis.
The information gathered from the sample respondents via the questionnaire was
screened, and its psychometric qualities were examined in five stages during the data
analysis stage. The demographic and psychographic profiles of the sample respondents were
examined in the first phase. There were 167 females and 254 males among the respondents.
The average age was 29.64 years (SD 5 5.94), with a range of 21–48. Years of experience had a
mean value of 6.46 (SD 5 5.260). This was primarily done to better understand the
demographic and work-related aspects of the sample.
Using exploratory factor analysis (EFA) with varimax rotation, the items measuring the
study constructs, such as employability culture, perceived internal employability, WWB,
LWB and PWB, were assessed in the second phase. This was done to see if the customized
scales used in the study were unidimensional. The results of the factor extraction confirmed
the previous structure of the integrated scale items. In other words, the findings backed up a
five-factor framework that represented the included components.
In the next phase, common method bias was checked. Since the data used in the study
were generated from a single source, the potential effect of common method bias may exist
(Podsakoff et al., 2003). Thus, we used Harman’s single factor test as an exploratory
assessment to test if this possible harmful effect exists in the self-reported survey data.
As part of this assessment, we forced all those items covering all the five dimensions to load
onto one factor. The factor extraction results revealed an extracted total variance of 31.1%.
Since this indicates that one-factor extraction using all these items did not yield the majority
of the covariance between the study measures, we presumed that common method bias is not
present in the data collected in the study. Further, a factor extraction using the varimax
rotation technique and eigenvalue higher than one criterion also revealed a five-factor
structure with high factor loadings of the items to the factors that confirmed the earlier
interpretation. In addition, we used the Common Latent Factor (CLF) technique as a
confirmatory strategy for analyzing common-method bias. We included an underlying latent
factor in this approach, which is linked to all of the observable data. A comparison of this
model with the standardized regression weights of the typical correlated CFA model revealed
a small difference of 0.005 on all five dimensions. As a result, the study concluded that there is
no risk of common method bias in the data under examination (Podsakoff et al., 2003).
Further, in the fourth phase, the more detailed psychometric properties of the scales were
analyzed using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). The overall correlated CFA model
covering the seven-factor dimensions supported that the data fit the model well, and it was
evident from the satisfactory model fit indices (3 2/df 5 2.14, RMR 5 0.04, NFI 5 0.90,
CFI 5 0.94, RMSEA 5 0.05 and SRMR 5 0.04). Further, the CFA factor loadings of the items
with respect to their respective constructs were reported above the suggested threshold of
0.50, and average variance extracted (AVE) coefficients ranged from 0.52 to 0.92, which
confirmed the reliability and convergent validity of the scales.
Later, the discriminant validity of the scale constructs was established by comparing the
square root of AVE scores for each construct with its inter construct correlations.
It supported that in all cases, this comparison confirms the discriminant validity of the scales
(Fornell and Larcker, 1981). Thus, it confirms the psychometric properties of the scales used
in the study (Table 1).
 After confirming the psychometric properties of the scales, the average scores of all five Enhancing
scales were calculated (Table 2). This was mainly done to facilitate further analysis and employee
thereby to test the proposed study hypotheses. In addition, the association between the study
constructs was analyzed using correlations, and in all cases, it supported the expected
wellbeing
direction and magnitude (Table 3). Further, all the scores calculated with respect to the study
constructs were mean-centered prior to the formal test of hypotheses.
111
Structural model and hypotheses testing
Structural equation modeling was performed using IBM SPSS as well as AMOS to verify
our hypotheses for the causal relationships. Following the existing literature on model fit
indices (Hair et al., 2010), our hypothesized model exhibited a good fit to the observed data
(3 2/df 5 2.32, RMR 5 0.04, NFI 5 0.884, CFI 5 0.93, RMSEA 5 0.05 and SRMR 5 0.04).

