Verbal behaviour as an indicator of personnel wellbeing

The article examines one of the possible applications of speech activity theory and the text psychological structure as the product of this activity to the research of personnel wellbeing. Very often, an employee’s wellbeing status is inaccessible to management. The idea is that the verbal behaviour psychological pattern can be used as an indicator of employee wellbeing status perception. The authors’ aim was to develop a text analysis model to be used for revealing the peculiarities of wellbeing perception status; to determine the most diagnostic parameters of the model; and to apply them to the personnel wellbeing assessment. The authors’ conclusions are based on analyzing numerous personnel speech samples, which show how the model functions as an instrument for measuring the real quality of wellbeing status perception and how diagnostic the proposed model parameters are. The research of speech samples, which belong to university foreign language trainers from Russia and Kazakhstan, allows us to describe a typical teacher who is not satisfied with career opportunities available, the level of salary and constant management pressure. The results of the study can be applied to practical human resource management and the development of new ways of motivating and training employees in any professional field.

1. Alaverdov A. R. (2019), Problems of ensuring personnel security of Russian universities: monograph, Synergy University, Moscow, Russia (in Russian).

2. Alaverdov A. R. and Alaverdova T. P. (2020), “Selection of candidates for positions in higher education institution from the standpoint of their potential loyalty to employer”, Vysshee obrazovanie v Rossii = Higher Education in Russia, vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 37–50, https://doi.org/10.31992/0869-3617-2020-29-1-37-50

3. Borisova I. N. (2005), “Russian conversational dialogue: zones of tolerant and intolerant communication”, In.: Kupin N. A., Khomyakova M. B. (eds), Philosophical and linguocultural problems of tolerance: coll. monograph, Series: Interregional Studies in the Social Sciences, OLMA–PRESS, Moscow, Russia, pp. 364–389. (In Russian).

4. Diener E., Suh E. M., Lucas R. E. and Smith H. L. (1999), “Subjective well-being: three decades of progress”, Psychological Bulletin, vol. 125, no. 2, pp. 276–302, https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.125.2.276

5. Eldor L. and Vigoda-Gadot E. (2017), “The Nature of employee engagement: rethinking the employee organization relationship”, The International Journal of Human Resource Management, vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 526–552, https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2016.1180312

6. Harvey-Knowles J. A. (2018), “Verbal person-centered support provision quality following an exploratory supportive skills intervention”, Western Journal of Communication, vol. 82, no. 1, pp. 75–99, https://doi.org/10.1080/10570314.2017.1308004

7. Kahn W. A. (1990), “Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at work”, Academy of Management Journal, vol. 33, no. 4, pp. 692–724, https://doi.org/10.2307/256287

8. Linley P. A., Maltby J., Wood A. M., Osborne G. and Hurling R. (2009), “Measuring happiness: the higher order factor structure of subjective and psychological well-being measures”, Personality and Individual Differences, vol. 47, no. 8, pp. 878–884, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2009.07.010

9. Mogilevich B. R. (2016). “Communicative tolerance discourse”, Moscow State University Bulletin, Series 18. Sociology and Political Science, vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 192–201.

10. Nurullina G. M. and Usmanova L. A. (2018). “Psycholinguistic aspects of studying text as a product of speech activity”, Philology and culture = Vestnik Tatarskogo gosudarstvennogo gumanitarno-pedagogicheskogo universiteta, no. 3 (53), pp. 72–76.

11. Poroykov S. Yu. (2018), Psychological Types, INFRA-M, Moscow, Russia (in Russian).

12. Smith-Keiling B. L., Sharma A., Fagbodun S. M., Chahal H. K., Singleton K., Gopalakrishnan H., Paleologos K. E., Brantley J., Nguyen V., Mathew M. and Ligt A. J. van de (2020), “Starting the conversation: Initial listening and identity approaches to community cultural wellness”, Journal of Microbiology and Biology Education, vol. 21, no. 1, https://journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/jmbe.v21i1.2073

13. Vorozheikin I. E., Kibanov A. Ya. and Zakharov D. K. (2004), Conflictology: textbook, INFRA-M, Moscow, Russia (in Russian).

14. Zakharova L. N. and Leonova I. S. (2020), “Subjective well-being of the staff of enterprises with different involvement in innovative processes: age aspect”, Vestnik universteta, no. 2, pp. 186–193, https://doi.org/10.26425/1816-4277-2020-2-186-193

15. Zimnyaya I. A. (2001), Linguistic psychology of speech activity, Moscow Psychosocial Institute, Moscow; MODEK, Voronezh, Russia (in Russian).