Organizational Behavior with Job Performance
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Revised Pages Chapter Job 2 Performance ORGANIZATIONAL MECHANISMS Organizational Culture Organizational INDIVIDUAL Structure MECHANISMS Job GROUP Satisfaction MECHANISMS Leadership: INDIVIDUALINDIVIDUAL Styles & Behaviors Stress OUTCOMEOUTCOMESS Job Leadership: Performance Power & Influence Motivation Organizational Teams: Commitment Trust, Justice, Processes & Ethics Teams: Characteristics Learning & Decision-Making INDIVIDUAL CHARACTERISTICS Personality & Cultural Values Ability ccol30085_ch02_034-063.inddol30085_ch02_034-063.indd 3344 11/14/70/14/70 22:06:06:06:06 PPMM Revised Pages After growth made St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital the third largest health- care charity in the United States, the organization developed employee perfor- mance problems that it eventually traced to an inadequate rating and appraisal system. Hundreds of employ- ees gave input to help a consulting firm solve the problems. LEARNING GOALS After reading this chapter, you should be able to answer the following questions: 2.1 What is the defi nition of job performance? What are the three dimensions of job performance? 2.2 What is task performance? How do organizations identify the behaviors that underlie task performance? 2.3 What is citizenship behavior, and what are some specifi c examples of it? 2.4 What is counterproductive behavior, and what are some specifi c examples of it? 2.5 What workplace trends affect job performance in today’s organizations? 2.6 How can organizations use job performance information to manage employee performance? ST. JUDE CHILDREN’S RESEARCH HOSPITAL The next time you order a pizza from Domino’s, check the pizza box for a St. Jude Chil- dren’s Research Hospital logo. If you’re enjoying that pizza during a NASCAR race, look for Michael Waltrip’s #99 car, which Domino’s and St. Jude jointly sponsor. These col- laborations spotlight the mission of the Tennessee-based hospital, which works to save children by finding cures for catastrophic illnesses through research and treatment. St. Jude currently has more than 4,000 active patients, and each day, approximately 200 children visit St. Jude for clinical visits or admission as a patient to one of the hospital’s 60 rooms. The managers and employees at St. Jude have worked hard to build America’s ccol30085_ch02_034-063.inddol30085_ch02_034-063.indd 3355 11/14/70/14/70 22:06:23:06:23 PPMM Revised Pages 36 third largest health care charity, where “no one pays for treatment beyond what is cov- ered by insurance, and those without insurance are never asked to pay.”1 The very existence of St. Jude depends on the public’s perception that their con- tributions to the hospital will be used effectively. According to Chief Operations Offi- cer John Nash, approximately 30 donations are needed for each $1,000 the hospital spends.2 The leaders of St. Jude believe that the effective use of donations and the rep- utation of St. Jude depend very much on the performance of each and every employee. However, after experiencing tremendous growth in the 1990s, St. Jude began to suffer several performance problems, many of which were traced to employees’ performance evaluations.3 Managers only used the top two rating categories when evaluating their subordinates’ performance, virtually ignoring the bottom three categories. As a result, all employees appeared to be exceeding performance standards, and the rating system could not identify areas in need of improvement or separate high from low perform- ers. Picture a class in which every student gets an A or A؊, regardless of how much they actually learn. It may seem appealing for a while, but students need to know what they’ve mastered and what they’re still struggling with, and those students who work harder need to be rewarded with better grades. Another problem with the job performance evaluations at St. Jude was that the rat- ing system did not distinguish between different types of jobs in terms of the task and interpersonal activities that were necessary for success. Although academics, scien- tists, doctors, medical students, nurses, fund raisers, accountants, and human resources and public relations personnel employed by St. Jude carried out many different types of tasks in many different contexts, the evaluation system was not flexible enough to tai- lor feedback to each employee. Picture a Calculus class that is forced to use the same kinds of exams as an English class. It’s hard to use essays and creative writing to evalu- ate the amount of Calculus learned, just as it’s hard to use equations and statistics to evaluate the amount of English learned.4 In response to these problems, St. Jude began working with a consulting firm to develop an improved performance management system.5 The overall goal of the new system was to motivate managers and employees to think about job performance in a way that would promote the life-saving mission of St. Jude. In developing the revamped system, hundreds of employees