It is a stressor that positively induces personal learning, growth, and accomplishment (LePine et al., 2004). Flinchbaugh et al. (2015) provided a challenge-hindrance framework, which evidenced that challenge stressors have the opposite effect on general stress, mitigate the passive effects of hindrance stressors, improve thriving, and increase employee life satisfaction. Further, their study shows that challenge appraisals indicate the magnitude of challenge stress and motivate employees to handle their daily workload effectively while actively experiencing a sense of learning. Prem et al. (2017) conducted a more detailed, diary study of the divided aspects of thriving, measuring the effects of two challenge stressors (i.e., time pressure and learning demands) in the workplace. On the two aspects of thriving, challenge stressors positively affected learning but had no impact on vitality. Generally speaking, challenge stress, which variably depends on the industry, employee’s age, tenure, and the nature of the firm, is positively associated with employee thriving (Huang, 2017). Therefore, we propose the following hypothesis:

In contrast to challenge stress, hindrance stress represents the pressure to perform mundane and repetitive tasks (LePine et al., 2004). According to Dollard et al. (2013), hindrance stress, measured by hindrance appraisals, is closely related to the feelings of low morale. Thus, it reduces worker satisfaction and undermines thriving (LePine et al., 2004). Additionally, when compared with challenge stress, hindrance stress discourages individual growth and its beneficial consequences as individuals use their limited resources, of time and energy, to cope with meaningless, mundane, and repetitive tasks. Subsequently, individuals perceive thriving as a strain in the workplace (Flinchbaugh et al., 2015). For example, Huang (2017) found that hindrance stress is negatively associated with thriving according to the field and online research including 542 questionnaires in East China. Therefore, we propose the following hypothesis:

It refers to the sense of volition and control that employees experience in improving their work efficiency (Rhoades and Eisenberger, 2002). A high degree of autonomy, along with other components of intrinsic motivation, can contribute toward thriving, including vitality and learning (Geiger, 2013). Mukhaimer (2012) concluded that autonomous motivation positively affects thriving because employees feel better in a flexible work environment. According to Sia and Duari (2018), decision-making authority is critical to work satisfaction and involvement and is a key motivator for employees to thrive. Decision-making authority can enhance employee autonomy and interact with task focus, thereby motivating employees to learn and work harder. Several studies (e.g., van Scheppingen et al., 2015; Li et al., 2016) have revealed a more direct, more detailed relationship between autonomy and vitality, namely, half of thriving, whereby increased vitality stimulates the active involvement of employees, thus encouraging thriving behavior at work. Therefore, given a proper autonomy, employees experience a greater mental motivation and thriving, which effectively increases their desire to work (Gu, 2015; Xie, 2016; Gao F., 2017; Li, 2018). In light of the aforementioned studies, we propose the following hypothesis:

In terms of work control, employees can manage their own work tasks and plans, granting them greater flexibility and decision-making power (Quick et al., 1990). Cheng et al. (2013) concluded that employees with more control tend to perform better and remain more positive about their work than those with less control. Therefore, the ability to control work with optimistic synergy motivates employees to confidently face the challenges of their work (Cheng et al., 2013). Additionally, strengthening the supervision and control and focusing on comparisons between work goals and outcomes improve vitality and learning processes. Employees are more likely to effectively control the quality of their work when using the quality of outcomes to set appropriate job requirements. With improved work outcomes, employees who are acknowledged for their abilities are motivated to continue working (Li, 2018). By effectively controlling work, employees can gain more resources, such as objective opinions, positive emotional, and behavioral management, which encourage employee thriving. Therefore, we propose the following hypothesis:

It is defined as a part of interpersonal relationships at work and plays a significant role in predicting the thriving of employees. It is the belief that another party can perform well without being forced to reach the target (Koçak, 2016). Trust can be divided into three aspects: a management team, a supervisor, and colleagues. Trust in a management team is developed when an employee feels supported and shows that he/she relies on the decisions of the organization. The relationship between employees and their supervisors and/or colleagues also emphasizes trust on a smaller scale (Koçak, 2016). High-quality relationships are beneficial in motivating the employees to be more active at work and when interacting with supervisors and colleagues, and ultimately thrive more (Li, 2018). Additionally, employee trust in leaders equips leaders with power and authority for management, and trust in employers ensures that employers are more capable of supervision and learn from colleagues. With the proper guidance of supervisors and colleagues, employees are more willing to thrive in a voluntary manner (Jaiswal and Dhar, 2017). Through collective trust-based interactions, employees enjoy high-quality social bonds and a higher level of thriving at work. Carmeli et al. (2009) explored the relationship between positive work relationships and vitality in an alternative explanatory path. With trust, building high-quality relationships encourages employees to have the confidence to actively express their personal opinions. It also enables employees to respect the requirements of their work. Therefore, we propose the following hypothesis:

The workplace environment can positively or negatively affect employees (Paterson et al., 2014). In a supportive and friendly environment, supervisors tend to pay attention to their subordinates and express concern in many aspects, including work performance and individual development. They also tend to provide a variety of resources to help with employee tasks. These behaviors facilitate the work of an employee and encourage them to work agentically, which leads them to thrive (Paterson et al., 2014). Additionally, the social support provided by supervisors and colleagues can be helpful in supporting employees to feel secure in their jobs. In short, under a supportive climate, unconfident or confused employees are motivated by suggestions for improvement, increasing their likelihood of thriving well for a longer period of time (Cheng et al., 2013). Zhu et al. (2019) discovered the positive effect of a supportive environment among a particular group of workers, namely, people with disabilities. They also suggested that a climate of team learning can reduce the negative impact of disability and ultimately enhance the thriving of people with disabilities. Therefore, we propose the following hypothesis:

It is perceived as the opinion of an employee on workplace equity (Colquitt et al., 2001). Bensemmane et al. (2018) argued that, despite an individual variation, the overall average sense of justice across a team contributes to the collective thriving of team members. Mushtaq et al. (2017) uncovered the mechanisms underlying the influence of justice on employee thriving and suggested that employees with a higher sense of organizational justice show greater confidence in the assessment and reward system of an organization. Given this belief, employees concentrate on their work and pursue performance improvement, which translates to a higher degree of thriving. Working in an organization that emphasizes the improvement of three components of justice, including procedural, interactional, and distributive justice, drives the motivation for employees to thrive (Deng, 2016). Thus, we propose the following hypothesis:

It is a way for supervisors to provide information to subordinates according to the outcomes of their work (Maurer et al., 2002). Useful feedback not only provides an incentive for employees to learn new skills and ideas but also potentially transforms the workplace to an open and a transparent system, significantly increasing employee thriving (Xie, 2016). In terms of an integrative model of human growth in the workplace, Gao F. (2017) concluded that supervisory developmental feedback positively affects the basic psychological needs of employees and further influences their thriving. Supervisors use verbal encouragement and express concern to build relationships with their subordinates. This effective interaction strengthens employees’ sense of belonging to the organization and guides them on how to improve their work, which ultimately stimulates thriving (Wang et al., 2017). Lee et al. (2015) stated that feedback-seeking behavior in a team feedback environment can also significantly improve the work performance and attitude of employees, leading to increased thriving as employees become clear about their work abilities and responsibilities. Therefore, we propose the following hypothesis:

It refers to the behavior of an employee in modifying and adjusting the content of a job to improve performance; a process that clarifies and confirms their job requirements and their own beliefs (Wrzesniewski and Dutton, 2001). This leads to the conclusion that employees with positive and enthusiastic attitudes toward work ultimately experience thriving (Li, 2015). Employees who craft their jobs strengthen their awareness of their duties and abilities. After proper positioning, they use organizational resources more efficiently and feel motivated to learn on their jobs (Wang, 2018). Additionally, job crafting enables employees to take on challenges, advance their knowledge, and lay the foundation for their personal growth. Through this process, the advantages of concentration and progress at work motivate employees with crafted jobs to thrive at a higher level (Han, 2017). Therefore, we propose the following hypothesis:

It is defined as a “subordinate’s perception of the extent to which supervisors engage in a sustained display of hostile, verbal, and non-verbal behaviors, excluding physical contact” (Zhang and Bednall, 2016, p. 455). According to the theory of affective events, researchers argue that abusive supervision is negatively associated with thriving (Luo, 2016). Employees perceive abusive supervision as a negative affective event that undermines the climate of trust and respect; a climate that ensures employee safety and encourages them to take risks and explore. Without this, employees can feel untrusted or disrespected and can lose their energy and enthusiasm for learning at work. Therefore, we propose the following hypothesis:

It is a specific leadership style that focuses on the self-awareness and psychological capital of both workplace leaders and followers (Gardner et al., 2005). Under this kind of leadership, leaders driven by their own values and beliefs provide more support to their staff and pursue an equal work environment (Gardner et al., 2005). Therefore, a positive relationship may exist between authentic leadership and employee thriving. Xu et al. (2017) emphasize this finding by highlighting a positive association between authentic leadership and thriving, especially through the meditating variable of leader–member exchange (LMX). LMX improves communication and interaction from the team level to an individual level, so that authentic leaders can influence their followers, in supervisory interactions, by increasing an inherent motivation for self-determination (Ryan and Deci, 2000). Therefore, we propose the following hypothesis:

Unlike authentic leadership, empowering leadership emphasizes delegation to subordinates to improve their psychological experience at work (Li et al., 2016). Delegation is a process of power-sharing, whereby employees have flexibility in decision-making, setting goals, or completing tasks. Simultaneously, they are more likely to feel motivated to learn on their own as they realize more responsibility and confidence from their leader (Ali et al., 2018). Empowered employees tend to shoulder more responsibilities than originally required (Kabat-Farr and Cortina, 2017). In the process, they are vitalized and become willing to learn to improve their work performance. Along with this opinion, Li et al. (2016) also proposed that empowering leadership engenders thriving. Specifically, this leadership style contributes to a greater tendency for employees to thrive, by encouraging them to participate in decision-making processes and providing many supportive resources. As a result, employees are highly willing to learn, stay vitalized, and feel more secure and responsible at work (Han, 2017). Therefore, we propose the following hypothesis:

It refers to a particular relationship between leaders and their subordinates built via exchanges at work. Atwater and Carmeli (2009) concluded that the higher the quality of LMX, the more employees engage, and the more willing they are to be active and passionate at work because they feel trusted and respected. In short, harmonious LMX leads to employee thriving and improves work outcomes (Li, 2015; Xu et al., 2017). Zhang et al., (2018) drew a similar conclusion that LMX facilitates emotional bonding between leaders and their subordinates beyond the simpler relationship between the colleagues. This bond enhances the efficiency of employees, encourages engagement, brings vitality, and promotes learning. Thus, high-quality LMX between leaders and employees beneficially facilitates their work efficiency and enriches their job content (Atwater and Carmeli, 2009; Zhang et al., 2018). Therefore, we propose the following hypothesis:

Previous studies have suggested that there is a strong relationship between servant leadership and thriving at work (e.g., Jaiswal and Dhar, 2017; Walumbwa et al., 2018). Servant leadership is a positive leadership approach, focusing on serving colleagues and supporting them via necessary work resources and compassion. This empowers employees to take on challenges and be confident in continuously improving themselves (Walumbwa et al., 2018). Furthermore, servant leadership can lead to employee trust in leadership and enhance creativity in thriving (Jaiswal and Dhar, 2017). Luo (2016) revealed a positive correlation between servant leadership and thriving by investigating the effect of aggressive mistreatment by customers on employee thriving. Therefore, we propose the following hypothesis:

It exists when leaders actively stimulate employee motivation and help them achieve higher goals (Collins, 2014). The relationship between thriving and transformational leadership has recently attracted attention, and current empirical evidence has proven to be very positive (Dong, 2018). Transformational leadership enables employees to experience beneficial encouragement, happiness, and openness at work while encouraging them to feel more autonomous in a respectful and supportive environment. This collectively leads to the thriving of individual employees (Hildenbrand et al., 2018). Furthermore, this leadership style motivates employees to learn and increase vitality via social capital. Niessen et al. (2017) shed light on the relationship between the perceived transformational leadership and the thriving of teachers. Although they did not conclude a direct relationship between them and revealed that employees felt increased levels of thriving under strong transformational leadership, given that they were less emotionally exhausted. Therefore, we propose the following hypothesis:

In addition to various types of leadership, also known as relational resources (Spreitzer et al., 2005), two types of resources were meta-reviewed: positive meaning and knowledge resources (work experience).

