Category Archives: Job Performance
Effects of training and coaching on job performance (IO Psychology)
In a study examining the impact of a combination of classroom training and tele-coaching on job performance, 115 workers were evaluated, and 73 were randomly assigned to the experimental group and 42 to the control group. Both the experimental and control groups were given pre and post surveys that evaluated demographic characteristics and included a performance strategy inventory – which was created for the purpose of this study – that assessed the efficacy of responses to stressful situations and the level of impact stressful situations had on job performance. While the subjects in the control group received nothing else, the experimental group received training on locus of control and its relationship to performance, goal setting, stress-reduction techniques, and creating action plans. Additionally, the experimental group engaged in a 30-minute tele-coaching session. Relative to the control group, the experimental group were better able to problem solve, better able to respond to criticism, more flexible in responding to changing priorities, more capable of dealing with tight deadlines, and better at expressing themselves.
Job Performance – Predictors of Mood
If you want happy employees, give them important tasks within their range of abilities, according to a study by Cynthia D. Fisher of Bond University, Amirali Minbashian of the University of New South Wales, Nadin Beckmann of Durham University, & Robert E. Wood of the University of Melbourne. More specifically, the results of the study indicated that the importance of a task and the employee’s confidence about completing the task predicted whether an employee would experience positive or negative emotions. If the task was important and the employee felt that she could complete it effectively, she had an increase in positive emotions. On the other hand, if the task was important and the employee felt that she could not complete it effectively, she had an increase in negative emotions.
This result was found on a study of 135 middle managers from airline, banking, broadcasting, insurance, and packaging industries. These employees reported the importance of the task that they were working on (e.g., “How important is it that you complete this task effectively?”), their confidence in being able to effectively complete the task (e.g., “How confident are you that you can complete this task effectively?”), and their current mood fives times per day for three weeks (e.g., happy, content, stressed, frustrated). Though these results are important for any employer to know, they are especially relevant for those in the fields of industrial and organizational psychology, human resource management, organizational development, and organizational management.
The curious case of the employee’s declining performance (Human Resource Management)
Individuals who are curious and creative – traits within the openness to experience personality dimension – have a slower decline in job performance than those who are less curious and imaginative, according to a study by Amirali Minbashian and Joanne Earl of the University of New South Wales and Jim E.H. Bright of the Australian Catholic University. After about three years, most employees’ performance begins to decline, but the decline of those more open to experiences started later and progressed at a slower rate.
This study examined the relationship between openness and job trajectory of 129 new employees over a four-year period. Fifteen items from the Congruence Personality Scale-2 measured openness, and supervisor rating on a single-item five-point performance scale assessed performance. So, if you want to invest in the long-term, select employees who score high on openness!
Job Commitment and Performance (IO Psychology)
Job involvement is related to both in-role job performance and organizational citizenship behavior, according to an investigation by Aamir Ali Chughtai of Dublin City University. Job involvement relates to the employee’s level of commitment, in-role job performance refers to how well an employee performs the formal job requirements, and organizational citizenship is an umbrella term for roles or functions that an employee takes on that are not part of his or her formal job requirements.
Specifically, the results indicated a medium positive correlation between job commitment and in-role job performance and job commitment and organizational citizenship. The sample consisted of 195 teachers from over fifty universities in Pakistan, and the job-involvement scale measured its namesake, a measure created for the purpose of this study assessed in-role performance, and items from the Chinese citizenship behaviour scale and Organizational citizenship behaviour scale measured Organizational citizenship behavior.
Bad Behavior At Work: Are Managers Asking For It? (IO Psychology)
Topic: Counter-Productive Work Behavior, Leadership, Job Performance
Publication: Journal of Applied Psychology (January, 2013)
Article: Blaming the Organization for Abusive Supervision: The Roles of Perceived Organizational Support and Supervisor’s Organizational Embodiment
Authors: M.K. Shoss, R. Eisenberger, S.L.D. Restubog, T.J. Zagenczyk
Reviewed By: Ben Sher, M.A.