Direct effects
The results of standardized regression path coefficients and their statistical significance are
summarized in Table 4. Of the proposed three hypotheses, all of them were statistically
supported amongst the sample.
EC exhibited a positive relationship with IE (β 5 0.29, p < 0.001) and WWB (β 5 0.40,
p < 0.001), LWB (β 5 0.26, p < 0.001) and PWB (β 5 0.36, p < 0.001). Also, IE is positively
associated with WWB (β 5 0.40, p < 0.001), LWB (β 5 0.34, p < 0.001), PWB (β 5 0.39,
p < 0.001). Findings support the direct hypothesis and all direct hypotheses are accepted. The
results are picturized in Figure 2.
Results indicate that employability culture results in enhanced perceived internal
employability among employees. In line with prior studies, perceived internal employability
is strongly associated with employee wellbeing, and the association is considerably stronger
for internal employability and employability culture predicting work wellbeing.

Mediation effects
We used an analytical approach prescribed by Preacher and Hayes (2004) to test the
mediation hypotheses. This mediation approach directly tests the indirect effect between the
predictor and the criterion variables through the mediator via a bootstrapping procedure

Construct WWB LWB PWB Ec IntlEmp CR AVE Cron-Bach

WWB 0.78 0.90 0.60 0.90

LWB 0.68 0.81 0.92 0.66 0.92
PWB 0.62 0.65 0.71 0.86 0.52 0.86 Table 1.
Ec 0.36 0.22 0.33 0.67 0.83 0.55 0.83 Validity analysis
IntlEmp 0.40 0.33 0.39 0.28 0.67 0.76 0.59 0.76 results

Measure Mean SD Kurtosis Skewness

Ecul 3.62 0.74 0.76 0.64

IE 3.67 0.62 1.14 0.52
WWB 3.61 0.71 0.60 0.42
PWB 3.90 0.57 1.76 0.58 Table 2.
LWB 3.65 0.74 0.07 0.41 Descriptive statistics
BIJ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
30,1
1. Int Emp 1
2. WWB 0.398** 1
3. PWB 0.366** 0.609** 1
4. LWB 0.302** 0.679** 0.629** 1
5. Em Cul 0.311** 0.385** 0.325** 0.256** 1
112 6. Gender 0.118* 0.073 0.051 0.018 0.015 1
7. Exp in current Orgnsn 0.141* 0.146* 0.146* 0.160* 0.113 0.098 1
8. Age 0.134** 0.171** 0.205** 0.185** 0.112* 0.080 0.650** 1
Table 3. Note(s): **Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)
Correlation table *Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed)

Relationship Beta-coeff SE () Sig level Decision

Ec – LWB 0.26 0.047 p < 0.001 Supported

Ec – WWB 0.40 0.046 p < 0.001 Supported
Ec - PWB 0.36 0.046 p < 0.001 Supported
IE-PWB 0.39 0.046 p < 0.001 Supported
IE-LWB 0.34 0.047 p < 0.001 Supported
Table 4. IE-WWB 0.40 0.046 p < 0.001 Supported
Direct relationship Ec - IE 0.29 0.047 p < 0.001 Supported

Figure 2.
Empirical model with
results

(Efron and Tibshirani, 1994). Further, to check the mediating role of perceived internal
employability in the relationship between employability culture and employee wellbeing
constructs (LWB, PWB, WWB), the indirect effect of employability culture on the constructs
of employee wellbeing (LWB, PWB, WWB) was examined. The results supported a
significant indirect effect of employability culture on LWB (b 5 0.09, p < 0.001, 95%
LLCI 5 0.01, ULCI 5 0.18), WWB (b 5 0.18, p < 0.001, 95% LLCI 5 0.08, ULCI 5 0.30); PWB Enhancing
(b 5 0.08, p < 0.001, 95% LLCI 5 0.01, ULCI 5 0.17). Among the indirect effects, the indirect employee
effect of perceived internal employability is most significant for work wellbeing, which
clearly signifies the impact of employability culture at the workplace.
wellbeing

