problem 1 - job performance Flashcards
what is job performance
the degree to which an individual helps the organization reach its goals
is behavioral, episodic, evaluative & multidimensional
performance is a behavioral contruct
performance is behavior with an evaluative component → behavior that can be evaluated as positive or negative for individual or organizational
2 imp reasons why should focus on behavior instead of results:
1. states/conditions of things/people that are changed by performance are also affected by other factors not under the individual performer’s control
2. a behavioral focus is necessary to develop a psychological understanding of selection processes and apply the full range of psychological principles and tools to the problem of prediction most fruitfully
performance behavior is episodic
streams of work behavior are punctuated by occasions when people do something that does make a difference in relation to organizational goals
these are the behavioral episodes that make up the domain of job performance
performance behavior episodes are evaluative
only behavioral episodes that make a difference to organizational goal accomplishment are part of the performance domain + that they vary widely according to their organizational contributions
* both behaviors that have pos & neg effects + behaviors that have big or small effect
* = behavioral episodes in the performance domain have varying contribution values for the organization
Thus, it is possible to identify behavioral episodes that are regarded as more or less organizationally desirable and to scale the degree to which they are organizationally desirable with enough precision to distinguish between them
performance domain is behaviorally multidimensional
- All behavioral episodes can be scaled according to a common metric: contribution value - when expressed this way job performance is unidimensional
- However there are many different kinds of behaviors that would advance or hinder organizational goals - shouldnt just lump them all together
what is task performance
an individual’s proficiency with which they perform activities which contribute to the organization’s technical core
can be direct or indirect & is multidimensional
2 types:
1. Activities that transform raw materials into the goods & services that are the organization’s products
2. Activities that service and maintain the technical core & enable it to function effectively
what is contextual performance?
activities which do not contribute to the technical core but which support the organizational, social, and psychological environment in which organizational goals are pursued
2 types:
1. Behaviors which aim primarily at the smooth functioning of the organization as it is at the present moment
2. Proactive behaviors which aim at changing and improving work procedures and organizational processes
individual differences in task & contextual performance
3 direct determinants of job performance
Declarative knowledge: knowledge of facts, principles, and procedures
Procedural knowledge and skill: skill in actually doing what should be done; combination of knowing what to do and actually being able to do it
Motivation: combination of choice to exert effort, choice of how much effort to exert and choice of how long to continue to exert effort
individual differences in task & contextual performance
McCrae and Costa (1996) metatheoretical framework
Basic tendencies: the fundamental capacities and dispositions that describe differences between individuals - define potential for observable behavior
Characteristic adaptations: concrete expressions of abstract basic tendencies and take the form of specific skills, habits, preferences, attitudes, and patterns of behavior that people learn as their basic tendencies interact with their environments over time
Objective biography: the set of overt behaviors that theories of personality often try to predict; - basically job performance
Causal relations between these three variables: basic tendencies directly affect characteristic adaptations that, in turn, directly affect objective biography (no direct link between basic tendencies and objective biography)
individual differences in task & contextual performance
Motowildo’s theory
Individual differences in personality and cognitive ability + learning experiences lead to variability in characteristic adaptations that mediate effects of personality and cognitive ability on job performance
* The kinds of traits and characteristic adaptations that are related to task performance are different from those that are related to contextual performance
Basic tendencies divided into:
* Cognitive ability - presumed to be a better predictor of task performance
* Personality variables - presumed to be better predictors of contextual performance
Motowildo’s theory
Task performance
knowledge, skills & habits
Task knowledge: knowledge of facts and principles related to functions of the organization’s technical core + knowledge of procedures, judgmental heuristics, and rules for processing information and making decisions about matters related to the technical core
* People with high levels of cognitive ability = more likely to master and remember relevant facts, principles, and procedures
Task skills: skill in actually using technical info + applying knowledge to perform the necessary actions smoothly, quickly, and without error
* Cognitive ability has direct effects on task knowledge that, together with task skill, also mediates effects of ability on job performance
Task habits: patterns of responses to task situations that either facilitate or interfere with the performance of task behaviors + motivational task habits
* Expected to be affected by individual differences both in cognitive ability and in personality traits such as conscientiousness
Motowildo’s theory
Contextual performance
knowledge, skills & habits
Contextual knowledge: knowledge of facts, principles, and procedures for effective action in situations that call for helping and cooperating with others, following organizational rules, persisting despite difficult obstacles, etc.
