Job Performance

Sabine Sonnentag, Judith Volmer and Anne Spychala

Individual performance is of high relevance Researchers agree that performance has to be for organizations and individuals alike. Show­ considered as a multi-dimensional concept. ing high performance when accomplishing On the most basic level one can distinguish tasks results in satisfaction, feelings of self­ between a process aspect (i.e., behavioral) and efficacy and mastery (Bandura, 1997; Kanfer an outcome aspect of performance (Borman et aL, 2005). Moreover, high performing and Motowidlo, 1993; C ampb ell, McCloy, individuals get promoted, awarded and hon­ Oppler, and Sager, 1993; Roe, 1999). ored. Career opportunities for individuals who The behavioral aspect refers to what perform well are much better than those of people do while at work, the action itself moderate or low performing individuals (Van (Campbell, 1990). Performance encompasses Scotter et aI., 2000). specific behavior (e.g., sales conversations This chapter summarizes research on indi­ with customers, teaching statistics to under­ vidual performance and addresses perfor­ graduate students, programming computer mance as a multi-dimensional and dynamic software, assembling parts of a product). This concept. First, we define the concept of conceptualization implies that only actions performance, next we discuss antecedents of that can be scaled (i.e., counted) are regarded between-individual variation of performance, as performance (Campbell et al., 1993). More­ and describe intraindividual change and over, this performance concept explicitly only variability in performance, and finally, we describes behavior which is goal-oriented, present a research agenda for future research. i.e. behavior which the organization hires the employee to do well as performance (Campbell et al., 1993). JOB PERFORMANCE AS A The outcome aspect in turn refers to the MULTI-DIMENSIONAL CONCEPT result of the individual's behavior. The actions described above might result in contracts The concept and definition of individual per­ or selling numbers, students' knowledge in formance has received considerable scholarly statistical procedures, a software product, or research attention over the past 15 to 20 years. numbers of products assembled. Empirically, 428

the behavioral and outcome aspect are related. to actions that are part of the formal However, there is no complete overlap, as reward system (i.e., technical core), and the outcome aspect is affected by other addresses the requirements as specified in detenninants than the behavioral aspect. job descriptions (Wi1liams and Karau, 1991). Imagine a car retailer who communicates At a general level, task performance con­ the preferences of a product (behavioral sists of activities that transform materials aspect) excellently, but who nevertheless into the goods and services produced by achieves low sales figures (outcome aspect) the organization or to allow for efficient due to low demand of this specific type functioning of the organization (Motowidlo of cars. Similarly, a teacher who provides et al., 1997). Thus, task performance covers an excellent statistics lesson which fulfills the fulfillment of the requirements that are all learning requirements (behavioral aspect) part of the contract between the employer and might not provide students with knowledge employee. (outcome aspect) if students' lack motivation Moreover, task performance in itself can be or cognitive abilities. described as a multi -dimensional construct. Moreover, performance must be distin­ Campbell (1990) proposed a hierarchical guished from effectiveness and from produc­ model of eight performance factors. Among tivity or efficiency (Campbell et al., 1993; these eight factors, five refer to task perfor­ Pritchard et al., 1992). Effectiveness refers to mance: the evaluations of the results of performance (i.e., financial value of sales). In comparison, (1) job-specific task proficiency; productivity is the ratio of effectiveness to the (2) non-job-specific task proficiency; cost of attaining the outcome. For example, (3) written and oral communication proficiency; the ratio of hours of work (input) in relation (4) supervision, in case of leadership position; and to products assembled (outcome) describes partly productivity. (5) management/administration. A great deal of attention has been paid to the distinction between task and contextual Each of these five factors itself consists of performance. There are three basic differences subfactors which are differently important for between task and contextual performance various jobs. For example, the supervision (Borman and Motowidlo, 1997; Motowidlo factor includes (1) guiding, directing, and et al., 1997; Motowidlo and Schmit, 1999): motivating subordinates and providing feed­ back, (2) maintaining good working relation­ (1) contextual performance activities are com- ships, and (3) coordinating subordinates and parable for almost all jobs, whereas task others resources to get the job done (Borman performance is job specific; and Brush, 1993). (2) task performance is predicted mainly by ability, whereas contextual performance is mainly predicted by motivation and personality; Contextual performance (3) task performance is in-role behavior and Often it is not sufficient to comply with part of the formal job-description, whereas contextual performance is extra-role behavior the formal job requirements, one needs and discretionary (Le. not enforceable), and to go beyond what is formally required often not rewarded by formal reward systems (Parker et al., 2006; Sonnentag and Frese, or directly or indirectly considered by the 2002). Contextual performance consists of management. behavior that does not directly contribute to organizational performance but supports the organizational, social and psychological Task performance environment. Contextual performance is dif­ Task performance covers a person's contri­ ferent from task performance as it includes bution to organizational performance, refers activities that are not formally part of the 429 job description. It indirectly contributes to (Organ, 1988; 1997). OCB consists of five an organization's performance by facilitating components: task performance. Borman and Motowidlo (1993) enumerate • altruism (i.e. helping others); five categories of contextual performance: • conscientiousness (Le., compliance to the organi­ zation); (1) volunteering for activities beyond a person's 11 civic virtue (e.g., keeping up with matters that formal job reqUirements; affect the organization); (2) persistence of enthusiasm and application • courtesy (e. g., co nsu Iting with others before taki ng action); and when needed to complete important task requirements; • sportsmanship (e.g., not complaining abouttrivial (3) assistance to others; matters) (4) following rules and prescribed procedures even when it is inconvenient; and (LePine et al., 2002; Organ, 1988). (5) openly defending organization objectives. The more 'pro active ' view on contextual performance includes concepts such as per­ Examples of contextual performance are sonal initiative (Frese et al., 1996), taking demonstrating extra effort, following orga­ charge (Morrison and Phelps, 1999), and nizational rules and policies, helping and proactive behavior (Crant, 1995). Personal cooperating with others, or alerting colleagues initiative is characterized as a self-starting about work-related problems (Borman and and active approach to work and comprises Motowidlo, 1993; Motowidlo et al., 1997). activities that go beyond what is formally In the past, contextual performance was required. Consequently, employees show per­ conceptualized and measured in numerous sonal initiative when their behavior fits to ways. On a very general level, these different an organization's mission, when their goals conceptualizations can be identified that aim have a long-term focus, and when they are at the effective functioning of an organization capable of finding solutions for challenging as it does at a certain time ('stabiliz­ situations. Similarly, taking charge implies ing' contextual performance), and proactive that employees accomplish voluntary and behaviors which intend to implement new constructive efforts which effect organiza­ and innovative procedures and processes in tionally functional change. Proactive behavior an organization, thus changing the organi­ refers to showing self-initiated and future­ zation ('proactive' contextual performance; oriented action that aims to challenge the Sonnentag and Frese, 2002). status quo and improve the current situation The 'stabilizing' contextual performance (Crant, 1995; Parker et al., 2006). In sum, comprises organizational citizenship behavior contextual performance is not a single set of (OCB; Organ, 1988), and some aspects of uniform behaviors, but is multidimensional in prosocial organizational behavior (Brief and nature (Van Dyne and LePine, 1998). Motowidlo, 1986). OCB describes discre­ tionary behavior which is not necessarily recognized and rewarded by the formal Adaptive performance reward system. Discretionary means that the Campbell et al. 's (1993) taxonomy of work behavior is not enforceable and not part of performance did not initially include adaptive the formal role in terms of the person's performance. However, due to changing and contract with the organization. Furthermore, dynamic work environments, the need for Organ (1988) explains that not every single adaptive employees has become increasingly discrete instance of OCB is expected to important (Pulakos et al., 2000; Smith et al., make a difference in organizational out­ 1997). Numerous authors refer to adaptability comes, but that the aggregate promotes using different names. Hesketh and Neal the effective functioning of an organization (1999) referred to adaptive performance, 430