Findings and discussions

The present research is intended to find empirical support for the conceptual model on the 113
associations among employability culture, perceived internal employability and employee
wellbeing. To the best of our knowledge, an inquiry into the positive impact of employability
culture on employee wellbeing is conducted for the first time. The study specifically looked
into the mediating effect of internal employability on the three types of employee wellbeing.
The research was carried out among software engineers in India, and the conceptualized
model was empirically assessed through Structural Equation Modeling. The results revealed
a good fit and good predictive power of the independent variables. All the anticipated links
regarding direct relationships were accepted. A partial mediation was reported in the case of
the three mediating hypotheses.
The concept of employability culture is one among the least discussed and empirically
assessed topics in the management literature, even though its prominence is ever higher now
(Nauta et al., 2009; Wong et al., 2017). This cognitive concept of organizational culture needs to
be given more emphasis as it is related to organizational learning. The concept is closely
related to a learning organization culture where employees are allowed to learn, develop and
innovate and are provided with opportunities to do so. Organizations that invest in
improving the personal mastery of employees, help them to become the masters of their
domain (Hill, 2021). This will of course lead to personal and institutional benefits.

Role of employability culture

The study found support to the proposition tha/t employability culture leads to enhanced
internal employability and wellbeing of employees. A significant positive association between
employability culture and internal employability was reported. Previous studies have proved
that the participation of employees in competence development opportunities provided by the
organization will lead to increased self-perceived employability (De Vos et al., 2011). Our study
went one step further and looked into whether employability enhancement initiatives may lead
to enhanced perceived internal employability whereby a positive association is found out. The
findings are in line with the new psychological contract as proposed by Donald et al. (2020). In
line with the findings of Nauta et al. (2009) and Donald et al. (2019), organizations support
employees to improve their skill sets by providing an employability culture, and in return,
employees demonstrate enhanced perceived internal employability.
In the recent period where organizations cannot promise job security, one way by which
organizations can recognize and contribute to their employees’ development is to provide
ample opportunities to grow. In doing so, organizations can make employees feel that they are
not locked in with the current organization. Previous studies have validated an association
between employability culture and the employability orientations of employees like turnover
intention and push and pull motives (Nauta et al., 2009). In doing so, there rises a win–win
situation by which both organization and employees are in a comfortable situation. Such a
contented work environment leads to better wellbeing of employees.

Employability culture leading to wellbeing

Employee wellbeing is a valid measure to assess the level of satisfaction or contentment he/
she has with his/her job as well as life. This study assessed the association between
BIJ employability culture and life, work and psychological wellbeing. Employability and
30,1 wellbeing are complementary in nature. Studies have shown that employability leads to
enhanced employee wellbeing (Berntson and Marklund, 2007; De Cuyper et al., 2008). Both are
quintessential for sustainable employment. Sustainable employability is important from the
employee perspective as it approves continued employment for the employee as well as
assures wellbeing at work and in life. Sustainable employment is also important for the
continued development of organizations (Nimmi and Zakkariya, 2021; Bishop, 2020).
114 Among the three types of wellbeing, a comparatively strong positive association was
found between employability culture and work wellbeing (R2 5 0.16, β 5 0.40, p < 0.001).
Furthermore, compared to the other two wellbeing measures in mediation analysis, a higher
predictive power was found in the EC-IE-WWB relationship (R2 5 0.25, β 5 0.31, p < 0.001).
These findings give a stronghold to developing an employability culture in organizational
policies, creating satisfied, empowered employees. Only such a culture could anticipate and
adapt to changes that are associated with superior performance. Along with that, a satisfied
employee signals more loyalty and has less likelihood of leaving the organization (Nauta
et al., 2009).

Mediating role of perceived internal employability

The researchers looked into the impact of employability culture on perceived internal
employability, whereby a positive association was confirmed. Recent studies have
equivocally supported the buffering role of perceived internal employability on many
organizational and individual outcomes (Soares and Mosquera, 2019; Moreira et al., 2020).
Many organizations do believe that enhancing perceived internal employability is a strategy
for employee development (Moreira et al., 2020). Previous research is univocal that a satisfied
employee is less inclined to broaden his employability orientation outside the organization
(Nimmi et al., 2020). Perceived Internal Employability, as a major resource, develops other
resources in line with organizational development. Hence, developing such learning and
development-focused cultures is crucial for employee wellness.