across different job levels and functional areas gave input. The system’s components now include documentation of performance goals for each employee within specific jobs and a roadmap for how to accomplish those goals. The evaluation system also encourages communication throughout the year between supervisors and subordinates. Whether a performance shortfall issue has to do with core task responsibilities or more general behaviors like cooperativeness and team- work, employees now have the information and support they need to improve. Although instituting the new system was not easy, the effort was worthwhile. Improved employee performance translates into better usage of donated funds—all of which are necessary to save the lives of the small children who roam the hallways of St. Jude. JOB PERFORMANCE We begin our journey through the integrative model of organizational behavior with job performance. Why begin with performance? Because understanding one’s own per- formance is a critical concern for any employee, and understanding the performance of ccol30085_ch02_034-063.inddol30085_ch02_034-063.indd 3366 11/14/70/14/70 22:07:01:07:01 PPMM Revised Pages CHAPTER 2 Job Performance 37 one’s unit is a critical concern for any manager. Consider for a moment the job perfor- mance of your university’s football coach. If you were the university’s athletic director, you might gauge the coach’s performance by paying attention to various behaviors. How much time does the coach spend on the road during recruiting season? How effective are the coach’s practices? Are his offensive and defensive systems well designed, and is his play calling during games appropriate? You might also gauge some other behaviors that fall outside the strict domain of football. Does the coach run a clean program? Do his players graduate on time? Does he represent the university well during interviews with the media? Of course, as your university’s athletic director, you might be tempted to ask a simpler question: Does he win? After all, fans and boosters may not care how good the coach is at the previously listed behaviors if the team fails to make it to a prestigious bowl game. Moreover, the coach’s performance in terms of wins and losses has important implications for the university because it affects ticket sales, bowl revenues, licensing fees, and booster donations. Still, is every unsuccessful season the coach’s fault? What if the coach develops a well-conceived game plan but the players repeatedly make mistakes at key times in the game? What if the team experiences a rash of injuries or inherits a schedule that turns out to be much tougher than originally thought? What if one or two games are decided at the last moment and influenced by fluke plays or bad calls by the officials? This example illustrates one dilemma when examining job performance. Is performance a set of behaviors that a person does (or does not) perform, or is job performance the end result of those behaviors? You might be tempted to believe that it is more appropriate to define performance in terms of results rather than behaviors, because results seem more “objective” and are more connected to the central concern of managers—“the bottom line.” For example, the job performance of salespeople is often measured by the amount of sales revenue generated by each person over some time span (e.g., a month, a quarter, a year). For the most part, this logic makes perfect sense: Salespeople are hired by organizations to generate sales, and therefore, those who meet or exceed sales goals are worth more to the organization and should be considered higher performers. However, as sensible as this logic seems, using results to indicate job performance cre- ates a problem because results are often influenced by factors that are beyond the employee’s control—product quality, competition, equipment, technology, budget constraints, cowork- ers, and supervision, just to name a few. Even if these uncontrollable factors are less relevant in a given situation, there is another problem with a results-based view of job performance, in that results don’t indicate how to reverse a “bad year.” That is, performance feedback based on results does not generally provide people with enough information to learn what they need to change in their behavior to improve. Given that OB as a field of study aims to understand, predict, and improve behavior, we will refer to job performance as behavior. The outcomes associated with those behaviors will therefore be termed “job performance results.” So what types of employee behaviors constitute job performance? To understand this question, consider that job performance is formally defined as the value of the set of 2.1 What is employee behaviors that contribute, either positively or negatively, to organizational goal the defi nition of accomplishment. 6 This definition of job performance includes behaviors that are within job performance? the control of employees, but it places a boundary on which behaviors are (and are not) What are the three relevant to job performance.