Murphy and Iackson (1999) discussed role uniquely to overall managerial performance. flexibility, and London and Mone (1999) Moreover, Iohnson (2001) showed that raters wrote about the proficiency of integrating new vary the relative weight they put on different learning experiences. As a result of extensive aspects of performance speaking in favor literature review and factor analyses, Pulakos of raters' implicit models of performance et al. (2000) presented an eight-dimensional dimensions. taxonomy of adaptive performance: Recently, Griffin et al. (2007) presented and tested a model that aimed at integrating major (1) handling emergencies or crisis situations; performance concepts. These authors argued (2) handling work stress; that two principle changes (i.e., increasing (3) solving problems creatively; interdependence and uncertainty of work (4) dealing with uncertain and unpredictable work systems) require an integrative model of dif­ situations; ferent performance dimensions. They defined (5) learning work tasks, technologies and proce- three core performance dimensions, namely dures; proficiency, adaptivity, and pro activity which (6) demonstrating interpersonal adaptability; they classified at three levels (individual, (7) demonstrating cultural adaptability; and team and organization). Proficiency covers (8) demonstrating physically oriented adaptability. the fulfillment of role requirements that can be formalized, adaptivity refers to the extent These dimensions of adaptive performance of adaptation to changes at the workplace were shown to exist across many different and proactivity describes the extent of self­ types of jobs (Pulakos et aI., 2000). directed action necessary to adapt to changes. Like task and contextual performance, Griffin et al. (2007) regarded individual task adaptive performance also appears to be a proficiency to be comparable to task perfor­ multidimensional construct. However, future mance, and adaptivity and pro activity to be research is needed to specify, for example, especially important in uncertain situations. the antecedents and consequences of adaptive Furthermore, these different types of behavior performance and the generalizability of the are not considered to be mutually exclusive adaptive performance taxonomy suggested but their importance should vary depending by Pulakos and her co-workers (2000). on the uncertainty of the environment. Given the increased importance of adaptive In sum, performance should be seen as a performance, more empirical research is multidimensional construct with the dimen­ needed. sions being multidimensional themselves. Moreover, each performance dimension is Relationship between task, related to different aspects of organizational success (e.g., task performance helps to satisfy contextual and adaptive technical core requirements). The ongoing performance rapid changes in technology (Burke and Ng, One can distinguish conceptually between 2006), mergers and fusions (Pike, 2006), task, contextual, and adaptive performance; and the globalization of many firms (Black and task and contextual performance can et al., 1991) require workers to be increasingly be separated empirically (Griffin et aI., tolerant of uncertainty (Pulakos et aI., 2000). 2000, Motowidlo and Van Scotter, 1994). Additionally, there is evidence that task of and contextual performance are differently Measurement performance important for outcome variables (Con way, Given the centrality of job performance in 1999; Johnson, 2001). In a meta-analysis of organizations, it becomes clear that the mea­ managerial jobs, Conway (1999) found that surement of individual performance should task and contextual performance (job dedi­ capture job performance as reliable and valid cation, interpersonal facilitation) contributed as possible. 431

A variety of measures of job performance were larger than method (source) effects. has been used over the past decades (Campbell Thus, Woehr et al. (2005) concluded that et aI., 1990; Viswesvaran et aI., 1996). For ratings from different sources are to some example, rating scales, tests ofjob knowledge, extent comparable. However, there is no hands-on job samples, and archival records perfect convergence of ratings across sources have been used to assess job performance and at present it is not clear if this is (Campbell et aI., 1990). From these measure­ attributable to systematic or random error ment options, performance ratings (e.g. peer components. ratings and supervisor ratings) are the most Literature examining the effect of contex­ frequent way of measuring job performance tual performance on managerial evaluations (Viswesvaran et aI., 1996). Often, 'objective' (Conway, 1999; Van Scotter and Motowidlo, criteria such as sales figures and production 1996; Werner, 1994) suggests that manager records are requested. However, even these ratings should, aside from evaluations of criteria involve subjective judgments of which task performance, incorporate ratings of specific type of criteria pictures performance contextual performance and that the effects (Campbell, 1990) and are, like other perfor­ of contextual performance on organizational mance measures, not perfect. performance and success are at least as great Several studies have focused on the degree as those of task performance (Podsakoff et al., of convergence across various sources of 2000). performance ratings (Conway and Huffcutt, As it is not always possible to assess 1997; Harris and Schaubroeck, 1988; Mabe mUltiple performance dimensions in practice, and West, 1982; Viswesvaran et aI., 1996). it is valuable to know if there is one Using meta-analysis, Viswesvaran et aI., general factor in ratings of j ob performance. (1996) compared the reliability of supervisor Viswesvaran et al. (2005) addressed this ratings and peer ratings. They concluded that question using a meta-analytic framework, supervisory ratings showed higher interrater and their results suggest that there is one large reliability than peer ratings. Another meta­ general factor. This finding implies that the analytic review (Harris and Schaubroeck, practice of generating a composite measure 1988) revealed that self and supervisor ratings of various performance dimensions seems to correlated moderately (r = 0.35) as did be justifiable as long as it is theoretically self and peer ratings (r = 0.36), whereas satisfying. correlations between peer and supervisory ratings were higher (r = 0.62). Comparing Summary and conclusion the reliability of peer and supervisor ratings, findings yield higher correlations of different The overview of the major performance supervisors ratings assessing the same indi­ dimensions views individual performance as a vidual compared to different peers ratings multi-dimensional concept. At the most basic evaluating the same individual (Conway and level, performance can be differentiated in Huffcutt, 1997; Mount et aI., 1998). terms of process and outcome. Moreover, Woehr et al. (2005) investigated the impact one can distinguish between task, contextual, of the performance dimension (e.g., technical and adaptive performance and each of these knowledge, integrity, and leadership) and types in itself is multidimensional. These rating source (i.e., peer, self, and super­ performance types differ wi th respect to visor) as well as the degree of measure­ their antecedents and consequences and can ment equivalence across sources. Results be conceptually and empirically separated. suggest that the impact of the underlying Measurement of performance is central as performance dimension is comparable across important organizational decisions are based different rating sources. Woehr et al. (2005) on individual performance. Future research is also found that, in terms of a multi-trait needed to clarify the interplay of the different multi-method approach, trait effects (source) performance types. 432

