Category Archives: *Journal of Occupational & Organizational Psychology
Effective leadership: I was born (and made) this way!
Topic: Leadership, Human Resource Management
Publication: Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology (JUN 2011)
Article: Great man or great myth? A quantitative review of the relationship between individual differences and leader effectiveness
Authors: Hoffman, B. J., Woehr, D. J., Maldagen-Youngjohn, R., Lyons, B. D.
Reviewed by: Alexandra Rechlin
How many times have you heard or considered the following question: Are leaders born or made? The general consensus is that leaders are both born and made, but which do you think is more influential? This article delves into that issue by comparing many individual differences that could potentially predict leadership effectiveness.
In this meta-analysis, the authors compared 25 individual difference variables by looking at their relationships with leadership effectiveness criteria. Fourteen of the 25 variables had not been reviewed in previous meta-analyses. The individual difference variables were categorized into two groups: trait-like individual differences and state-like individual differences. Trait-like individual differences are those that are more stable, such as personality and intelligence. State-like individual differences are more temporary and can be learned; knowledge and skills are good examples.
The authors found that overall, trait-like and state-like individual differences were fairly similar in their prediction of leadership effectiveness. In other words, according to this meta-analysis, leaders are both born and made to a fairly equal extent. Of the trait-like variables, the best predictors of leadership effectiveness were achievement motivation, energy, dominance, honesty/integrity, self-confidence, creativity, and charisma. Of the state-like variables, the best predictors were interpersonal skills, oral communication, written communication, management skills, problem-solving skills, and decision-making.
Based on this meta-analysis, it appears equally important to pick leaders with certain traits and to develop those leaders by increasing their knowledge and skills.
human resource management,organizational industrial psychology, organizational management
Does Being Proactive in Your Job Positively Relate to Your Performance, Satisfaction, and Commitment? Yes, Yes, and Yes!
Topic: Job Performance, Organizational Commitment
Publication: Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology (JUNE 2010)
Article:Employee proactivity in organizations: A comparative meta-analysis of emergent proactive constructs
Authors: Jeffrey P. Thomas, Daniel S. Whitman, and Chockalingam Viswesvaran
Reviewed by: Mary Alice Crowe-Taylor
Given the dynamic nature of the work environment, being proactive has become necessary for today’s leaders and managers. What does that mean? More specifically, what is Employee Proactivity and what does it lead to? Measuring Employee Proactivity has varied from measuring “proactive personality”, which is considered a steady, natural propensity to direct or control circumstances and dynamically provoke change, to measuring “voice” which measures the tendency to constructively discuss change. Two other ways of measuring it are the self-explanatory variables “personal initiative” and “taking charge”.
In this study, using meta-analysis, these authors analyzed 103 data sets totaling 32,967 participants and empirically determined the relationships between these types of measures of Employee Proactivity and job performance, job satisfaction, organizational commitment as well as: “the big five” personality traits; social networking ability; work experience; age; and general mental ability.
Whew! What a lot of variables! Well, the good news is that the authors were very comprehensive and exacting in their analysis. Employee Proactivity, measured as “proactive personality”, ”taking personal initiative” and “taking charge”, positively correlated with both subjective and objective job performance.
Organizational Attraction – It’s more than the Money!
Topic: Staffing, Culture, Work Environment
Publication: Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology (2010)
Article: Fit with What? The Influence of Multiple Self-Concept Images on Organizational Attraction
Authors: K. P. Nolan, C. M. Harold
Reviewed By: Lauren A. Wood
What attracts a potential employee to a specific organization – salary, benefits, promotion opportunities? Yes, in part, but attraction also stems from something deeper – an employee’s own self-image. Self-image consists primarily of two parts: the actual self (or the compilation of traits and attributes that an individual believes him or herself to possess) and the ideal self (or the collection of traits and attributes that an individual would like to acquire).