Counterproductive work behaviors (CWBs) occur when employees do things that go against organizational goals. For example, stealing, bullying, unnecessary absence, swivel chair racing, beer pong in the break room, and assaulting the copy machine with a baseball bat when it is out of toner are all classified as counterproductive work behaviors. I-O psychology research has typically tried to predict which type of person will engage in these devious behaviors. However, a recent study by Shoss, et al. (2013) has found that certain organizations may also be causing an increase in bad behavior.
What do organizations do that leads to these detrimental outcomes? The study found that abusive supervision by bosses is to blame. Abusive supervision occurs when managers belittle their employees or treat them badly. When this happens, employees have lower perception of organizational support, meaning employees do not feel that the organization cares about them or values their contributions. The feeling that the organization doesn’t care was exacerbated when employees think that the abusive supervisor embodies the entire organization’s attitudes about employees, and is not merely driven by independent personal motives.
So if abusive supervision makes employees believe the organization does not care about them, what happens then? Employees may choose to engage in behavior that is counterproductive to the organization as a means of revenge against the organization. The study also found that job performance may decrease. This includes lower performance for parts of the job that are formally included in job requirements (in-role performance) as well as parts of the job that are not included in job requirements (extra-role performance). Once again, when employees perceive that the abusive supervisor embodies the entire organization, these findings were all strengthened.
What can we learn from this? Organizations that want to reduce counterproductive work behavior and improve their employees’ performance should not view these outcomes as being entirely dependent on the employees. Organizations play a large role in fostering the kind of behavior that they seek. This study highlights the detriments of abusive supervision, especially when it appears that the supervisor who delivers the abuse is representing the organization as a whole. For best results, leaders should strive to emphasize that abuse is not valued by the organization and that abusive supervisors will not be tolerated.
human resource management, organizational industrial psychology, organizational management
source for picture: http://www.freedigitalphotos.net/images/Business_People_g201-Stressed_Man_Portrait_Isolated_On_White_Background_p76018.html
When Customers Attack: Verbal Aggression and Employee Performance (IO Psychology)
Topic: Job Performance, Training, Conflict
Publication: Journal of Applied Psychology (SEPT 2012)
Article: When Customers Exhibit Verbal Aggression, Employees Pay Cognitive Costs
Authors: A. Rafaeli, A. Erez, S. Ravid, R. Derfler-Rozin, D.E. Treister, R. Scheyer
Reviewed By: Ben Sher
What happens when customers get angry? For starters, they may yell, scream, pound their fists, emit a plume of smoke from their ears, and occasionally rip off their t-shirts like Hulk Hogan. But then what happens to the employees? Research by Rafaeli, et al. (2012) examines the negative effect this kind of behavior has on the people working behind the counter.
The researchers conducted four experiments and found that employees’ performance suffers when customers become verbally aggressive. Under these circumstances, employees will have a harder time remembering things and have worse perception. Why? Exposure to anger requires people to make sense of why someone is angry. It also requires people to plan a response to dealing with the anger. These processes use up valuable mental resources, which are best reserved for focusing on the job at hand.
Another reaction that anger causes is a state of arousal, which happens any time people are faced with a threat. When this happens, employees focus their attention on the angry customer and lose sight of the task at hand. When people perceive a threat, they also may be more likely to retaliate, even when it is not a beneficial reaction.
These findings became even stronger when customers were considered high status. This means that employees became even more distracted by aggression from the biggest-spending customers, arguably the people whose satisfaction is most important. On the other hand, the findings of this study became weaker when employees were able to engage in “perspective taking”, which is the ability to consider and understand the viewpoint of another person. In this situation, understanding why the customer is angry leads to patience, while also freeing up mental resources.