PREDICTORS OF INTERINDIVIDUAl and Hunter, 2004). More recent meta-analyses DifFERENCES IN JOB PERFORMANCE based on UK and other European samples reported corrected mean correlations between Both theoretically and practically, it is critical GMA and job performance of 0.48 (Bertua to identify predictors of job performance. et aI., 2005) and 0.62 (Salgado et aI., 2003) Most generally, one can differentiate between suggesting that the association between GMA person-specific and situation-specific predic­ and job performance is culturally invariant, tor variables. Person-specific variables are at least within Western cultures. Additional individual difference variables, that is, vari­ analyses based on meta-analytic data showed ables that differ between individuals, but are that the correlations between OMA and expected to be rather stable within individuals. job performance differ across job types. Situation-specific variables characterize the Generally, the correlations are higher for more work situation or the organizational context, complex jobs; but also for less complex jobs but not the individual person. GMA remains substantially related to job performance. Studies examining the association between Person-specific variables more specific abilities also found substan­ Individuals differ considerably in job per­ tive correlations between these abilities and formance level. In jobs with low difficulty, indicators of job performance. For example, the performance of the highest performer Bertua et al. (2005) reported corrected corre­ exceeds the lowest performers between two lations between verbal, numerical, perceptual, to four times, whereas in jobs with high and special abilities on the one hand and job difficulty, highest performers may exceed the performance on the other hand of 0.39, 0.42, lowest performers by even a greater ratio 0.50, 0.35 respectively. Thus, these specific (Campbell et aI., 1996). What predicts these abilities were nearly as strong predictors of differences? Most research on person-specific job performance as is GMA. predictors of job performance focused on An important question in this research abilities, knowledge, experience, and non­ area is whether specific cognitive abilities cognitive traits. contribute to the prediction of job per­ formance beyond the predictive power of Cognitive abilities GMA. Based on data from 1,036 enlistees Ability refers to 'the power or capacity to from the US Air Force working in seven act financially, legally, mentally, physically, different jobs, Ree et al. (1994) concluded or in some other way' (Ree et aI., 2001: 21). that specific abilities added significantly to Cognitive ability refers to qualifications or the prediction of job performance, but that capacity with respect to mental tasks. Sub­ this incremental contribution was small in stantive research efforts have been undertaken practical terms (cf. Olea and Ree, 1994). Ree to examine whether general mental ability et al.'s conclusion that, in the prediction of (OMA), also referred to as 'g' (Spearman, job performance, there is 'not much more 1904), is related to job performance. Meta­ than g' was and still is heavily debated in analyses show that OMA is a strong predictor the field of personnel selection and beyond of job performance. For example, in a (Brown et aI., 2006; Reeve, 2004; Sternberg comprehensive meta-analysis based on data and Wagner, 1993). For example, at least in from 425 studies (N = 32,124) Hunter and some types of jobs, social skills add to the Hunter (1984) reported a corrected mean cor­ prediction of job performance (Ferris et aI., relation of 0.51 (corrected for range restriction 2001). and criterion unreliability) between measures Most meta-analyses examining the asso­ of GMA and job performance, a finding ciation between cognitive abilities and job replicated from data in the US and Canada (for performance did not differentiate between summaries, see Salgado et aI., 2001; Schmidt various types of job performance, leaving 433 the question of whether cognitive abilities Knowledge are unifonnly related to all types of job Campbell et al.'s performance model (1993) perfonnance largely unanswered. Motowidlo proposed declarative and procedural knowl­ et al. (1997) have argued that cognitive ability edge as core performance determinants. Meta­ is mainly related to task perfonnance by analytic evidence suggests that job knowledge impacting on task habits, task skills, and (i.e., declarative knowledge) is related to job task knowledge. According to these authors, performance. For example, Hunter and Hunter the relationship between cognitive ability and (1984) reported average correlations between contextual performance should be weaker job content knowledge tests and perfonnance because cognitive ability should be only ratings of 0.48. A more recent meta-analysis related to contextual knowledge, but not to examining the relationship between written contextual habits or contextual skills. knowledge tests and job performance resulted Empirical research largely supports this in an effect size (corrected for the effects of assumption. In most studies, the associations sampling error, range restriction and criterion between cognitive ability and organizational umeliability) of 0.45. Moderator analysis citizenship behavior or related contextual indicated that the relationship was higher for perfonnance constructs were weak and mostly more complex jobs (Dye et aI., 1993). non-significant (Chan and Schmitt, 2002; Studies assessing more procedural aspects Hattrup et aI., 1998; LePine and VanDyne, of knowledge reported that the correlations 2001; VanScotter and Motowidlo, 1996; for between tacit know ledge and j ob performance contrary findings, see Allworth and Hesketh, ranged between 0.20 and 0.40 (Sternberg, 1999; Motowidlo and VanS cotter, 1994). 1997). A meta-analysis that used situational With respect to more proactive types of judgement tests as measures for procedural contextual performance, research evidence knowledge found a mean estimated pop­ remains inconclusive. Whereas Fay and ulation correlation of 0.34 between these Frese (2001) reported a positive relationship knowledge measures and job performance between cognitive ability and personal initia­ (McDaniel et aL, 2001). tive, Le Pine and Van Dyne (2001) showed Generally, it is argued that job knowl­ that cognitive ability was not related to voice edge mediates between individual disposi­ behavior as one specific aspect of pro active tions (e.g., cognitive ability and personality) behavior. Clearly more studies are needed that and job performance. Using path-analysis, also take the type of job into account. Schmidt et al. (1986) demonstrated that job Research evidence remains scarce regard­ knowledge mediates the relationship between ing the relationship between cognitive ability general mental ability and job performance, and adaptive performance. The few studies suggesting that individuals high on cognitive that did examine the association between ability are more successful in acquiring job­ cognitive ability and adaptive performance, relevant know ledge that in turn helps them to however, largely converge in their findings, accomplish their work tasks. inasmuch as cognitive ability was found to Chan and Schmitt (2002) examined the be positively related to adaptive perfonnance relationship between situational judgement (Allworth and Hesketh, 1999; LePine, 2003; test measures and various aspects of job Pulakos et aI., 2002). performance. In a study based on data from Thus, there is convincing empirical evi­ 160 civil service employees the authors dence that cognitive abilities, particularly found that the situational judgement test GMA, are substantially related to overall score predicted task performance as well job performance in general, and to task as contextual performance (job dedication, perfonnance in particular. Cognitive abilities interpersonal facilitation). Interestingly, the do not seem to be a strong and consistent situational judgement test predicted task predictor of contextual performance, but they and contextual performance beyond cogni­ are associated with adaptive performance. tive abilities, personality factors, and job 434 experience (for a similar finding see also opposed to soft performance measures, for Clevenger et al., 2001). amount of experience compared to time and Knowledge might not only be related to type, and for task experience, compared to task performance but also to proactive and job or organizational experience. This meta­ adaptive performance. For example, Fay and analytic finding suggests that experience is a Frese (2001) have argued that knowledge complex construct and the time aspect of job helps in showing proacti ve behavior. Parker experience might not be most relevant for job et al. (1997) conceptualized the subjective performance. importance of production knowledge as one To advance knowledge on the role of expe­ core facet of a flexible work orientation (i.e., rience, Tesluk and Jacobs (1998) suggested an individuars propensity to show pro active a comprehensive model that includes qualita­ performance). In addition, research has shown tive aspects of experience, particularly type that knowledge can also be beneficial for of experience including variety, challenge adaptive performance (Chen et al., 2005). and complexity. Also, research on managerial Taken together, there is convincing evi­ learning suggests that specific experiences dence that knowledge is related to various and individuals' reactions to these experiences aspects of job performance. However knowl­ might matter more for subsequent perfor­ edge may not only affect performance, but mance than simple quantitative indicators of specific facets of performance may help in experience (McCauley et al., 1994). increasing knowledge (cf., Seibert et al., Meta-analytic findings on the role of 2001). experience mostly refer to task performance or overall job performance. Research evidence Experience on the relationship between job experience Job experience is also relevant for perfor­ and contextual performance is relatively mance. Hunter and Hunter (1984) reported scarce, and mostly yields weak correlations a mean corrected correlation between job betweenjob experience and contextual perfor­ experience and job performance of 0.18 mance, particularly OCB-related indicators (corrected for measurement error in job (Chan and Schmitt, 2002; Motowidlo and performance ratings). Another meta-analysis VanS cotter, 1994; VanS cotter and Motowidlo, (McDaniel et al., 1988) reported a higher 1996). With respect to adaptive performance, estimate of the population estimate and further research showed a weak positive correlation indicated that the relationship between job between experience with change and this experience and job performance decreases performance aspect (Allworth and Hesketh, with age. A more recent meta-analysis result­ 1999). ing in an overall effect size of 0.13 suggests Thus, quantitative aspects ofjob experience the relationship between job experience and show weak to moderate associations with task performance might be also contingent on performance, and rather low correlations with job complexity and type of performance contextual and adaptive performance. Moder­ measurement (Sturman, 2003). ator variables probably play a substantial role Another meta-analysis on the relationship in the relationship between job experiences between experience and job performance and performance. differentiated between diverse performance measures (soft vs. hard), measurement mode Non-cognitive predictors (amount, i.e. number of times having per­ In addition to cognitive factors (e.g., general formed a particular task, time, and type), mental ability and knowledge) and experi­ and level of specificity (task experience, ence, non-cognitive traits have also received job experience, organizational experience; considerable research attention as potential Quinones et al., 1995), with an overall person-specific predictors ofjob performance. mean estimated population correlation, of These non-cognitive traits include personality 0.27. Correlations were higher for hard as factors such as proposed by the Five Factor 435

