"What makes organisations positive is not the elimination of the negative"

In these organisations, working life is painful. In fact, the Nova SBE Professor underlined that "work" etymologically derives from the Latin word tripalium, which means three sticks, being the name given to an object of torture used in Ancient Rome. "And, for many people, working is a real daily torture, from 9 to 5", he added.

"We should invest in more positive organisations simply because we spend so much time in our jobs and it is important to create places where work is meaningful, allowing us to be surrounded by good people." To do this, we must first understand that working life is itself a paradox: "what makes organisations positive is not the elimination of the negative, but the ability to balance positive and negative events so that an outcome is created.Inother words, positivity is not the absence of negativity, but the ability to grow from both good and bad things. The question is: how can we use these two poles to evolve professionally?

"I would start with the meaning of work. What is it for me? The same job can be perceived differently by different people - it can be seen as a job, a career or a calling". From the perspective of a job, work is nothing more than a combination of tasks needed to earn money. Whereas if we see it as a career, it is assumed to be a means to an end, a path that involves more responsibility, growth, that goes beyond the tasks performed. Finally, it can be interpreted as a calling, something to do with meaning and purpose.

Regarding this last dimension, Miguel Pina e Cunha explains that it is possible to consider purpose in an innate way, if we consider that we are born to perform a task, or in an apprehended way, not feeling that this calling is inherent to our personality, but that by performing certain work, "we manage to create impact and we learn to like it". "And I would guess that most people find meaning in their work not because they were born into it, but because they have learned to enjoy what they do. The good news is that I think it is possible to find purpose in any kind of work."

‍

‍

Looking at the example above, we realise that purpose often comes from a choice. In the same way, we can choose to make a work environment more toxic or positive, depending on our daily choices. Therefore, we should ask ourselves: how can I grow and help other people to grow in the workplace?

"I think one of the most effective ways to apply these principles is to embrace the concept ofgrowth mindset, described by Carol Dwek," she explained. Look at intelligence, for example, you can think of it as something fixed or something you can train. If we choose the first option, we will help people to grow less, because we believe that nothing we do will have an impact on the result. If we assume that it is something that can be shaped, we have to accept the risk that we may fail in this task, but it will always be something that will have greater impact and will consequently bring greater happiness.

Carol Dwek did an experiment with several children who she taught to build puzzles of between 100 and 300 pieces. She then asked them which type of puzzle they would like to continue with - the simpler 100-piece one, or the more complex 300-piece one. Several participants chose the first option, as it was easier and a safer choice, however there were children who opted for the more complicated puzzle , asking "what's the fun of doing something we already know how to do?" We conclude with this example that, to achieve something fun and fulfilling in the workplace, it is necessary to take risks, accepting the possibility of failure. What's more, at the beginning, no one is competent at a task they have never done. Possibly, you will fail many times.

Once again we realise that "positivity is paradoxical: there is no growth without suffering". If we want to risk doing a new task, we will probably make a mistake.

"How can we support each other in this process? By cultivating something called psychological safety, by supporting someone who fails, so that they can learn something. If we see the mistake as an opportunity to learn, then it stops being a failure. I am not saying that failure is good, because nobody likes to fail, but on the other hand, avoiding failure results in one of two things: either you always do the same thing or you never do anything. The alternative is to try new things, to improve, but, possibly, we will fail." On the side of the supporters, psychological security is achieved by positively reinforcing with statements such as: "solve the problem, because I know you will never make this mistake again".

At the end of the day, it is our choice how we proceed. However, it is good to keep in mind that what is interesting in these positive organisations is that this psychological security does not only arise in the important moments, it is part of all day-to-day interactions. "Good organisations are those that act as one: where people win together and lose together".