According to image congruity theory, customers are likely to purchase products that reflect both their actual as well as ideal self-image. Expanding this theory, individuals on the job hunt should favor organizations that emphasize both actual and ideal self-image qualities of the candidate. But, these same candidates should be the most attracted to organizations which emphasize their ideal self-image qualities, because this should inflate self-esteem by making the candidate feel closer to achieving his or her ideal self-image.
Beware of “Where I used to work, we ….” — It may be a sign of poor fit, low motivation.
Topic: Staffing, Selection, Recruiting, Motivation
Publication: Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology (83)
Article: Disengagement in Work-Role Transitions
Authors: C. Niessen, C. Binnewies, J. Rank
Reviewed By: Lauren A. Wood
Employees are no longer linked to an organization for life, and as a result, there has been an increase in job change in recent years. Researchers studying employees’ adjustment to a job change have suggested that in order to succeed, the new employee must detach or disengage from the previous job and organization. This is especially critical when the employee is psychologically attached to their previous work place and/or work role as is typically the case when the employee has worked in their previous role for a long period of time.
Results from the current study reveal that the more the new employee’s psychologically attachment to their old work-role remains after taking the new job, the less motivated they are to pursue learning in the new position and the less they feel they fit with the new company. However, when an employee actively disengages from their previous job-role, the employee experiences greater perceptions of fit and is more motivated to engage in learning activities on the job.
Organization-based self-esteem: – It’s good for me AND the bottom line.
Topic: Job Satisfaction, Organizational Commitment, Performance
Publication: Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology (SEP 2010)
Article:A meta-analysis of the predictors and consequences of organization-based self esteem.
Authors: Bowling, N. A., Eschleman, K. J., Wang, Q., Kirkendall, C.,& Alarcon, G.
Reviewed by: Charleen Maher
Organization-based self-esteem (OBSE) is a role-specific type of self-esteem that describes employees’ beliefs about their value and competence as a member of an organization – “I’m valued around here!” So, what predicts OBSE in employees and what are the outcomes of experiencing OBSE?
A meta-analysis by Bowling and colleagues found that OSBE is predicted by the dispositional, “hard wired” traits of general self-esteem and self-efficacy (the belief a person has that he/she can achieve goals). Additionally, job complexity, autonomy, perceived organizational support, and social support from managers and coworkers were work conditions that predicted OBSE in employees.
As for outcomes, the present study found that OBSE was positively related to job satisfaction, organizational commitment, job involvement, performance, and organizational citizenship behavior.
Play Hard, Rest Hard and Maximize Your Performance
Topic: Work-Life Balance
Publication: Journal of Occupational and
Organizational Psychology (JUN 2010)
Article: Recovery during the weekend and
fluctuations in weekly job performance: A week-level study examining
intra-individual relationships
Authors: C. Binnewies, S. Sonnentag, and
E.J. Mojza
Reviewed By: Benjamin Granger
We all know that working hard during
the work week is important. But a recent study by Binnewies et al. (2010)
suggests that playing and resting hard over the weekend also plays an important
part in determining employees’ performance at work. Finally, research in support of my Friday afternoon naps and
Saturday golf game!
In their study of white collar
employees in Germany, Binnewies et al. explored factors that contribute to
employees feeling mentally and physically refreshed after the weekend and how
feeling refreshed affects subsequent job performance during the week. The authors suggest that the
opportunity to recover over the weekend is vital for restoring employees’
valuable mental and physical resources that get depleted over the course of the
work week.
Binnewies et al. identified three
contributors to recovery over the weekend: (1) mentally detaching oneself from
work (not thinking about work issues/projects), relaxing, and engaging in non job-related
tasks/projects that allow for personal achievement (e.g., competitive leisure
activity, hobby). Engaging in
these kinds of activities over the weekend helps employees feel refreshed and
recovered at the beginning of the following work week which in turns leads to
better self-reported performance at work, more self-reported organizational
citizenship behaviors and increased personal initiative to complete work tasks.