* People who have personality characteristics consistent w these elements should be more likely to notice that certain patterns of behavior are more effective in such situations and = more likely to master this knowledge
Contextual skills: skill in actually carrying out actions known to be effective for handling these situations
* Determined largely by personality traits such as extraversion and agreeableness +
Contextual habits: patterns of responses that either facilitate or interfere with effective performance in contextual work situations
* Might be at least somewhat affected by conscientiousness, but we expect that other personality traits that reflect tendencies to adopt one interpersonal or social style rather than another, traits such as extraversion and agreeableness
process underlying performance change over time
early phases of skill acquisition: performance relies largely on ‘controlled processing’ - the availability of declarative knowledge & the optimal allocation of limited attentional resources
* tranisition stage: when person is new at a job & tasks are novel - cog ability is relevant for perf
later stages: performance largely relies on automatic processing, procedural knowledge, and psychomotor abilities
* maintanance stage: when task accomplishment becomes automatic - cog ability less imp & dispositional factors more imp
perspectives on performance
individual differences perspective
focuses on perf differences between individuals + seeks to identify the underlying factors
* cog ability: ppl w high cog abilities perform better than ppl w low cog abilities
* personality: general relationships between personality factors and perf are relatively small - strongest relationships for neuroticism and conscientiousness
* motivation: may be caused by differences in motivational traits and differences in motivational skills
* self efficacy: shown to be related to both task & contextual perf + imp in learning process
* professional experience: shows a positive, although small relationship with job perf
perspectives on performance
situational perspective
factors in the individuals’ environment which stimulate and support or hinder performance
* job characteristics model: assumes that job characteristics have an effect on critical psychological states which in turn have an effect on personal & work outcomes
* sociotechnical systems theory: describes work systems as composed of social and technical subsystems - perf improvement can only follow from the joint optimization of both subsystems
* role theory: role ambiguity and role conflict are conceptualized as stressors that impede performance (weak empircal support)
* situational constraints: stressors within in the work env & stressors caused by the actual work itself assumed to impair job performance directly
perspectives on performance
performance regulation perspective
focuses on the performance process itself & conceptualizes it as an action process
* expertise research approach: aims to identify what distinguishes individuals at different perf levels - found that high performaers differ in the way they approach tasks & arrive at solutions
* action theory approach: describes the performance process, as any other action, from both a process and a structural pov - perf depends goals, planning & good feedback
* goal setting theory: assumes that goals affect performance via 4 mediating mechanisms: effort, persistence, direction, and task strategies
sources of performance appraisal information
objective production data
used as an index of how well an employee is performing on the job - limited in its frequency and value
* e.g. salesperson assessed by sales volume
usually not a complete measure of job performance - affected by 2 problems:
1. variability in performance can be due to factors beyond the employee’s control
2. doesn’t account for quality, only quantity
sources of performance appraisal information
personnel data
absenteeism: employees who have unexcused absence are judged as performing worse than others
* measurement & interpretation of absenteeism are not clear-cut - absences can be excused or unexcused depending on many factors
accidents: can be used as a measure of job performance but only for a limited number of jobs
rating errors: halo errors
evaluations based on the raters general feelings about an employee → rater may have a favorable attitude toward the employee that permeates all evaluations
* rater has strong feelings about 1 aspect of the employees performance → feelings generalized to other performance factors → employee is judged as uniformly good or bad
* valid vs invalid halo
* theory of person perception: in the schemas we use to assess other people, it may make sense to us that they would be rated highly across many diff dimensions, even dimensions we have little opportunity to observe
rating errors: leniency errors
raters can be categorized by the leniency of their appraisals
* harsh raters → give evaluations that are lower than the true level of ability = severity or negative leniency
* easy raters → give evaluations that are higher than the true level = positive leniency
rating errors: central-tendency error
refers to rater’s unwillingness to assign extreme high or low ratings → everyone is average and only the middle (central) part of the scale is used
sources of performance appraisal information
judgemental data - graphic rating scales
most commonly used - individuals ranked on a number of traits of factors where rater judges ‘how much’ of each factor the individual has
e.g. quantity of work, practical judgment, job knowledge, etc.