Implications
Theoretical implications
The person-centric approach (Harrison, 1995) toward employee’s employability has proved to
be a valuable tool to enhance their psychological resources. Many recent studies are coming
up highlighting the importance of psychological resources in augmenting employee
sustainability at work (Nimmi and Zakkariya, 2021; Akkermans et al., 2013). This study
highlighted the prominence of internal employability perceptions as a positive psychological
resource that is developed in an employee as a result of developing a sound employability
culture, which leads to enhanced employee wellbeing (De Cuyper et al., 2011).
The resources that help an employee at work can be external as well as internal. From a
resource perspective, the employability culture acts as an external resource. These external
resources help to build internal resources in the form of hard skills and soft skills which have
a huge positive impact on the psychological resources of an employee. This resource
accumulation in the form of implicit and explicit skills and attitudes is beneficial for both
organizations and employees. From a sustainability point of view, these resources that
accumulate among employees have far-reaching consequences and can lead to the
development of sustainable careers. This study thus reiterates the significance of COR
theory in explaining career orientations and its outcomes.
The study also strengthens the importance of SCCT theory in explaining the role of social
support/workplace support for better career outcomes. As a predominant theory in
vocational psychology, this theory specifically looks into the enablers and disablers of career Enhancing
development (Lent and Brown, 2019). The latest models of SCCT theory deal with explaining employee
factors leading to career satisfaction and the wellbeing of employees at the workplace. Our
work advances theoretical understanding of SCCT by empirically validating workplace
wellbeing
enablers of employee wellbeing.

Practical implications 115

Early studies with organizational practices have been studied from the point of view of high-
performance management systems, talent management systems or human resource
management systems. This is the first among the studies to look into the impact of
employability culture, which is a cognitive part of organizational culture. Organizational
cognition is related to organizational learning and development. Employability oriented
development activities have many positive repercussions on employees as well as
organizations. The paper’s significant practical implication is its suggestion to bring
alterations in the work culture of organizations to make it more employee-friendly and
empowering. Employees need to believe that they are a significant part of the workplace, that
they are valued for their skill and ability and be continuously appreciated for their skillset.
A company’s success depends on its skilled labor, as they are the cogwheels that keep the
business turning. Studies have highlighted the connection between employee wellbeing, and
the positive effect on the company’s Return on Investment (Lupton, 2019).
Millennials look up to working with an organization that provides them opportunities to
learn and upskill instead of hooking up to just career progression (Gulyani and Bhatnagar,
2017). Change in career attitudes and the development of protean attitude among millennials
also emphasizes the importance of developing an employability culture in organizations
(Nimmi et al., 2020; Gulyani and Bhatnagar, 2017). Such career attitudes are quintessential to
surviving in a highly competitive job market. Organizations ought to provide more
responsibility to employees regarding their careers. Career tutors and mentors could be
provided to enhance their knowledge base. Instruments to increase self-knowledge, like self-
assessment tests or drawing up personal employability plans, can also be offered (Kluytmans
and Ott, 1999).
From a wellbeing perspective, enhanced psychological wellbeing is related to longevity
and a happy and contented life. There is less inter-personal conflict associated with persons
with high psychological wellbeing (Morin, 2020). They are likely to enjoy a better quality of
life. Providing a supportive climate in the workplace is highly beneficial for the peaceful social
life of employees. Likewise, improved work wellbeing denotes a safe environment to work
and a feeling of contentedness.
The results of the study have an impact at a societal level, especially for a developing
nation like India. As a developing nation, India depends on the demographic dividend of its
youth for economic development. Young working people must be competent enough to meet
the challenges of the working environment. Their employability, in general, is an asset to the
organization as well as the nation (Nimmi and Zakkariya, 2021).

Conclusion and limitations of the study

The study has a few limitations that can be mitigated with further research. Employability
culture has been assessed through subjective measures as provided by employees. In
subsequent studies, a combined assessment could be undertaken by including the
perceptions of both employees and employers. It is also possible to consider a qualitative
approach to examine the impact of employability culture. The propositions were tested with a
population comprising of software engineers who form a significant chunk of knowledge
BIJ workers in India. The study could be broadened to other industry sectors and even blue-collar
30,1 workers for further reinforcing the propositions.
The uniqueness of this study is that it brings out a new perspective on employee
wellbeing. The study proposes a model for employee wellbeing in the backdrop of social
cognitive career theory and conservation of resources theory and empirically proves it, thus
contributing to various domains of human resource management, career psychology and
management. The study confirms that creating a sound employability culture enhances the
116 perceived internal employability, and both together are significant in predicting employee
wellbeing. It creates a sense of reassurance for the employee on their future prospects with the
organization. The present paper is expected to guide corporate management to enhance
employees’ employability skills and keep them updated on the technological and life skills
needed to thrive in the labor market.