It involves both the purpose and significance of work. It comes from the value of work and the creation of worth via interacting with colleagues at work (Spreitzer et al., 2005). Positive meaning at work aligns the expectations of employees to each other and also helps them to understand the goals of the organization. It enables them to understand their work and its significance and engenders thriving at work. Niessen et al. (2012) conducted a diary study and showed a positive relationship between personal variability during workdays and positive meaning and thriving. Their study provides evidence for a number of hypotheses for the socially embedded model of thriving proposed by Spreitzer et al. (2005), and expands the literature by focusing on identifying personal differences in positive meaning in a single day alone rather than concentrating on personal growth- and work-related outcomes. Individuals who experience a stronger sense of positive meaning at work will feel a sense of thriving on the same day. Therefore, we propose the following hypothesis:

In the model of Spreitzer et al. (2005), knowledge resources are known as the important resources generated at work that engender employee thriving. We argue that work experience is a knowledge resource because it is generated at work and enables employees to understand their work; in other words, it is related to the knowledge required and how to obtain the relevant information to get the job done (Moreland and Argote, 2003). Therefore, we expect that work experience serves as a knowledge resource for employees to learn about how to acquire the knowledge, information, and skills needed to work and promote thriving. Therefore, we propose the following hypothesis:

It is a phenomenon in which individuals seek new ways of working, via experimentation, discovery, innovation, and risk-taking (Spreitzer et al., 2005). Previous studies have evidenced the positive relationship between exploration and thriving (Button et al., 1996). Spreitzer et al. (2005) posited that, when employees experienced explore at work, they were willing to acquire new knowledge to resolve problems, therefore positively related to the thriving of an employee. Exploration behavior also enhances employee vitality; Kleine et al. (2019) stated that exploration is a direct outcome of thriving as the activity is associated with the immediate experience of both vitality and learning. Sia and Duari (2018) evidenced the positive result of thriving by finding that work exploration stimulates employees to produce surprising ideas and strategies. Therefore, we propose the following hypothesis.

Although the importance of heedful relating has attracted much attention, it is also essential, in investigating thriving at work, to analyze individual work task characteristics such as task focus. Task focus refers to the dedication and concentration required by an employee to achieve the objectives of a job (Brown et al., 2005). Niessen et al. (2012) concluded that task focus is a key agentic work behavior that plays an important role in increasing employee thriving. Specifically, highly dedicated employees focus on completing tasks and finding the best possible solutions, resulting in a higher likelihood of success and molding them into vital, active-learning employees. Employees who are highly task-focused feel a sense of accomplishment at work and actively acquire, previously unknown, integral job skills; thereby increasing thriving (Paterson et al., 2014). Furthermore, Paterson et al. (2014) found that, to thrive in a variety of job roles, employees adopt various behaviors depending on the scenario. People tend to be attracted to work by the tasks involved in the job, ergo, and are inclined to feel more vitality from these tasks and actively learn what is necessary to complete them (Sia and Duari, 2018). Therefore, we propose the following hypothesis.

It refers to cooperative and mutually supportive interactions between the workers (Paterson et al., 2014). Many people work in advanced teamwork-based organizations, where collaboration and communication with teammates significantly affect employee thriving. In this case, the focus is on the interactions within the group and the achievements of the entire team. More effective and high-quality cooperation between the employees, that is, more heedful relating, engenders higher levels of thriving (Paterson et al., 2014). Heedful relations between colleagues are important for employees to fully realize the functions of the organizational structure and the ultimate goals of the organization. Through intensive and high-quality interactions, employees tend to actively learn from their colleagues and play responsible, larger roles in the team, ultimately increasing their levels of thriving (Sia and Duari, 2018). Abid et al. (2016) conducted an empirical study in support of the positive effects of heedful relations and posited that heedful relating motivates positive employee behavior, which is consistent with previous arguments. Therefore, we propose the following hypothesis:

It implies having an optimistic attitude toward difficulties and hurdles (Geiger, 2013). The relationship between self-efficacy and thriving has recently attracted attention as evidencing significantly positive effects on thriving, regardless of employee group (Geiger, 2013; Lee et al., 2015; Chen et al., 2016; Levy, 2016; Bensemmane et al., 2018; Zhu et al., 2019). Building self-efficacy, as a part of intrinsic mindfulness, increases the likelihood of employees thriving regardless of workplace characteristics, including the organizational climate (Geiger, 2013). Moreover, employees with high self-efficacy are ready to face the challenges at work and are confident enough to complete them. Thus, as self-efficacy accumulates, employees are more likely to feel that they are thriving regardless of the work environment (Levy, 2016). Bensemmane et al. (2018) discovered this relationship in the context of a team and proposed that self-efficacy is integral to understanding the importance and effectiveness of personal resources. Therefore, we propose the following hypothesis.