sources of performance appraisal information
judgemental data - employee comparison methods
individuals are compared with one another = variance is forced into the appraisals
* advantage: elimination of central tendency & leniency errors bc raters are compelled to differentiate among the people being rated - halo error still possible
rank order method: rater ranks employees from high to low on a given performance dimension - don’t know level of performance
paired comparison method: each employee is compared with every other employee - rater selects which of the 2 is better on the specific dimension
forced distribution method: most useful when the other methods are most limited (when the sample is large) - procedure is based on the normal distribution & assumes that employee performance is normative
sources of performance appraisal information
judgemental data - behavior checklists & scales
focus is on behavior - the greater the agreement on the meaning of the performance appraised, the greater the chance that the appraisal will be accurate
critical incidents: this technique is flexible & can be used for performance appraisal and job analysis
* supervisors record behaviors that greatly influence job performance
* end result is a list of behaviors that constitute effective & ineffective job performance
behaviorally anchored rating scale (BARS): combination of critical incident & rating scale methods - performance is rated on a scale, but the scale points are anchored with behavioral incidents
behavior-observation scale (BOS): based on critical incidents - rater must rate employee on the frequency of critical incidents over a certain time period
rater training
the process of training raters to make more accurate ratings of performance - typically achieved by reducing the frequency of halo, leniency and central-tendency errors
* not all research on rater training is positive
* frame-of-reference training: involves providing raters with common reference standards (ie frames) by which to evaluate performance
* pos effect of rater training on: reduced halo error, reduced leniency error, and increased rating accuracy
rater motivation
refers to organisationally induced pressures that compel raters to evaluate ratees positively
* appraiser has several goals e.g. presenting themselves as a good boss & avoiding conflict
* = several reasons why they may inflate ratings of their subordinates - e.g. desire to improve subordinates chance of raise
* also several reasons why they may deflate ratings - e.g. punishing non-compliant subordinates
appraisal interviews
subordinate motivation
the appraisee may also enter the appraisal process with a wide & mixed agenda
e.g. orientation may be protective and designed to maintain self-esteem or may wish to persuade the appraiser with a counter pov
pattern & strength of an appraisee’s needs may be influenced by a number of factors - most imp is need for achievement (NAch)
appraisals - subordinate motivations/reactions
need for achievement
NAch found to be a sig influence in determining many work outcomes, including level of goal difficulty the individual prefers
7 elements of NAch:
1. work ethic - desire to work hard
2. acquisitiveness - motivation based on financial reward
3. dominance
4. pursuit of excellence
5. competitiveness
6. status aspiration
7. mastery - reinforcement gained from success in the face of difficulty
all (except maybe dominance) would seem to have potential relevance to understanding an individual’s orientation to appraisal
appraisals - subordinate motivations/reactions
goal orientation
learning goal orientation (LGO) - orientation towards developing competence by acquiring new skills and mastering new problems and tasks
* pos related to feedback seeking
* much more pos attitude to genuine feedback & suggestions
performance goal orientation (PGO) - an orientation to demonstrate and prove the adequacy of one’s competence by seeking favorable assessments and avoiding criticism
* neg related to feedback seeking
* less tolerance of anything but pos feedback + focus efforts on maintaining perf in areas in which they had already proved their effectiveness
appraisals - subordinate motivations/reactions
self awareness, self-esteem & self-efficacy
self-awareness: research suggests that those higher in self-awareness are higher performers
* very likely that the more self-aware an individual is, the more pos is their reaction likely to be in the PA situation
self-esteem: 2 hypotheses on self-esteem levels & responses to feedback
1. self-consistency position: individuals with low self-esteem will prefer less pos feedback (because it fits with their self-image) & vice-versa
2. self-enhancement position: both high and low self-esteem individuals will want positive feedback, and that the latter will be especially motivated to seek it out
self-efficacy: numerous studies showing its relationship to variables such as managerial ambition and ratings of work performance made by others
appraisals - subordinate motivations/reactions
locus of control
internal LOC see feedback as more beneficial - bcuz they believe that they can use this feedback to improve their performance
those w external LOC don’t see feedback as useful bc they believe their performance is affected by external factors
contradicts feedback attitudes
appraisals - subordinate motivations/reactions
feedback attitudes
internal propensity: reflects self-reliance, a lack of trust in other people’s evaluations, and valuing internal feedback
internal ability: reflects the ability to self-assess, to know what is required by way of performance and the ability to judge one’s progress towards it, irrespective of preference for internal or externally generated feedback
* strongly related to pos self-esteem, NAch & self-assurance (internal propensity showed a similar pattern)
external propensity: preference for, and greater trust in, performance feedback from outside sources
* opposite pattern to internal ability + neg correlated with tolerance for ambiguity