One potential implication of these
findings is that employees who continue to mentally focus on work during the
weekend in lieu of relaxing and participating in leisure activities may actually
be sabotaging themselves for the following work week. However, Binnewies et al. do mention that it is possible
that recovery during the work week (e.g., in the evenings) may potentially
compensate for lack of recovery over the weekend. Nevertheless, their results support what many of us probably
agree with; that it is vital for employees to replenish their mental and
physical resources in order to perform at a high level.
Finally, while many organizations
already place a heavy focus on work-life balance, it is important for
organizations to promote employees’ recovery while not at work. Studies like this remind us that overburdening
employees with work during non-work times can backfire in terms of reduced
productivity as well as a host of other negative individual (e.g., increased
stress, mental and physical health problems) and organizational outcomes (e.g.,
increased health care costs, increased absenteeism and turnover).
What Makes for a Successful Employee and Why?
Topic: Job Performance, Personality
Publication: Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology (MAR 2010)
Article: Human capital and objective indicators of career success: The mediating effects of cognitive ability and conscientiousness
Authors: T.W.H. Ng and D.C. Feldman
Reviewed By: Benjamin Granger
Career success is important for determining an employee’s well-being, life satisfaction, and can also contribute to organizational success. While it is well known that an employee’s level of education and work experience influences his/her career success, Ng and Feldman suggest that why this relationship exists is unclear.
According to Ng and Feldman, education and work experience are indicators of an employee’s human capital (i.e., competencies possessed by employees that positively influence performance). Such indicators of human capital signal to organizations that employees/job applicants posses valued competencies and will likely be successful on the job.
In a recent meta-analysis, Ng and Feldman argue that education can actually increase employees’cognitive ability which in turn enhances job performance. They argue further that work experience and attaining a high level of formal education leads employees to develop better work habits (i.e., become more conscientious) which is also a well known predictor of job performance.
Ng and Feldman’s results suggest that these indicators of human capital directly and positively influence objective indicators of employee career success (salaries and promotions). However, investments in human capital development also appear to increase employee cognitive ability and conscientiousness and thus affect career success indirectly as well.
Caution: While Ng and Feldman argue that education and work experience lead to cognitive ability and conscientiousness, the opposite could also be the case. This would suggest that smarter and more conscientious people seek out more education and tend to stay with their organizations longer which is also quite plausible and probably true to some degree.
These results lend support to the common practice of screening job applicants based on their education and work experiences prior to testing and/or interviewing. This initial step can save significant time and money and can effectively screen out applicants that do not possess the human capital necessary for successful job performance. Ng and Feldman also suggest that organizations make “tradeoffs” between work experience and education since applicants who attend school longer have fewer opportunities to gain work experience. Weeding out applicants with high levels of education because they do not possess certain work experiences may be cutting applicants who DO possess the necessary human capital for good performance.
Work Hard or Disengage in the Face of Job Insecurity?
Topic: Performance, Turnover
Publication: Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology (MAR 2010)
Article: A model for the effects of job insecurity on performance, turnover intention, and absenteeism
Authors: T. Staufenbiel and C.J. König
Reviewed By: Benjamin Granger
Job insecurity is in the air but how it affects performance is unclear. In a rather timely article on the role of job insecurity and predicting various workplace outcomes (job performance, turnover intentions and absenteeism), Staufenbiel and König (2010) collected data from 152 employees working for a German electronics wholesaler. Past research on job insecurity suggests two basic reasons why job insecurity should relate to performance. Interestingly, they conflict:
(1) Job insecurity leads to poor work attitudes (i.e., job dissatisfaction, lower organizational commitment) which then leads to a decrease in work performance.
(2) Job insecurity leads employees to ‘step up to the plate’ and increase their performance to avoid being laid off (i.e., good performance is considered a safeguard to being fired).