Model (Digman, 1990; McCrae and Costa, and 0.16 for extraversion, -0.03 and 0.27 1989), more narrow traits (Dudley et aI., for openness to experience, -0.01 and 0.33 2006), the pro active personality concept for agreeableness and 0.12 and 0.31 for (Crant, 1995), and core self-evaluations conscientiousness. (Judge and Bono, 2001). When differentiating between diverse The Five Factor Model differentiates five aspects of job performance, the pattern of distinct dimensions of personality: overall findings picture does not change substantially. Meta-analyses on the relation­ • emotional stability; ship between dimensions of the Five Factor • extraversion: Model of personality and OCB resulted in • openness to experience; estimated true correlations ranging between • agreeableness; 0.23 and 0.30 for conscientiousness (Dalal, et conscientiousness. 2005; LePine et al., 2002; Organ and Ryan, 1995). The estimated true correlation between Individuals high on emotional stability (i.e., emotional stability (low negative affect) and low neuroticism) are characterized by low OCB was 0.10 (Dalal, 2005; Organ and Ryan, negative affectivity and tend to respond 1995) and between agreeableness and OCB it with less subjective distress to negative was 0.12 (Organ and Ryan, 1995). events than do individuals low on emotional It has been suggested that pro active perfor­ stability. Extraversion refers to individuals' mance is predicted by a specific personality propensity to experience positive affect and concept, namely proacti ve personality (Crant, to be sociable, assertive, and energized by 1995). Not surprisingly, proactive personality social interactions. Openness to experience predicts pro active performance (Parker et al., characterizes an individual's tendency to be 2006; Thompson, 2005). More interestingly, creative, flexible, imaginative and willing to proactive personality was also significantly take risks. Agreeableness describes individu­ related to task performance (Crant, 1995; als who are kind, gentle, likable, cooperative, Thompson, 2005). In addition, there is some and considerate. Conscientiousness refers to evidence that personality predicts adaptive an individual's degree of being orderly, self­ performance (Pulakos et aI., 2002; but see also disciplined, achievement-oriented, reliable Griffin and Hesketh, 2003, 2004). and perseverant. Broad personality traits such as global An early meta-analysis on the relationship conscientiousness might not be the best between these Big Five personality factors predictors of job performance (Dudley et al., and job performance (based on 162 sam­ 2006). Meta-analysis showed that more nar­ ples from 117 studies) showed generally row personality traits (achievement, depend­ low correlations between personality factors ability, order, and cautiousness) contribute and performance measures. Specifically, the to the prediction of performance beyond the estimated true correlations were 0.08 for predictive power of global conscientiousness. emotional stability, 0.13 for extraversion, The amount of additional variance explained 0.04 for openness to experience, 0.07 for varied across performance criteria with the agreeableness and between 0.22 for consci­ largest increase of more than 25 per cent of the entiousness (Barrick and Mount, 1991). variance for job dedication and much smaller Kanfer and Kantrowitz (2002) summarized increases for other performance facets such as the findings from 11 meta-analytic studies overall j ob performance and task performance published between 1990 and 2000 that (Dudley et al., 2006). addressed the relationship between person­ One personality-related framework that ality and job performance. The estimated received increasing research attention during true-score correlations between personality the past decade refers to individuals' core and overall job performance ranged between self-evaluations. Judge et al. (1998) charac­ 0.08 and 0.22 for emotional stability, 0.09 terized core self-evaluations as 'fundamental, 436 subconscious conclusions individuals reach responsibility for outcomes of the work, and about themselves, other people, and the knowledge of the actual results of the work world' (Judge et aI., 1998: 18; cf. also Judge activities). Additionally, they proposed that et aI., 1997). Core self-evaluations comprise individual growth need strength moderates an individual's self-esteem, generalized self­ these relationships. efficacy, locus of control, and emotional Most of the empirical work based on stability. Meta-analytic evidence suggests that the JCM focused on task performance and these core self-evaluations are related to job overall job performance. Meta-analytic find­ performance (Judge and Bono, 2001). More ings showed small, but positive associations specifically, self-esteem showed a corrected between job characteristics and job perfor­ correlation of 0.26 with job performance. For mance. Fried and Ferris (1987) reported generalized self-efficacy, locus of control and corrected mean correlations between job emotional stability the corrected correlations performance and feedback, autonomy, task were 0.23,0.22, and 0.19 respectively. identity, and skill variety of 0.22,0.18,0.13, Thus, empirical data show that personality and 0.09 respectively, based on data from is related to job performance. However, eight studies (N = 1,091) and between job overall the effect sizes are relatively small, performance and task significance of 0.14 particularly in comparison to cognitive ability based on seven studies (N = 1,031). However, predictors. the data also suggested the existence of moder­ ators between autonomy and task significance Situation-specific variables: work on the one hand and job performance on the other hand. In a meta-analysis based characteristics and job design on data from 18 studies (N = 6,291), Job performance is not only influenced by Spector (1986) reported an adjusted mean person-specific variables such as general correlation of 0.26 (corrected for umeliability mental abilities, but also by characteristics of the measures) between autonomy and job of the situation in which the performance performance. Concerning mediating effects occurs. Research on situational antecedents of the assumed psychological states in the of job performance addresses workplace job characteristics-performance relationships factors that enhance as well as potentially inconclusive results were reported in the hinder petformance, and includes research on mentioned meta-analyses. Additionally, in a leadership and reward systems (e.g. Gerstner review of 26 studies, only weak support was and Day, 1997; Podsakoff et aI., 2006). We found for the assumed moderator effect of now concentrate on workplace factors and individual growth need strength on the rela­ their relationships to job performance. tionships between job characteristics and job The Job Characteristics Model (JCM) is performance (Graen et aI., 1986). Because of a major approach that deals with workplace the cross-sectional character of many studies, factors that enhance performance (Hackman causal interpretations are not warranted, and and Oldham, 1976). The JCM describes the it remains unclear whether better jobs foster relationships between core job characteristics, high petformance, or vice versa. However, critical psychological states and personal and intervention studies showed that job redesign work outcomes. Hackman and Oldham (1976) had positive effects on job performance assumed that core job characteristics (i.e., (Guzzo et aI., 1985; Parker and Turner, 2002), skill variety, task identity, task significance, lending some support to the interpretation that autonomy, and feedback) support the quality well-designed jobs increase performance (for of job performance as well as other outcomes the most recent meta-analysis see Humphrey such as internal work motivation, job satisfac­ et aI., 2007). tion, absenteeism, or turnover by enhancing Although there is empirical evidence for critical psychological states (i.e., experienced a positive relationship between particular meaningfulness of the work, experienced job characteristics and task performance, 437 the specific mechanisms are not yet fully of a task and can additionally reduce effort-to­ understood. Exemplary for the relationship performance expectancies. In a meta-analysis between task autonomy and job performance Villanova and Roman (1993) reported a neg­ Langfred and Moye (2004) discussed moti­ ative, non-significant relationship between vational, informational, and structural mech­ situational constraints and job performance anisms with some mechanisms enhancing but (mean correlation of -0.14 based on 11 other mechanisms impeding performance. studies with N = 9,273). Research on relationships between job In their meta-analysis, LePine et al. (2005) characteristics and contextual or adaptive per­ summarized relationships between various formance is very scarce. However, Chiu and stressors and job performance by classify­ Chen (2005) reported significant associations ing different stressors as hindrance versus between particular job characteristics (i.e., challenge. Hindrance stressors included role skill variety and task significance) and OCB, stressors and situational constraints and were which were partially mediated by intrinsic job negatively related to job performance (cor­ satisfaction. Furthermore, significant relation­ rected mean cOlTelation of -0.20 based on ships were found between autonomy or job 73 studies with N = 14,943). Challenge control and pro active behavior (Ohly et al., stressors on the other hand (e.g., demands, 2006; Parker, 2003; Parker et aI., 1997), which pressure, time urgency, and workload) were were mediated by psychological states such positively related to performance (corrected as control orientation and self-efficacy (Frese mean cOlTelation of 0.12 based on 20 studies, et aI., 2007; Parker et aI., 2006; Speier and N = 3,465). Thus, some stressors hinder Frese, 1997). job performance, but others enhance job Regarding workplace factors that poten­ performance. tially hinder job performance (often called Importantly, these results refer mainly to stressors), much research has focused on task or global performance. Initial studies on role stressors. Role theory suggests that the relationships between stressors and con­ role ambiguity and role conflict deplete job textual performance (namely proactive behav­ performance (Kahn et aI., 1964; see the ior) reported positive relationships between Chapter by Jex in this volume). Meta-analytic time pressure and personal initiative (Fay and findings revealed a negative, non-significant Sonnentag, 2002; Sonnentag, 2003), which is relationship between role ambiguity and job consistent with the results of LePine et al. performance (corrected mean correlations (2005) on challenge stressors. Furthermore, with various performance measures ranging Fay and Sonnentag (2002) reported a positive between -0.04 and -0.28; Tubre and Collins, relationship between situational constraints 2000). The relationship between role conflict (a hindrance stressor) and personal initiative. and job performance was also negative, but Thus, whereas hindrance stressors seem to much smaller than between role ambiguity impede task performance, this does not and performance (corrected mean correlations have to be true for specific aspects of between -0.12 and 0.03 depending on the contextual performance. Perhaps situational performance measure; Tubre and Collins, constraints point to sub-optimalities in the 2000). work organization that elicit attempts for Situational constraints are also negatively improving the situation (Fay et al., 1998). related to job performance (Bacharach and Overall, challenge stressors (e.g. time Bamberger, 1995; Peters and O'Connor, pressure, demands) seem to be positively 1980). Situational constraints refer to prob­ associated with task performance and also lems with machines, incomplete materials with proactive behavior, whereas hindrance or lack of necessary information, and these stressors (e.g. role stressors and situational stressors impede job performance directly constraints) seem to be negatively associated and indirectly: For example, problems with with task performance but possibly positively machines directly hinder the accomplishment with proactive behavior. 438

INTRAINDIVIDUAl CHANGE AND predictors of intraindi vidual change over time. VARIABILITY IN PERFORMANCE In other words, the core question is which variables account for increases (or decreases) Most research discussed in earlier sections in performance over time - relative to the per­ of this chapter adopted a between-person formance of other individuals working under perspecti ve on performance, assuming that similar conditions. Interindividual differences individual performance is rather stable - at relevant for skill acquisition are one core least as long as the work situation does not reason for intraindividual change over time change and as long as no learning occurs. (Ackerman, 1987; Fleishman, 1972). However, researchers have long recognized Murphy (1989) suggested that cognitive that performance is not a stable construct and abilities and other dispositional variables are that within-individual performance variability not uniformly important at all levels of is large (e.g., Ghiselli and Haire, 1960). job tenure. Murphy differentiated between a During the past 10 to 20 years, questions transition stage (e.g., times when an employee regarding within-person performance vari­ is new to ajob or when major aspects of the job ability and change received increased research change) and a maintenance stage (i.e., times attention - a trend that may be, at least when an employee has well learned his or her partially - attributed to the increased avail­ majortasks). During the transition stage, when ability of statistical methods and software new skills must be learned, cognitive abilities programs that allow for analyzing within­ are important for performing well, whereas person variability and change. Research in during maintenance stage, cognitive abilities intraindividual change and variability of will not play a major role for job performance performance is important and interesting for any more, and personality and motivational a number of reasons. First, it promises a more factors become more important. Using meta­ thorough understanding of the performance analyses, Keil and Cortina (2001) showed that phenomenon itself. Second, it examines if the relationship between cognitive ability and performance predictors such as cognitive job performance decreases over time spent ability are uniformly relevant and powerful on a task, supporting the proposition that across various levels of job experience. cognitive ability loses its predictive validity Third, it points to additional, more transient as experience increases (Ackerman, 1987; predictors of performance that can not be Murphy, 1989). captured when approaching performance only Several studies focusing primarily on sales from an individual difference or a job design personnel (for an exception, see Zickar and perspective. Slaughter, 1999) showed that there is sub­ Research on intra-individual variability and stantial interindividual difference in intrain­ change of performance addressed a number of dividual change in performance over time issues. A basic issue is whether individual per­ (Hofmann et al., 1993; Ployhard and Hakel, formance itself is stable over time (Henry and 1998; Thoresen et al., 2004). A few studies Hulin, 1987). Empirical evidence suggests tried to identify predictors of intraindividua1 that individual performance does not only change. For example, Ployhart and Hakel change contingent on job tenure (McDaniel (1998) found that initial performance levels et al., 1988) and - to a small extent - ageing and person-specific predictor variables were processes (Waldman and Avolio, 1986), but related to increases in performance over a two­ also that individuals' rank order with respect year period: Individuals with higher perfor­ to performance changes over time (Hanges mance in the first year tended to increase their et al., 1990; Hofmann et al., 1992): The best sales performance more quickly. Similarly, performers at a given point in time might not persuasion and empathy (self-report measures be the best performers five or ten years later. of others' perceptions) were positively related A related line of research aims at describing to the increase in performance increase. the patterns of change, and identifying Zickar and Slaughter's (1999) study on film 439

