Abstract The Conservation of Resources (COR) theory is one of the most widely cited models for understanding stress and motivation at work. Yet, a definitional problem remains when it comes to discerning what constitutes a resource, with personality trait constructs being particularly difficult to fit. In this paper, we assert that a resource should be conceptualized as (i) commonly valued; (ii) something that can be lost, depleted, or withdrawn; and (iii) unidirectional, whereby worth resides in one direction and loss or absence is indicative of a deficit. Using this criterion, we argue that personality traits—notably the five‐factor model (FFM) traits—are constitutionally different from resources, conceptualizing these instead as a new category of “resource catalysts” within COR. Resource catalysts (epitomized by FFM personality traits) are constructs that (i) serve other resources, (ii) have contextual and (iii) bidirectional value, and (iv) cannot be lost through use. Resource catalysts operate under different boundary conditions to resources and, when activated, will be used to galvanize, prioritize, and protect different resources in specific situations. We now encourage scholars to incorporate our (re)classification of resources and resource catalysts in future COR research to advance understanding of resource‐related activity at work.
Russell et al. (Mon,) studied this question.