References
Akkermans, J., Schaufeli, W.B., Brenninkmeijer, V. and Blonk, R. (2013), “The role of career
competencies in the JD-R model”, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 83 No. 4, pp. 356-366.
Akkermans, J., Tims, M., Beijer, S. and De Cuyper, N. (2020), “Should employers invest in
employability? Examining employability as a mediator in the HRM–commitment relationship”,
Frontiers in Psychology, Vol. 10, p. 717.2.
Astin, H.S. (1984), “The meaning of work in women’s lives a sociopsychological model of career choice
and work behavior”, The Counseling Psychologist, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 117-126.
Baer, R.A., Lykins, E.L. and Peters, J.R. (2012), “Mindfulness and self-compassion as predictors of
psychological wellbeing in long-term meditators and matched nonmeditators”, The Journal of
Positive Psychology, Vol. 7 No. 3, pp. 230-238.5.
Bakker, A.B. (2015), “Towards a multilevel approach of employee wellbeing”, European Journal of
Work and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 24 No. 6, pp. 839-843.
Bakker, A.B. and Demerouti, E. (2007), “The Job Demands-Resources model: state of the art”, Journal
of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 309-328.
Bandura, A. (1986), Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory, Prentice
Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, pp. 5-107.
Baptiste, N.R. (2008), “Tightening the link between employee wellbeing at work and performance: a
new dimension for HRM”, Management Decision, Vol. 46, pp. 284-309.
Berntson, E. (2008), Employability Perceptions: Nature, Determinants, and Implications for Health and
Wellbeing, Doctoral dissertation, Department of Psychology, Stockholm University, Stockholm.
Berntson, E. and Marklund, S. (2007), “The relationship between perceived employability and
subsequent health”, Work and Stress, Vol. 21 No. 3, pp. 279-292.
Bishop, J.K. (2020), Organizational Learning Culture: The Relationship to Employee Wellbeing and
Employee Resilience, University of Canterbury.
Boycott, N., Schneider, J. and Osborne, M. (2014), “Creating a culture of employability in mental health”,
Mental Health and Social Inclusion, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 29-34, doi: 10.1108/MHSI-03-2014-0007.
Currie, D. (2001), Managing Employee Well-Being, Chandos Publishing, Oxford.
De Cuyper, N., Bernhard-Oettel, C., Berntson, E., Witte, H.D. and Alarco, B. (2008), “Employability and
employees’ wellbeing: mediation by job insecurity”, Applied Psychology, Vol. 57 No. 3,
pp. 488-509.
De Cuyper, N., Van der Heijden, B.I. and De Witte, H. (2011), “Associations between perceived
employability, employee well-being, and its contribution to organizational success: a matter of
psychological contracts?”, The International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 22
No. 07, pp. 1486-1503.
De Vos, A., De Hauw, S. and Van der Heijden, B.I. (2011), “Competency development and career Enhancing
success: the mediating role of employability”, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 79 No. 2,
pp. 438-447. employee
Diener, E. (1984), “Subjective wellbeing”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 95 No. 3, pp. 542-575.
wellbeing
Donald, W.E., Baruch, Y. and Ashleigh, M.J. (2019), “The undergraduate self-perception of
employability: human capital, careers advice, and career ownership”, Studies in Higher
Education, Vol. 44 No. 4, pp. 599-614.
117
Donald, W.E., Baruch, Y. and Ashleigh, M.J. (2020), “Striving for sustainable graduate careers:
conceptualization via career ecosystems and the new psychological contract”, Career
Development International, Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 90-110.
Dries, N., Forrier, A., De Vos, A. and Pepermans, R. (2014), “Self-perceived employability, organization-
rated potential, and the psychological contract”, Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 29
No. 5, pp. 565-581.
Efron, B. and Tibshirani, R.J. (1994), An Introduction to the Bootstrap, CRC Press, Florida.
Eskildsen, J.K. and Nussler, M.L. (2000), “The managerial drivers of employee satisfaction and
loyalty”, Total Quality Management, Vol. 11 Nos 4-6, pp. 581-588.