directors revealed that those who directed variation in a sample of sales representatives. more films per year showed a higher increase Thus, it is not only important to identify in performance (as rated by external film variables that predict performance change critics) over time, and also demonstrated per­ over longer times, it is also interesting to formance trajectories that were more strongly address performance variability within shorter accelerating. In a study with pharmaceutical time frames. Beal et al. (2005) recently sales representative, Thoresen et al. (2004) offered a theoretical approach to intraindi­ differentiated between employees working vidual performance variability that addresses on a maintenance stage and those working within-person fluctuations of performance on a transitional stage. In the maintenance within relatively short periods of time (e.g., stage, personality factors were not related to over the course of a working day). They changes in performance over time. In the presented a model of episodic performance transition stage, sales representatives high on to describe how immediate affective experi­ agreeableness and low on emotional stability ences are linked to within-person variations were more likely to increase their performance of performance. They defined performance over time. One explanation for this finding is episodes as 'behavioral segments that are that individuals low on emotional stability will thematically organized around organization­ be more concerned in a transitional situation, ally relevant goals and objectives' (p. 1055). and therefore might invest more effort that This model suggests that performance within will lead to better performance. each performance episode is influenced by As a whole, empirical research demon­ a person's general resource level (e.g., strated that individuals differ in their per­ cognitive ability, task-relevant skills) and the formance trajectories, with some individuals momentary allocation of resources. Beal et al. increasing their performance at a faster rate argued that pelformance within an episode is than others. With respect to predictors of impeded when the person does not succeed intraindividual changes, recent studies are in allocating all resources to the primary promising. However, compared to the vast work task and when attention is diverted by amount of studies on person-specific and off-task demands. The authors assumed that situation-specific predictors of interindividual affective experiences - along with distractions differences in performance, research evidence and interruptions that cause specific affective on predictors of intra-individual change in states - are a core source of attentional performance remains limited and not yet demands that interfere with the attentional well-integrated. Clearly, more studies are demands of the primary work tasks. A recent needed that include a broader range of empirical study related to this model provided predictors and that systematically address promising results (Beal et al., 2006). cognitive, non-cognitive, experience-related Taken together, the literature summarized and situational variables and their relative in this section suggests that individual importance. In addition, it appears to be performance is not necessarily stable over helpful to differentiate between maintenance time. We anticipate that with the advance of and transition stages as predictors of the available software that can analyze change, performance change probably differ between more research will be conducted addressing these stages. performance variability and change over time. Most studies on intraindividual change in performance summarized so far refer to changes over longer periods of time (mostly RESEARCH AGENDA months or years - for an exception see Deadrick et al., 1997). However, performance During the past decades research on job may also vary within shorter periods of time. performance has made substantial progress. For example, Stewart and N andkeolyar (2006) Core accomplishments are certainly the dif­ demonstrated substantial weekly performance ferentiation between task performance and 440

contextual performance, the differentiation situation-specific variables affect performance. between various contextual performance con­ Nevertheless, an interesting avenue for structs with a particular focus on proactive future research would be to examine how perfonnance, the emergence of the adaptive performance affects other organizational performance concept, new insights on the phenomena and processes. The core dynamic nature of performance, and the underlying assumption here is that showing understanding of the predictors of perfor­ specific performance behaviors may predict mance, particularly person-specific predic­ individual orientations, behaviors, or even tors. Nonetheless, many questions still remain knowledge (Seibert et al., 2001). Similarly, unanswered. In this section, we suggest some experiencing oneself as someone who avenues for future research. performs well, or being perceived as Adaptive performance is an interesting demonstrating high performance levels, may concept that receives increasing research also influence specific behaviors (Sonnentag attention (Griffin et al., 2007; Pulakos et al., and Volmer, in press). More theoretical 2000). Conceptual refinements and improved work is needed that specifies how objective measures are important: Compared to other performance levels, as well as subjective aspects of job performance (particularly task perceptions of performance, influence other performance), little is known about predic­ organizationally relevant processes. tors of adaptive performance. This applies A related question concerns possible effects both to person-specific and situation-specific of task performance on contextual and predictors. adaptive performance. As past research has With respect to situational variables as aimed at a differentiation between these three predictors of job performance, future research performance aspects (Griffin et al., 2007), the may address several issues. First, more question how task performance might influ­ research is needed on the processes by which ence contextual and adaptive performance - specific features of the work situation (e.g., and vice versa - has received little research job control) translate into various aspects attention so far. of job perfonnance (Langfred and Moye, Research demonstrated that performance 2004). Second, more focus on job design is a dynamic construct and that performance studies would be helpful in learning about the fluctuates within individuals and changes over causal link between situational variables and time. Comprehensive studies are needed that job perfonnance. Although there is evidence systematically examine the time frames of (e.g., Wall and Clegg, 1981) that job design such fluctuations and changes (Mitchell and results in perfonnance improvement, more James, 2001). Moreover, research on within­ studies are needed that take the recent changes individual variability and change focused on on the nature of work and the context in task performance (for an exception, Sonnen­ which work occurs (e.g., globalization) into tag, 2003). Future studies may also investigate account when testing the impact of job design how contextual and adaptive performance interventions (Holman et al., 2003). Third, fluctuate and change over time (Grant and there is increasing evidence that job stressors Ashford, in press). In addition, as performance do not necessarily impair job performance in general is predicted by person-specific and (LePine et al., 2005), and this is particularly situation-specific variables, it seems to be true for proactive performance (e.g., Fay promising to include both person-specific and and Sonnentag, 2002). More research is situation-specific constructs in the prediction now required that examines how and under of performance fluctuations and change. what conditions job stressors facilitate per­ Long-term changes in performance levels formance - without compromising employee are at least partially caused by learning health and well-being. processes. While there is a tremendous Most studies examining job performance amount of research examining training and investigated how person-specific and learning processes, resulting in improved 441 task performance (Colquitt et al., 2000; performance, that in turn is predicted to facil­ Sonnentag et al., 2004), little is known about itate, and high perlormance in organizational how training impacts contextual and adap­ contexts. tive performance. Because it is increasingly important that employees show pro active and adaptive performance at work, opportunities REFERENCES associated with training approaches should be explored (Frese et al., 2002), as investing in Ackerman, P. L. (1987) 'Individual differences in training and learning is likely a promising skill learning: An integration of psychometric and avenue for increasing contextual and adaptive information processing perspectives', Psychological performance. Bulletin, 102: 3-27. Although many researchers agree that Allworth, E. and Hesketh, B. (1999) 'Construct-oriented biodata: Capturing change-related and contextually performance is a process (CampbeU, 1990; relevant future performance', International Journal of Grant and Ashford, in press), the performance Seledion and Assessment, 7: 97-111. process itself remains a 'grey box.' There Bandura, A. (1997) Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control. are few attempts to disentangle the various New York: Freeman. aspects of the performance process (Frese, Bacharach, S. B. and Bamberger, P. (1995) 'Beyond 2007; Marks et al., 2001; Sonnentag and situational constraints: Job resources inadequacy and Frese, 2002). For example, such approaches individual performance at work', Human Resource specify how the performance process evolves Management Review, 5: 79-102. from goal development, via planning, analysis Barrick, M. R. and Mount, M. K. (1991) 'The big five of the situation, performance execution and personality dimensions and job performance: A meta- analysis', Personnel Psychology, 44: 1-26. monitoring to feedback processing. Much Beal, D. J. Weiss, H. M. Barros, E. and MacDermid, S. M. more research is needed to arrive at a (2005) 'An episodic process model of affective more comprehensive understanding of what influences on performance', Journal of Applied happens while individuals are performing. Psychology, 90: 1054-1068. Beal, D. J., Trougakos, J. P., Weiss, H. M. and Green, S. G. (2006) 'Episodic processes in emotional CONCLUSION labor: Perceptions of affective delivery and regulation strategies', Journal of Applied Psychology, 91: Research onjob performance has come a long 1053-1065 way. Numerous studies have been conducted Bertua, C, Anderson, N. and Salgado, S. R. (2005) 'The that have resulted in a solid knowledge predictive validity of cognitive ability tests: AUK meta- analysis', Journal of Occupational and Organizational base, for example when it comes to the Psychology, 78: 387-409. differentiation between different aspects of Black, J. 5., Mendenhall, M. and Oddou, G. (1991) job performance and person-specific pre­ 'Toward a comprehensive model of international dictors of job performance in general, and adjustment: An integration of mUltiple theoretical task performance in particular. Other areas perspectives', Academy of Management Review, 16: received comparably less attention but schol­ 291-317. ars have demonstrated that there are great Barman, W. C. and Brush, D. H. (1993) 'More progress opportunities for better understanding and toward a taxonomy of managerial performance predicting job performance. For example, requirements', Human Performance, 6: 1-21. situational variables must not be neglected Borman, W. C. and Motowidlo, S. J. (1993) 'Expanding when predictingjob performance. In addition, the Criterion Domain to Include Elements of Contextual Performance', in N. Schmitt and W. researchers increasingly challenge the view Borman (eds), Personnel Selection in Organizations. that job performance is stable over time. New York: Jossey-Bass, pp. 71-98. These different lines of research provide Barman, W. C and Motowidlo, S. J. (1997) 'Task a set of different approaches that scholars performance and contextual performance: The may pursue to ensure a greater knowl­ meaning for personnel selection research', Human edge of the nature and predictors of job Performance, 10: 99-109. 442