It is a personality trait that refers to the ability to positively associate events with outcomes (Luthans et al., 2007). Similar to the analytical path of self-efficacy, Levy (2016) agreed that optimism encourages employees to focus on their work, which increases the likelihood of meeting the job requirements and completing difficult tasks, thereby contributing to their experience of thriving. Xie (2015) also proposed that optimism is one of the four components of psychological capital. Employees are believed to thrive more from frustration when they use psychological capital, such as the patience and courage offered by optimism, to manage challenges or to face unfair treatment. Furthermore, optimistic employees accept challenges, with confidence and a positive attitude, making them less likely to be influenced by anxiety or anger. Thus, they gain more positive outcomes such as thriving (Cheng et al., 2013). Therefore, we propose the following hypothesis.

Employees who are open tend to show positive emotions and also tend to be active and energetic at work. Additionally, open-minded employees are modest and inherently learn from their surroundings (Hennekam, 2017) and, therefore, experience higher levels of thriving. The interaction between being open to experience and transformational leadership also affects employee thriving (Hildenbrand et al., 2018). In the context of leadership, people who are open are able to cope with opposing voices and to avoid serious embarrassment at work, thus supporting them to thrive. By analyzing the underlying mechanisms, we propose the following hypothesis.

It describes the ability of an individual to maintain self-discipline and continued motivation to achieve goals (Costa et al., 1991), and has been found to positively influence employee thriving. Conscientious employees tend to behave well and work hard toward their goals as they are familiar with their work and job contents (Hennekam, 2017). Simultaneously, this ability leads to outperformance and provides a sense of accomplishment. Therefore, conscientious employees tend to thrive easily (Hennekam, 2017). Conscientiousness also expresses a sense of responsibility that helps employees motivate themselves to thrive, and the employees tend to work more eagerly and broadly, laying a foundation for the emergence of thriving (Xie, 2015). Therefore, we propose the following hypothesis.

Most research on management specifies national culture as an import contingent factor that influences the relationships between different variables (Rattrie et al., 2020). For example, it serves as an important contextual factor that will influence the relationships between some work-related antecedents and outcomes (e.g., Choi et al., 2015, personality traits and organizational commitment). The dimensions of national culture were also regarded as influential factors that determine the responses of individuals toward work conditions and subsequently the associated results of the work (Liu et al., 2007; Taras et al., 2010, 2011). According to his research on national culture, Hofstede (1984) identified individualism as an important characteristic of each country and revealed the contrast in the scores of individualism between Eastern, primarily Asian countries, and Western countries. Compared to China with a score of being 20, the United States had a much higher score of 91 (Hofstede, 2001). Several studies are consistent with this result, including the regulatory focus theory of Higgins (1997) as well as the other relevant disparities between the scores.

Among the dimensions of national culture, individualism/collectivism dimension was considered as one of the important factors that cause the deviation of the reactions of individuals toward different job characteristics (e.g., Spector et al., 2007) and that of the different levels of their commitment to the organizations (Parkes et al., 2001). Individuals with an interdependent self-construal, in low-level individualistic countries, actively respond to information about accepting, or avoiding, responsibility for their surroundings; whereas, those with an independent self-construal, in high-level individualistic countries, tend to react to information in terms of personal goals and objectives (Lee et al., 2000; Elliot et al., 2001; Xu et al., 2018). Citizens living in high-scoring, individualistic countries tend to prioritize their interests, and set themselves apart from others. Therefore, the relationship between antecedents and thriving varies depending on the levels of individualistic culture.

According to the socially embedded model of thriving, the thriving of an individual is not only self-driven but also occurs through his/her interactions with others (Brown and Duguid, 1991; Wenger, 1998). Low-level individualistic countries emphasize the importance of collective interests in a group level and encourage individuals to support each other and maintain harmonious relationships. Individuals in low-level individualistic countries “are integrated into strong, cohesive in-groups, which throughout people’s lifetime continue to protect them in exchange for unquestioning loyalty” (Hofstede, 2001, p. 225). Ronen and Mikulincer (2009) also stated that individuals in low-level individualistic cultures were more sensitive to the fulfillment of group goals, the completion of teamwork, and the improvement engagement in a group level (Rattrie et al., 2020). This necessary interaction brought by the teamwork among individuals, via culture, is more likely to facilitate employee thriving in benign work environments, with positive work unit contextual features and resources. Therefore, we propose the following hypothesis.