资源保存理论在组织行为学中的应用：演变与挑战

资源保存理论(conservation of resources theory, COR)是组织行为学研究近30年中被引最高的理论之一。COR的提出源自Hobfoll对临床应激障碍的观察与思考, 历经了多次修订后该理论逐步由一个压力-反应模型发展成了一个以个体资源存量及其动态变化解释行为动因的动机理论, 形成了一个具有较广泛外延的理论体系。组织行为学是资源保存理论标志性文献的施引文献的核心来源。大量组织行为学研究对COR中的资源损失漩涡、获得螺旋等核心过程进行了实证检验, 涉及广泛的研究议题, 使COR成为了理解员工心理与行为动因的最具影响力的理论之一。COR在组织行为学中的应用面临一定的挑战, 其中有来自认知评价理论、适应理论的观点挑战, 也有其作为一个“跨界理论”带来的挑战。组织行为学研究在应用COR时应充分尊重其理论要义, 避免削足适履。

Conservation of resources theory in the organizational behavior context:Theoretical evolution and challenges

Over the past three decades,conservation of resources theory(COR)has become one of the most widely applied theories in organizational behavior(OB).In 1989,COR was proposed as a new stress model by Stevan E.Hobfoll,who has been a clinical psychologist studying stress disorder.After several major revisions,COR has developed from a stressor-strain model into a motivational theory and built a theoretical framework with several extensions.This framework views an individual’s stock of resources,as well as dynamic changes in resources,as driving mechanisms for a series of stress reactions and coping behaviors.From 1989 to 2020,OB literature has accounted for most citations of the 1989 paper that initially introduced COR theory.A great number of empirical studies in the OB field,covering a variety of themes,investigated the major propositions in COR.These propositions include resource loss and gain spirals,salience of resource gain in the context of resource loss,and more.As a result,COR has become one of the most influential theories for understanding employees’psychological processes and behavioral motivation.Applying COR in OB research also faces challenges from other theoretical perspectives.For example,the stress-appraisal theory and the adaption theory provide some contrasting viewpoints on stress.Its origin in clinical psychology also invites problems for OB scholars.We propose that OB researchers should avoid tailoring COR’s propositions to OB research questions,which often means neglecting its overarching perspective and purposely selecting isolated viewpoints to serve their own research questions.