Brief, A P. and Motowidlo, S. J. (1986) 'Prosocial Conway, J. M. and Huffcutt, A. I. (1997) 'Psy_ organizational behaviors', Academy of Management chometric properties of multisource performance Review, 11: 710-725. ratings: A meta-analysis of subordinate, supervisor, Brown, K. G., Le, H. and Schmidt, F. L. (2006) 'Specific peer, and self-ratings', Human Performance, 10: aptitude theory revisited: Is there incremental validity 331-360. for training performance?', International Journal of Crant, J. M. (1995) 'The Proactive Personality Scale and Selection and Assessment, 14: 87-100. objective job performance among real estate agents', Burke, R. J. and Ng, E. (2006) 'The changing Journal of Applied Psychology, 80: 532-537. nature of work and organizations: Implications for Dalal, R. S. (2005) 'A meta-analysis of the relationship human resource management', Human Resource between organizational citizenship behavior and Management Review, 16: 86-94. counterproductive work behavior', Journal of Applied Campbell, J. P., Glaser, M. B. and Oswald, F. L. Psychology, 90: 1241-1255. (1996) 'The substantive nature of job performance Deadrick, D. L., Bennett, N. and Russell, C. J. (1997) variability', in K. R. Murphy (ed.), Individual 'Using hierarchical linear modelling to examine Differences and Behavior in Organizations. San dynamic performance criteria over time', Journal of Francisco: Jossey-Bass, pp. 258-299. Management, 23, 745-757. Campbell, C. H., Ford, P., Rumsey, M. G. and Digman, J. M. (1990) 'Personality structure: Emergence Pulakos, E. D. (1990) 'Development of multiple job of the five-factor model', Annual Review of performance measures in a representative sample of Psychology, 41: 417-440. jobs', Personnel Psychology, 43: 277-300. Dudley, N. M., Orvis, K. A., Lebiecke, J. E. and Campbell, J. P. (1990) 'Modeling the Performance Cortina, J. M. (2006) 'A meta-analytic investigation Prediction Problem in Industrial and Organizational of conscientiousness in the prediction of job Psychology', in M. D. Dunnette and L. M. Hough performance: Examining the intercorrelations and (eds), Handbook of Industrial and Organizational the incremental validity of narrow traits', Journal of Psychology. PaloAlto: Consulting Psychologists Press. Applied Psychology, 91, 40-57. Vol. 1: pp. 687-732. Dye, A. D., Reck, M. and McDaniel, M. A (1993) Campbell, J. P., McCloy, R. A., Oppler, S. H. and 'The validity of job knowledge measures', Inter- Sager, C. E. (1993) 'A theory of performance', in national Journal of Selection and Assessment, 1, C. W. Schmitt and W. C. A. Borman (eds), Personnel 153-157. Selection in Organizations. San Francisco: Jossey- Fay, D. and Frese, M. (2001) 'The concepts of personal Bass, pp. 35-70. initiative (PI): An overview of validity studies', Human Chan, D. and Schmitt, N. (2002) 'Situational judgement Performance, 14,97-124. and job performance', Human Performance, 15: Fay, D. and Sonnentag, S. (2002) 'Rethinking the 233-254. effects of stressors: A longitudinal study on personal Chen, G., Thomas, B. and Wallace, J. C. (2005) initiative', Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 'A multilevel examination of the relationships among 7,221-234. training outcomes, mediating regulatory processes, Fay, D., Sonnentag, S. and Frese, M. (1998) 'Stressors, and adaptive performance', Journal of Applied Innovation, and Personal Initiative: Are Stressors Psychology, 90: 827-841. Always Detrimental?', in C. L. Cooper (ed.), Theories Chiu, S.-F. and Chen, H.-L. (2005) 'Relationship of Organizational Stress. Oxford: Oxford University between job characteristics and organizational Press, pp. 170-189. citizenship behavior: The mediational role of job Ferris, G. R. Witt, L. A. and Hochwarter, W. A (2001) satisfaction', Social Behavior and Personality, 33, 'Interaction of social skill and general mental ability 523-540 on job performance and salary', Journal of Applied Clevenger, J., Pereira, G. M. and Wiechmann, D. (2001) Psychology, 86, 1075-1082. 'Incremental validity of situational judgment tests', Fleishman, E. A. (1972) 'On the relation between abil- Journal of Applied Psychology, 86: 410-417. ities, learning, and human performance', American Colquitt, J. A, LePine, J. A. and Noe, R. A. (2000) Psychologist, 27,1017-1032. 'Toward an integrative theory of training motivation: Frese, M. (2007) 'The Psychological Actions and A meta-analytic path analysis of 20 years of research', Entrepreneurial Success: An Action Theory Approach', Journal of Applied Psychology, 85: 678-707. in J. R. Baum, M. Frese and R. A. Baron (eds), Siop Conway, J. M. (1999) 'Distinguishing contextual Organizational Frontiers Series: The Psychology of performance from task performance for managerial Entrepreneurship. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, jobs', Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 3-13. pp. 151-188. 443

Frese, M., Garman, G., Garmeister, K., Halemba, K., Hackman, J. R. and Oldham, G. R. (1976) 'Motivation Hortig, A., Pulwitt, T. et al. (2002) Training zur through the design of work: Test of a theory', Erhohung der Eigeninitiative bei Arbeitslosen: Bericht Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, ilber einen Pilotversuch [Training for increasing 16: 250-279. personal initiative in unemployed individuals: Report Hanges, P. J., Schneider, B. and Niles, K. (1990) 'Stability on a pilot study]. Zeitschrift fur Arbeits- und of performance: An interadionist perspective', Organisationspsychologie, 46, 89-97. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75: 658-667.

Frese, M., Garst, H. and Fay, D. (2007) 'Making Things Harris, M. M. and Schaubroeck, J. (1988) I A meta- Happen: Reciprocal Relationships Between Work analysis of self-supervisor, self-peer, and peer- Characteristics and Personal Initiative in a four-wave supervisor ratings', Personnel Psychology, 41: 43-62. longitudinal structural equation model', Journal of Hattrup, K., Q'(onnell, M. S. and Wingate, P. H. Applied Psychology, 92: 1084-1102. (1998) 'Prediction of multidimensional criteria: Frese, M., Kring, W., Soose, A and Zempel, J. (1996) Distinguishing task and contextual performance. 'Personal initiative at work: Differences between Human Performance, 11: 305-319. East and West Germany', Academy of Management Henry, R. A. and Hulin, C. L. (1987) 'Stability of skilled Journal, 39: 37-63. performance across time: Some generalizations and Fried, Y. and Ferris, G. R. (1987) 'The validity of the job limitations on uti lities', Journal ofApplied Psychology, characteristics model: A review and meta-analysis', 72: 457-462. Personnel Psychology, 40: 287-322. Hesketh, B. and Neal, A. (1999) 'Technology and Gerstner, C. R. and Day, D. V. (1997) 'Meta-analytic Performance', in D. R. ligen and E. D. Pulakos (eds), review of leader-member exchange theory: Correlates The Changing Nature of Performance: Implications and construct issues', Journal of Applied Psychology, for Staffing, Motivation, and Development. San 82: 827-844. Francisco: Jossey-Bass, pp. 21-55. Ghiselli, E. E. and Haire, M. (1960) 'The validation Hofmann, D. A., Jacobs, R. and Baratta, J. E. (1993) of selection tests in the light of the dynamic 'Dynamic criteria and the measurement of change', character of criteria', Personnel Psychology, 13: Journal of Applied Psychology, 78: 194-204. 225-231. Hofmann, D. A., Jacobs, R. and Gerras, S. J. (1992) Graen, G. B., Scandura, T. A. and Graen, M. R. (1986) 'Mapping individual performance over time', Journal 'A field experimental test of the moderating effects of Applied Psychology, 77: 185-195. of growth need strength on productivity', Journal of Holman, D., Wall, T. D., Clegg, C. W., Sparrow, P. and Applied Psychology, 71: 484-491. Howard, A. (2003) The New Workplace: A Guide Grant, A M. and Ashford, S. J. (in press) 'The Dynamics to the Human Impact of Modern Working Practices. of Proactivity at Work', Research in Organizational Chichester: Wiley. Behavior. Hunter, J. E. and Hunter, R. F. (1984) 'Validity and Griffin, M. A, Neal, A. and Neale, M. (2000) 'The utility of alternative predictors of job performance', contribution of task performance and contextual Psychological Bulletin, 96: 72-98. performance to effectiveness: Investigating the role Johnson, J. W. (2001) 'The relative importance oftask of situational constraints', Applied Psychology: An and contextual performance dimensions to supervisor International Review, 49: 479-497. judgments of overall performance', Journal ofApplied Griffin, M. A., Neal, A and Parker, S. K. (2007) 'A new Psychology, 86: 984-996. model of work role performance: Positive behavior in Judge, T. A and Bono, J. E. (2001) 'Relationship of uncertain and interdependent contexts', Academy of core self-evaluation traits - self-esteem, generalized Management Journal, 50: 327-347. self-efficacy, locus of control, and emotional Griffin, B. and Hesketh, B. (2003) 'Adaptable behaviours stability -with job satisfaction and job performance: for successful work and career adjustment', A meta-analysis', Journal of Applied Psychology, 86: Australian Journal of Psychology, 55: 65-73. 80-92. Griffin, B. and Hesketh, B. (2004) 'Why openness Judge, T. A, Locke, E. A. and Durham, C. C. (1997) to experience is not a good predictor of job 'The dispositional causes of job satisfaction: A core performance', International Journal of Selection and evaluations approach', Research in Organizational Assessment, 12: 243-251. Behavior, 19: 151-188. Guzzo, R. A., Jette, R. D. and Katzell, R. A. (1985) Judge, T. A., Locke, E. A., Durham, C. C. and 'The effects of psychologically based intervention Kluger, A N. (1998) 'Dispositional effects on job and programs on worker productivity: A meta-analysis', life satisfaction: The role of core evaluations', Journal Personnel Psychology, 38: 275-291. of Applied Psychology, 83: 17-34. 444