Estienne, M. (1997), “An organizational culture compatible with employability”, Industrial and
Commercial Training, Vol. 29 No. 6, pp. 194-199.
Eversole, B.A., Venneberg, D.L. and Crowder, C.L. (2012), “Creating a flexible organizational culture to
attract and retain talented workers across generations”, Advances in Developing Human
Resources, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 607-625.
Fornell, C. and Larcker, D.F. (1981), “Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable
variables and measurement error”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 39-50,
doi: 10.1177/002224378101800104.
Fugate, M., Kinicki, A.J. and Ashforth, B.E. (2004), “Employability: a psycho-social construct, its
dimensions, and applications”, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 65 No. 1, pp. 14-38.
Gonçalves, S.P. and Neves, J. (2012), “The Link between perceptions of Human Resources
Management practices and employee wellbeing at work”, Advances in Psychology Study,
Vol. 1, pp. 31-39.
Grant, A.M., Christianson, M.K. and Price, R.H. (2007), “Happiness, health, or relationships?
Managerial practices and employee wellbeing tradeoffs”, Academy of Management Perspectives,
Vol. 21, pp. 51-63.
Groot, W. and De Brink, H.M.V. (2000), “Education, training and employability”, Applied Economics,
Vol. 32 No. 5, pp. 573-581.
Gubler, M., Arnold, J. and Coombs, C. (2014), “Reassessing the protean career concept: empirical
findings, conceptual components, and measurement”, Journal of Organizational Behavior,
Vol. 35 No. S1, pp. 23-40, doi: 10.1002/job.1908.
Gulyani, G. and Bhatnagar, J. (2017), “Mediator analysis of passion for work in Indian millennials:
relationship between protean career attitude and proactive work behavior”, Career Development
International, Vol. 22 No. 1, pp. 50-69, doi: 10.1108/CDI-04-2016-0057.
Hair, J.F., Anderson, R.E., Babin, B.J. and Black, W.C. (2010), Multivariate Data Analysis, 7th ed.,
Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Hakanen, J.J., Peeters, M.C. and Schaufeli, W.B. (2018), “Different types of employee wellbeing across
time and their relationships with job crafting”, Journal of Occupational Health Psychology,
Vol. 23 No. 2, p. 289.
Halbesleben, J.R., Neveu, J.P., Paustian-Underdahl, S.C. and Westman, M. (2014), “Getting to the “COR”
understanding the role of resources in conservation of resources theory”, Journal of
Management, Vol. 40 No. 5, pp. 1334-1364.
Harrison, R. (1995), The Collected Papers of Roger Harrison, McGraw-Hill, London.
BIJ Hill, J. (2021), The Benefits of A Learning Organization Culture, Bloomfire, available at: https://
bloomfire.com/blog/benefits-learning-organization-culture/ (accessed 4 January 2022).
30,1
Hobfoll, S.E. (1989), Stress, Culture, and Community: The Psychology and Philosophy of Stress, Plenum,
New York.
Hobfoll, S.E. (2001), “The influence of culture, community, and the nested-self in the stress process:
advancing Conservation of Resources theory”, Applied Psychology: An International Review,
Vol. 50 No. 3, pp. 337-421.
118
Houben, E., De Cuyper, N., Kyndt, E. and Forrier, A. (2019), “Learning to Be employable or being
employable to learn: the reciprocal relation between perceived employability and work-related
learning”, Journal of Career Development, Vol. 48 No. 4, 0894845319867431.
Indira, N. and Shani, N. (2016), “Happiness and fatigue among millennials in selected information
technology organizations in India”, Asian Journal of Research in Social Sciences and
Humanities, Vol. 6 No. 7, pp. 390-399.
Juhdi, N., Pa’Wan, F., Othman, N.A. and Moksin, H. (2010), “Factors influencing internal and external
employability of employees”, Business and Economics Journal, Vol. 11, pp. 1-10.
Kirves, K.E. (2014), Perceived Employability. Antecedents, Trajectories and Wellbeing Consequences,
Ph.D Thesis, University of Tampere.
Kluytmans, F. and Ott, M. (1999), “Management of employability in The Netherlands”, European
Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 261-272.
Kooij, D.T., de Lange, A.H., Jansen, P.G. and Dikkers, J.S. (2013), “Beyond chronological age.