What can be done to counter the harmful effects of customer aggression? The researchers emphasize the importance of training to deal with verbal aggression. They say that training to deal with anger needs to occur at the same time employees train for other job components. This makes the anger training more naturalistic. Treating anger as a separate topic with no context might be ineffective when real-life situations arise. Finally, training may want to include strategies for perspective-taking, which might be the best antidote for the angry customer.
human resource management, organizational industrial psychology, organizational management
A new rating scale for multisource feedback (IO Psychology)
Topic: Feedback, Job Performance, Measurement
Publication: Personnel Psychology (AUTUMN 2012)
Article: Evidence for the effectiveness of an alternative multisource performance rating methodology
Authors: B. J. Hoffman, C. A. Gorman, C. A. Blair, J. P. Meriac, B. Overstreet, & E. K. Atchley
Reviewed by: Alexandra Rechlin
Do you receive multisource feedback (also called 360 degree feedback) at work? Based on its extreme popularity, my guess is that you do. An important question, therefore, is how to make the ratings more accurate and thus more informative for development. Brian Hoffman and his colleagues recently conducted two studies in which they developed and evaluated the efficacy of a new type of scale, called frame-of-reference scales (FORS), to use in multisource feedback systems.
FORS start with a definition of the dimension being rated, as well as examples of both effective and ineffective behavior for that dimension. The actual items are then presented. FORS differ from normal rating scales in that a definition and behavioral examples are provided. In this way, FORS are similar to frame-of-reference training, except that the information is presented in written format along with the items (as opposed to being provided in a training program). FORS are different from behaviorally anchored rating scales (BARS) in that BARS link specific behaviors with each scale point (whereas FORS provide examples of effective and ineffective behavior).
The authors compared FORS with standard rating scales (which were similar to behavioral observation scales) and found that using FORS increased accuracy and led to greater differentiation among dimensions. When compared to frame-of-reference training, using FORS led to similar levels of accuracy. FORS therefore seem to be an important development in the improvement of multisource feedback ratings; FORS lead to increased accuracy and are not as expensive or time-consuming as BARS and frame-of-reference training.
human resource management, organizational industrial psychology, organizational management
Does Asking For Help Lead to High Performance? (IO Psychology)
Topic: Learning, Personality, Job Performance
Publication: Journal of Applied Psychology (MAR 2012)
Article: The Impact of Help Seeking on Individual Task Performance: The Moderating Effect of Help Seekers’ Logics of Action
Authors: D. Geller, P.A. Bamberger
Reviewed By: Ben Sher
Help, I need somebody! When employees get stuck trying to complete a task, asking for help seems to be the surest way to solve the problem. But does asking for help lead to better job performance? According to Geller and Bamberger (2012), the answer is that it depends on who you are and why you are asking for help in the first place.
The researchers explain the difference between two reasons why a person may ask for help. The first is called dependent help-seeking logic. This is when a person is focused primarily on completing the task at hand as fast as possible, and is not necessarily concerned about developing long-term skills and abilities. Because people using this kind of logic pay little attention to the solution, they will likely ask for help the next time they are faced with a similar problem.
The other type is called autonomous help-seeking logic. This is when a person asks for help because of an inner desire to become competent at the task. When people use this logic, they are more likely to learn the solution to the problem, and will not need assistance next time they are confronted with the same problem.
So which kind of help-seeking logic leads to better job performance? After conducting a study of call-center employees, the researchers found that people who are usually autonomous help-seekers and people who are rarely dependent help-seekers are associated with better job performance. Practically, this means that people who seek help in order to learn how to do the task themselves are more likely to do better at their jobs.
What do we do with this information? From the perspective of people in helping positions, we might want to be on the lookout for help-seeking people who pay little attention to learning the solution for themselves. Helping these people does not seem to improve their performance in the long run. On the other hand, when we identify someone intent on mastering skills and gaining personal autonomy, helping them out might be a good idea. Investing time in these people may lead them to better job performance.
From the perspective of the help-seeking individual, we ought to ask ourselves what our motivation is when asking for help. If we are asking for help in order to learn and master the solution, we are on the right track. If we are asking for help as a mere shortcut, you might say we are not exactly helping ourselves.
Geller, D., & Bamberger, P.A., (2012). The impact of help seeking on individual task performance: The moderating effect of help seekers’ logics of action. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(2), 487-497.
human resource management, organizational industrial psychology, organizational management
The relationship between job performance and turnover – It’s not as simple as we thought! (IO Psychology)
Topic: Job Performance, Turnover, Culture
Publication: Journal of Applied Psychology (JAN 2012)
Article: The effect of culture on the curvilinear relationship between performance and turnover
Authors: Michael C. Sturman, Lian Shao, & Jan H. Katz
Reviewed by: Alexandra Rechlin
The relationship between job performance and turnover has long been thought to be curvilinear (U-shaped). In other words, the highest and lowest performers are most likely to quit their jobs. Numerous studies have replicated these findings, but these studies were almost entirely conducted in the United States. In a recent article, Michael Sturman and his colleagues investigated the effect that culture may have on the relationship between performance and turnover.