Kahn, R. L., Wolfe, D. M., Quinn, R. P., Snoek, J. D. McCauley, C. D., Ruderman, M. N., Ohlott, P. J. and and Rosenthal, R. A. (1964) Organizational stress: Morrow, J. E. (1994) 'Assessing the developmental Studies in role conflict and ambiguity. New York: components of managerial jobs', Journal of Applied Wiley. Psychology, 79, 544-560. Kanfer, R. and Ackerman, P. L. (2005) 'Work McCrae, R. R. and Costa, P. T. Jr. (1989) 'The structure competence: A Person-Oriented Perspective', in of interpersonal traits: Wiggins's circumplex and the A. J. Elliot and C. S. Dweck (eds), Handbook of five-factor model', Journal of Personality and Social Competence and Motivation. Guilford Publications, Psychology, 56: 586-595. pp. 336-353. McDaniel, M. A., Morgeson, F. P. and Finnegan, F. B. Kanfer, R. and Kantrowitz, T. M. (2002) 'Ability (2001) 'Use of situational judgment tests to predict and Non-Ability Predictors of Performance', in job performance: A clarification of the literature', S. Sonnentag (ed.), Psychological Management Journal of Applied Psychology, 86: 730-740. of Individual Performance. Chichester: Wiley, McDaniel, M. A., Schmidt, F. L. and Hunter, J. E. pp. 27-50. (1988) 'Job experience correlates of job per- Keil, C. T. and Cortina, J. M. (2001) 'Degradation of formance', Journal of Applied Psychology, 73: validity over time: A test and extension of Ackerman's 327-330. model', Psychological Bulletin, 127: 673-697. Mitchell, T. R. and James, L. R. (2001) 'Building better Langfred, C. W. and Moye, N. A (2004) 'Effects of theory: Time and the specification of when things task autonomy on performance: An extended model happen', Academy of Management Review, 26: considering motivational, informational, and struc- 530-547. tural mechanisms', Journal of Applied Psychology, 89: Morrison, E. W. and Phelps, C. C. (1999) 'Taking 934-945. charge at work: Extrarole efforts to initiate workplace LePine, J. A. (2003) 'Team adaptation and postchange change', Academy of Management Journal, 42: performance: Effects of team composition in terms of 403-419. members' cognitive ability and personality', Journal Motowidlo, S. J., Barman, W. C. and Schmit, M. J. of Applied Psychology, 88: 27-39. (1997) 'A theory of individual differences in task and LePine, J. A, Erez, A and Johnson, D. E. (2002) contextual performance', Human Performance, 10: 'The nature and dimensionality of organizational 71-83. citizenship behavior: A critical review and meta- Motowidlo, S. J. and Schmit, M. J. (1999) 'Performance analysis', Journal of Applied Psychology, 87: 52-65. Assessment in Unique Jobs', in D. R. ligen and LePine, J. A, Podsakoff, N. P. and LePine, M. A. E. D. Pulakos (eds), The Changing Nature of Job (2005) 'A meta-analytic test ofthe challenge stressor- Performance: Implications for Staffing, Motivation, hindrance stressor framework: An explanation for and Development. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-8ass, inconsistent relationships among stressors and pp. 56-86. performa nce', Academy of Management Journal, 48: Motowidlo, S. J. and Van Scatter, J. R. (1994) 'Evidence 764-775. that task performance should be distinguished LePine, J. A. and Van Dyne, L. (2001) 'Voice and coop- from contextual performance', Journal of Applied erative behavior as contrasting forms of contextual Psychology, 79: 475-480. performance: Evidence of differential relationships Mount, M. K., Judge, T. A, Scullen, S. E., Sytsma, M. R. with big five personality characteristics and cog- and Hezlett, S. A. (1998) 'Trait, rater and level nitive ability', Journal of Applied Psychology, 86: effects in 360-degree performance ratings', Personnel 326-336. Psychology, 51: 557-576. London, M. and Mone, E. M. (1999) 'Continuous Murphy, K. R. (1989) 'Is the relationship between Learning', in D. R. ligen and E. D. Pulakos (eds), cognitive ability and job performance stable over The Changing Nature of Performance: Implications time?', Human Performance, 2: 183-200. for Staffing, Motivation, and Development. San Murphy, P. R. and Jackson, S. E. (1999) 'Managing Francisco: Jossey-Bass, pp. 119-153. Work Role Performance. Challenging the Twenty- Mabe, P. A. and West, S. G. (1982) 'Validity of self- First Century Organizations and Their Employees', in evaluation of ability: A review and meta-analysis', D. R. ligen and E. D. Pulakos (eds), The Changing Journal of Applied Psychology, 67: 280-296. Nature of Performance: Implications for Staffing, Marks, M. A, Mathieu, J. E. and Zaccaro, S. J. (2001) Motivations, and Development. San Francisco: 'A temporally based framework and taxonomy of Jossey-Bass, pp. 325-365. team processes', Academy of Management Review, Ohly, S., Sonnentag, S. and Pluntke, F. (2006) 26: 356-376. 'Routinization, work characteristics and their 445