Examining perceived future time and subjective health as age related mediators in relation to
work-related motivations and wellbeing”, Work and Stress, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 88-105.
Lent, R.W. and Brown, S.D. (2019), “Social cognitive career theory at 25: empirical status of the
interest, choice, and performance models”, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 115, p. 103316.
Lent, R.W., Brown, S.D. and Hackett, G. (1994), “Toward a unifying social cognitive theory of career
and academic interest, choice and performance”, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 45,
pp. 79-122, doi: 10.1006/jvbe.1994.1027.
Lent, R.W., Brown, S.D. and Hackett, G. (2002), “Social cognitive career theory”, Career Choice and
Development, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 255-311.
Lupton, M. (2019), “Why health & wellbeing is important in the workplace”, available at: https://blog.
apastyle.org/apastyle/2016/04/how-to-cite-ablog- post-in-apa-style.html (accessed 17
December 2021).
MacDonald, L.A. (2005), Wellness at Work: Protecting and Promoting Employee Health and Wellbeing,
Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development, London.
Mathews, G. and Izquierdo, C. (2009), “Introduction: anthropology, happiness, and well-being”, in
Mathews, G. and Izquierdo, C. (Eds), Pursuits of Happiness: Wellbeing in Anthropological
Perspective, Berghahn Books, New York.
Menon, M. (2017), Perceived Organizational Support: Implications for Organizational Attachment in
Information Technology Sector, PhD Thesis, Cochin University of Science and
Technology, India.
Moreira, A., Cesario, F., Chambel, M.J. and Castanheira, F. (2020), “Competencies development and
organizational commitment: mediation through employability and moderation by generation”,
European Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 23 No. 2, pp. 123-149.
Morin, A. (2020), “How to improve your psychological wellbeing, very well mind”, available at:
https://www.verywellmind.com/improve-psychological-well-being-4177330 (accessed 20
February 2021).
Naim, M.F. and Lenka, U. (2017), “Linking knowledge sharing, competency development, and affective
commitment: evidence from Indian Gen Y employees”, Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol.
21 No. 4, pp. 885-906, doi: 10.1108/JKM-08-2016-0334.
Nauta, A., Van Vianen, A., Van der Heijden, B., Van Dam, K. and Willemsen, M. (2009), Enhancing
“Understanding the factors that promote employability orientation: the impact of employability
culture, career satisfaction, and role breadth self-efficacy”, Journal of Occupational and employee
Organizational Psychology, Vol. 82 No. 2, pp. 233-251. wellbeing
Nimmi, P.M. and Zakkariya, K.A. (2021), “Determinants of perceived employability in current career
context: evidence from India”, Journal of Asia Business Studies, Vol. 15 No. 5, pp. 804-820,
doi: 10.1108/JABS-05-2020-0187.
Nimmi, P.M., Zakkariya, K.A. and Nezrin, R. (2020), “Insight to impact: the effect of protean career 119
attitude on employability perceptions of IT professionals”, Colombo Business Journal, Vol. 11
No. 1, pp. 1-23.
Nolan, L.S. (2015), “The roar of millennials: retaining top talent in the workplace”, Journal of
Leadership, Accountability and Ethics, Vol. 12 No. 5, pp. 69-75.
Ortega, J. (2001), “Job rotation as a learning mechanism”, Management Science, Vol. 47 No. 10,
pp. 1361-1370, doi: 10.1287/mnsc.47.10.1361.10257.
Osipow, S.H. (1990), “Convergence in theories of career choice and development: review and prospect”,
Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 36, pp. 122-131.
Ostroff, C. (1993), “The effects of climate and personal influences on individual behavior and
attitudes in organisations”, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 56, p.
56-90.
Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Lee, J.-Y. and Podsakoff, N.P. (2003), “Common method biases in
behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies”, Journal of
Applied Psychology, Vol. 88 No. 5, pp. 879-903.
Porath, C., Spreitzer, G., Gibson, C. and Garnett, F.G. (2012), “Thriving at work: toward its