The authors analyzed data from employees in 24 countries. They compared the countries in terms of in-group collectivism, power distance, and uncertainty avoidance. In a culture that is highly collectivistic, people have a strong desire to be part of a group, and group goals are more important than individual ones. Power distance refers to the extent that people in that culture are accepting of unequal power distribution, and uncertainty avoidance is the extent to which a culture’s members are comfortable with uncertainty and risk.
Sturman and his colleagues found that the curvilinear relationship between job performance and turnover didn’t really hold up in some cultures. The U-shaped relationship was weaker (in other words, it’s a much flatter U) for collectivist cultures and for cultures high in power distance and high in uncertainty avoidance. Voluntary turnover was less likely in those cultures than in cultures high in individualism and low in power distance and uncertainty avoidance. The relationship between performance and turnover was stronger (more U-shaped) in cultures that were high in performance orientation.
These findings are important because they indicate that the nature of the relationship between performance and turnover is not the same for all cultures. Therefore, the same HR practices used to reduce turnover may or may not be effective, depending on the country in which they’re used. HR practices (e.g., efforts to encourage turnover of low performers, retention of high performers) should be chosen based on the target culture.
human resource management, organizational industrial psychology, organizational management
Tips for Getting Tips (IO Psychology)
Topic: Job Performance, Personality, Training
Publication: Journal of Applied Psychology (NOV 2011)
Article: Want a Tip? Service Performance as a Function of Emotion Regulation
and Extraversion
Authors: N. Chi, A.A. Grandey, J.A. Diamond, K.R. Krimmel
Reviewed By: Ben Sher
Your restaurant server is quite the professional! He manages a genuine, warm smile despite his impending apartment eviction, recurring car-transmission problems, and the fact that his favorite football team just lost in the playoffs. But to pull that off, your server had to perform something called emotional labor, a crucial topic of interest to IO Psychologists. New research by Chi, Grandey, Diamond, and Krimmel (2011) has found that certain emotional labor strategies are more useful than others, and that sometimes it depends on the type of person using these strategies.
The authors discuss two major strategies for performing emotional labor. The first is called surface acting. This is when employees fake the desired emotions even when those emotions don’t accurately reflect how they feel inside. The other strategy is called deep acting. This is when employees actually change their inner feelings to the desired state by focusing on past experiences. For example, an employee who is in a bad mood might try thinking hard about a time when he was in a happy mood, causing him to project a display of authentic happiness to his customers.
But the two strategies do not always lead to similar results. The researchers found that deep acting by restaurant servers will lead to them receiving more tips and exceeding customer expectations. In a separate study involving simulated call-center employees, the researchers found that deep acting leads to an overall better emotional performance, meaning it is more convincing to the customers. They also discovered that deep acting also leads employees to perform extra-role behaviors, meaning tasks that are not strictly part of someone’s job description but are nevertheless important. The authors explain that deep acting puts employees in a good mood, which makes them more likely to do extra work.
But what about surface acting? The researchers found that surface acting leads to receiving more tips, but only when used by extraverted, outgoing employees. When introverted employees tried surface acting, their overall emotional performance became worse, and was not as convincing to the customers. Specifically, this was true when the introverted employees performed extra-role behaviors. The authors explain that “faking it” strategies like surface acting are particularly exhaustive to introverts, and while introverts may be able to “fake it” while performing their typical duties, their emotional resources may become depleted when asked to perform extra-role behaviors.
The implications of these findings are important for training in any industry that requires contact with customers. Clearly, deep acting is a useful approach to dealing with the demands of emotional labor, and should be the preferred method endorsed during employee training. Surface acting may be an alternative method that works when deep acting is not possible or inconvenient, but only for naturally extraverted employees.
human resource management, organizational industrial psychology, organizational management