relationships with creative and proactive behaviors', and empirical literature and suggestions for future Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27: 257-279. research', Journal of Management, 26: 513-563. Olea, M. M. and Ree, M. 1. (1994) 'Predicting pilot and Pritchard, R. D. (1992) 'Organizational Productivity', in navigator criteria: Not much more than g', Journal of M. D. Dunnette and L. M. Hough (eds), Handbook Applied Psychology, 79: 845-851. of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 3 Organ, D. W. (1988) Organizational citizenship behav- (2nd ed.). Palo Alto: Consulting Psychologists Press, ior: The Good Soldier Syndrome. Lexington, MA: pp. 443-471. Lexington. Pulakos, E. D., Arad, S., Donovan, M. A. and Organ, D. W. (1997) 'Organizational citizenship behav- Plamondon, K. E. (2000) 'Adaptability in the ior: It's construct clean-up time', Human Performance, workplace: Development of a taxonomy of adaptive 10: 85-97. performance', Journal of Applied Psychology, 85: Organ, D. W. and Ryan, K. (1995) 'A meta-analytic 612-624. review of attitudinal and dispositional predictors Pulakos, E. D., Schmitt, N., Dorsey, D. W., Arad, S., of organizational citizenship behavior', Personnel Hedge, J. W. and Barman, W. C. (2002) Psychology, 48: 775-802. 'Predicting adaptive performance: Further tests of Parker, S. K. (2003) 'Longitudinal effects of lean a model of adaptability', Human Performance, 15: production on employee outcomes and the mediating 299-323. role of work characteristics', Journal of Applied Quinones, M. A., Ford, J. K. and Teachout, M. S. Psychology, 88: 620-634. (1995) 'The relationship between work experience Parker, S. K. and Turner, N. (2002) 'Work design and job performance: A conceptual and meta-analytic and individual work performance: Research findings reView', Personnel Psychology, 48: 887-910. and an agenda for future inquiry', in S. Sonnentag Ree, M. J., Carretta, T. R. and Steindl, J. R. (2001) (ed.), The Psychological Management of Individual 'Cognitive ability', in D. 5. O. N. Anderson, H. K. Performance: A Handbook in the Psychology of the Sinangil and C. Viswesvaran (eds), Handbook of Management of Organizations. Chichester: Erlbaum, Industrial, Work, and Organizational Psychology. pp. 69-93. London: Sage. Vel. 1: pp. 219-232. Parker, S. K., Wall, T. D. and Jackson, P. R. (1997) Ree, M. J., Earles, J. A. and Teachout, M. 5. (1994) , "That's not my job": Developing flexible employee 'Predicting job performance: Not much more than g', work orientations', Academy of Management Journal, Journal of Applied Psychology, 79: 518-524. 40: 899-929. Reeve, C. L. (2004) 'Differential ability antecedents Parker, S. K., Williams, H. M. and Turner, N. (2006) of general and specific dimensions of declarative 'Modelling the antecedents of proactive behavior at knowledge', Intelligence, 32: 621-652. work', Journal of Applied Psychology, 91: 636-652. Roe, R. A. (1999) 'Work performance: A mUltiple Peters, L. H. and O'Connor, E. J. (1980) 'Situational regulation perspective', in C. L. Cooper and constraints and work outcomes: The influences of I. T. Robertson (eds), International Review of a frequently overlooked construct', Academy of Industrial and Organizational Psychology. Chichester: Management Review, 5: 391-397. Wiley. Vol. 14: pp. 231-335. Pike, C. (2006) 'Mergers and acquisitions: Managing Salgado, J. F., Anderson, N., Moscoso, S., Bertua( c.( culture and human resources', Personnel Psychology, de Fruyt, F. and Rolland, J. P. (2003) 'A meta-analytic 59: 480-484. study of general mental ability validity for different Ployhard, R. E. and Hakel, M. D. (1998) 'The substantive occupations in the European community'( Journal of nature of performance variability: Predicting interindi- Applied Psychology, 88: 1068-1081. vidual differences in intraindividual performance', 5algado, J. F., Viswesvaran, C. and Ones, D. S. Personnel Psychology, 51: 859-901. (2001) 'Predictors Used for Personnel selection: An Podsakoff, P. M., Bommer, W. H., Podsakoff, N. P. OveNiew of Constructs, Methods and Techniques', and MacKenzie, S. B. (2006) 'Relationships between in N. Anderson, D. S. Ones, H. K. Sinangil and leader reward and punishment behavior and C. Viswesvaran (eds), Handbook of Industrial, Work subordinate attitudes, perceptions, and behaviors: and Organizational Psychology. London: Sage. Vol. 1: A meta-analytic review of existing and new pp. 165-199. research', Organizational Behavior and Human Salgado, S. R., Anderson, N., Moscoso, 5., Bertua, C. Decision Processes, 99: 113-142. and DeFruyt, F. (2003) 'International validity gener- Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Paine, J. B. and alization of GMA and cognitive abilities: A European Bachrach, D. G. (2000) 'Organizational citizenship community meta-analysis', Personnel Psychology, 56: behaviors: A critical review of the theoretical 573-605. 446

Schmidt, F. L. and Hunter, J. (2004) 'General mental wrong', Current Directions in Psychological Science, ability in the work of work: Occupational attainment 2: 1-5. and job performance', Journal of Personality and Stewart, G. L. and Nandkeolyar, A. K. (2006) 'Adaptation Social Psychology, 86: 162-173. and intraindividual variation in sales outcomes: Schmidt, F. L., Hunter, J. E. and Outerbridge, A. N. Exploring the interactive effect of personality and (1986) 'Impact of job experience and ability on environmental opportunity', Personnel Psychology, job knowledge, work sample performance, and 59: 307-332. supervisory ratings of job performance', Journal of Sturman, M. c. (2003) 'Searching for the inverted Applied Psychology, 71: 432-439. u-shaped relationship between time and performance: Seibert, S. E., Kraimer, M. L. and Crant, J. M. (2001) Meta-analyses of the experience/performance, tenure/ 'What do proactive people do? A longitudinal model performance, and age/performance relationships', linking proactive personality and career success', Journal of Management, 29: 609-640. Personnel Psychology, 54: 845-874. Tesluk, P. E. and Jacobs, R. R. (1998) 'Towards an Smith, E. M., Ford, J. K., Kozlowski, S. W. J., Quinones, integrated model of work experience', Personnel M. A. and Ehrenstein, A. (1997) 'Building Adaptive Psychology, 51: 321-355. Expertise: Implications for Training Design Strategies', Thompson, J. A. (2005) 'Proactive personality and job in Training for a Rapidly Changing Workplace: Appli- performance: A social capital perspective', Journal of cations of Psychological Research. Washington, D.e.: Applied Psychology, 90: 1011-1017. American Psychological Association, pp. 89-118. Thoresen, C. J., Bradley, J. c., Bliese, P. B. and Thoreson, Sonnentag, S. (2003) 'Recovery, work engagement, J. D. (2004) 'The big five personality traits and and proactive behavior: A new look at the interface individual job performance growth trajectories in between nonwork and work', Journal of Applied maintenance and transitional job stages', Journal of Psychology, 88: 518-528. Applied Psychology, 89: 835-853. Sonnentag, S. and Frese, M. (2002) 'Performance Tubre, T. C. and Collins, J. M. (2000) 'Jackson and concepts and performance theory', in S. Sonnentag Schuler (1985) revisited: A meta-analysis of the (ed.), Psychological Management of Individual relationships between role ambiguity, role conflict, Performance. Chichester: Wiley, pp. 3-25. and job performance', Journal of Management, 26: Sonnentag, S., Niessen, C. and Ohly, S. (2004) 'Learning 155-169. at work: Training and development', in C. L. Cooper Van Dyne, L. and LePine, J. A. (1998) 'Helping and and I. T. Robertson (eds), International Review of voice extra-role behaviors: Evidence of construct and Industrial and Organizational Psychology. Chichester: predictive validity', Academy of Management Journal, Wiley, Vol. 19: pp. 249-289. 41: 108-119. Sonnentag, S. and Volmer, J. (in press) 'Individual-level Van Scotter, J. R. and Motowidlo, S. J. (1996) predictors of task-related teamwork processes: The 'Interpersonal facilitation and job dedication as role of expertise and self-efficacy in team meetings', separate facets of contextual performance', Journal Group and Organization Management. of Applied Psychology, 81 : 525-531. Spearman, C. (1904) 'General intelligence, objectively Van Scotter, J. R., Motowidlo, S. J. and Cross, T. C. determined and measured', American Journal of (2000) 'Effects of task performance and contextual Psychology, 15: 201-293. performance on systemic rewards', Journal of Applied Spector, P. E. (1986) 'Perceived control by employees: Psychology, 85: 526-535. A meta-analysis of studies concerning autonomy Villa nova, P. and Roman, M. A. (1993) 'A meta- and participation at work', Human Relations, 39: analytic review of situational constraints and 1005-1016. work-related outcomes: Alternative approaches to Speier, C. and Frese, M. (1997) 'Generalized self- conceptualization', Human Resource Management efficacy as a mediator and moderator between control Review, 3: 147-175. and complexity at work and personal initiative: Viswesvaran, c., Ones, D. S. and Schmidt, F. L. A longitudinal field study in East Germany', Human (1996) 'Comparative analysis of the reliability of job Performance, 10: 171-192. performance ratings', Journal of Applied Psychology, Sternberg, R. J. (1997) 'Tacit knowledge and job 81: 557-574. success', in N. Anderson and P. Herriot (eds), Viswesvaran, c., Schmidt, F. L. and Ones, D. S. International Handbook of Selection and Assessment. (2005) 'Is there a general factor in ratings of London: Wiley, pp. 201-213. job performance? A meta-analytic framework for Sternberg, R. J. and Wagner, R. K. (1993) 'The disentangling substantive and error influences', g-ocentric view of intelligence and job performance is Journal of Applied Psychology, 90: 108-131. 441

Waldman, D. A. and Avolio, B. J. (1986)'A meta-analysis of expectations of co-worker performance', of age differences in job performance', Journal of Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61: Applied Psychology, 71: 33-38. 570-581. Wall, T. D. and (Iegg, C. W. (1981) 'A longitudinal Woehr, D. J., Sheehan, M. K. and Bennett, W. (2005) field study of group work redesign', Journal of 'Assessing measurement equivalence across rating Occupational Behavior, 2: 31-49. sources: A multitrait-multirater approach', Journal of Werner, J. (1994) 'Dimensions that make a difference: Applied Psychology, 90: 592-600. Examining the impact of in-role and extra-role Zickar, M. J. and Slaughter, J. E. (1999) 'Examining behaviors on supervisory ratings', Journal of Applied creative performance over time using hierarchical Psychology, 79: 98-107. linear modelling: An illustration using film directors', Williams, K. D. and Karau, S. J. (1991) 'Social Human Performance, 12: 211-230. loafing and social compensation: The effects