measurement, construct validation, and theoretical refinement”, Journal of Organisational
Behavior, Vol. 33, pp. 250-275.
Preacher, K.J. and Hayes, A.F. (2004), “SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in
simple mediation models”, Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, Vol. 36,
pp. 717-731.
Rothwell, A. and Arnold, J. (2007), “Self-perceived employability: development and validation of a
scale”, Personnel Review, Vol. 36 No. 1, pp. 23-41, doi: 10.1108/00483480710716704.
Ryff, C.D. (1989), “Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning of psychological
wellbeing”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 57 No. 6, pp. 1069-1081.
Sanders, J. and De Grip, A. (2004), “Training, task flexibility and the employability of low-skilled
workers”, International Journal of Manpower, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 73-89, doi: 10.1108/
01437720410525009.
Soares, M.E. and Mosquera, P. (2019), “Fostering work engagement: the role of the psychological
contract”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 101, pp. 469-476.
Ten Brummelhuis, L.L. and Bakker, A.B. (2012), “A resource perspective on the work–home interface:
the work–home resources model”, American Psychologist, Vol. 67 No. 7, p. 545.
Upadhyay, P., Singh, R., Jahanyan, S. and Nair, S. (2016), “Measuring the effects of role efficacy
enhancement on knowledge workers: evidence from Indian IT industry”, International Journal
of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 65 No. 6, pp. 860-872, doi: 10.1108/IJPPM-
03-2016-0065.
Van Dam, K. (2004), “Antecedents and consequences of employability-orientation”, European Journal
of Work and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 13, pp. 29-51.
Vanhercke, D., De Cuyper, N., Peeters, E. and De Witte, H. (2014), “Defining perceived employability: a
psychological approach”, Personnel Review, Vol. 43 No. 4, pp. 592-605, doi: 10.1108/PR-07-
2012-0110.
BIJ Wilson, M.G., Dejoy, D.M., Vandenberg, R.J., Richardson, H.A. and Mcgrath, A.L. (2004), “Work
characteristics and employee health and wellbeing: test of a model of healthy work
30,1 organisation”, Journal of Occupational and Organisational Psychology, Vol. 77 No. 4, pp. 565-588.
Wong, S.C., Rasdi, R.M., Samah, B.A. and Wahat, N.W.A. (2017), “Promoting protean career through
employability culture and mentoring: career strategies as moderator”, European Journal of
Training and Development, Vol. 41 No. 3, pp. 277-302.
Zheng, X., Zhu, W., Zhao, H. and Zhang, C. (2015), “Employee wellbeing in organisations: theoretical
120 model, scale development, and cross-cultural validation”, Journal of Organizational Behavior,
Vol. 36 No. 5, pp. 621-644.

About the authors

Dr. Nimmi P M is an Associate Professor at Adi Shankara Business School in Kalady. She is an ardent
researcher in the field of career psychology. She has published ten international publications in the last
two years. Her research, writing and presentations revolve around the topics of higher education,
emerging career attitudes, employee well-being, employability and human-computer interaction. Nimmi
P M is the corresponding author and can be contacted at: nimmimohandas1985@gmail.com
Dr. K.A. Zakkariya is a Professor in Human Resource Management and Marketing at School
of Management Studies, Cochin University of Science and Technology, India and is also the Director of
DDU KAUSHAL Kendra, the Center for Vocational Education in the University. He has been member of
various academic and administrative bodies of different universities in the country and was the former
Director of Aligarh University Centre, Malappuram, India. He has 20 years of teaching and research
experience and has more than 60 research publications in journals and books of national and
international repute and is reviewer to many journals including Gender in Management and Journal of
Management Development.
Anju Varghese Philip has been active in academia and Industry. She has worked in Insurance
Industry for 3 years and later joined academia and taught marketing management. Her area of research
includes psychological needs and Social media.

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com