Although these lines of reasoning are at odds with each other, Staufenbiel and König argue that both processes can operate simultaneously and this is indeed what they found in their study. Specifically, their findings confirmed that job insecurity leads to reduced work attitudes, which in turn leads to a decrease in job performance, an increase in turnover intentions and higher rates of absenteeism. However, job insecurity also seems to simultaneously push employees to increase their performance at work, be absent less often and be less likely to consider quitting.
While this may still seem odd, Staufenbiel and König found that this dual explanation for how job insecurity affects workplace outcomes is much more plausible than considering only its negative effect on performance. It is important to note, however, that job insecurity’s negative influence on performance, turnover intentions and absenteeism is stronger than its direct positive effects on these important outcomes.
In conclusion, Staufenbiel and König warn against managers using job insecurity as a motivational tool (“get to work or we’ll find someone to replace you!”). While this may indeed get employees to step it up a notch in the short term, it can also negatively influence their work attitudes which have the opposite – and much longer lasting – effect on performance.
Staufenbiel, T., & König, C.J. (2010). A model for the effects of job insecurity on performance, turnover intention, and absenteeism. Journal of Occupational and
Organizational Psychology, 83, 101-117.
Brainwriting – a New Trend for Increased Innovation?
Topic: Creativity
Publication: Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology (MAR 2009)
Article: Better than brainstorming? Potential contextual boundary conditions to brainwriting for idea generation in organizations.
Author: P. A. Heslin
Reviewed By: Sarah Teague
The generation of innovative ideas is essential to the success of modern organizations. In attempts to facilitate this idea generation, group brainstorming has become a fixture in many organizations today. The current article compiles a list of the potential limitations of brainstorming and describes why brainwriting may be more effective.
Brainstorming involves the oral sharing of ideas within a group. In such a setting, there are several factors that may prevent group members from sharing ideas. Some individuals may feel that their ideas are not good enough, or they may hold back to avoid upstaging their superiors. Additionally, the value of the process can be negatively impacted by those who contribute too much (monopolizing the conversation), as well as those who contribute too little due to a lack of accountability (social loafing).
Brainwriting refers to the sharing of ideas among group members in a written form. The author cites evidence that suggests that this method could promote accountability and potentially eliminate the social pressures involved in a face-to-face group setting, thereby improving productivity. While the author strongly emphasizes the need for continued empirical research, this technique shows promise as a viable alternative to traditional brainstorming and builds on the adage that, “Two heads are better than one” – just not at the same time.
Mentoring: A Win-Win-Win Situation
Topic: Mentoring, Job Performance
Publication: Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology (DEC 2009)
Article: What can I gain as a mentor? The effect of mentoring on the job performance and social status of mentors in China
Authors: D. Liu, J. Liu, H.K. Kwan, and Y. Mao
Reviewed By: Benjamin Granger
Generally, mentoring relationships are intended to develop younger and/or less experienced employees. However, research has shown that mentoring relationships benefit mentors as well as their protégés. In a recent investigation, Liu and colleagues (2009) found that mentoring relationships relate favorably to mentors’ job performance ratings and social status within the organization.
Using a large sample of mentors from a Chinese manufacturing firm, Liu et al. found that mentors who engage in more mentoring activities tend to have higher job performance ratings. This relationship appears to be due the increased learning opportunities made available to mentors through the mentoring process. Thus, mentoring activities offer mentors additional opportunities to learn which may influence their job performance.
Additionally, mentors who engage in more mentoring activities tend to have higher social status (as rated by their supervisors). Importantly, mentors who engage in more mentoring activities report better social interaction with others in the workplace, which relates directly to the social status of the mentor.
Based on Liu et al.’s findings, organizations can be confident that formal mentoring relationships benefit both mentors and protégés. Organizational mentoring programs appear to be win-win-win situations as they help develop less-seasoned employees, improve the job performance and social status of experienced mentors, and ultimately contribute to organizational effectiveness.
