Example: tourism industry

Self-Efficacy and Work-Related Performance: The …

Self-Efficacy and Work-Related Performance: The Integral Role of Individual DifferencesTimothy A. JudgeUniversity of FloridaChristine L. JacksonPurdue UniversityJohn C. ShawMississippi State UniversityBrent A. Scott and Bruce L. RichUniversity of FloridaThe present study estimated the unique contribution of Self-Efficacy to Work-Related performancecontrolling for personality (the Big 5 traits), intelligence or general mental ability, and job or taskexperience. Results, based on a meta-analysis of the relevant literatures, revealed that overall, across allstudies and moderator conditions, the contribution of Self-Efficacy relative to purportedly more distalvariables is relatively small.

Self-Efficacy and Work-Related Performance: The Integral Role of Individual Differences Timothy A. Judge University of Florida Christine L. Jackson

Tags:

  Performance, Individuals, Roles, Self, Related, Differences, Relating, Related performance, The integral role of individual differences

Information

Domain:

Source:

Link to this page:

Please notify us if you found a problem with this document:

Other abuse

Transcription of Self-Efficacy and Work-Related Performance: The …

1 Self-Efficacy and Work-Related Performance: The Integral Role of Individual DifferencesTimothy A. JudgeUniversity of FloridaChristine L. JacksonPurdue UniversityJohn C. ShawMississippi State UniversityBrent A. Scott and Bruce L. RichUniversity of FloridaThe present study estimated the unique contribution of Self-Efficacy to Work-Related performancecontrolling for personality (the Big 5 traits), intelligence or general mental ability, and job or taskexperience. Results, based on a meta-analysis of the relevant literatures, revealed that overall, across allstudies and moderator conditions, the contribution of Self-Efficacy relative to purportedly more distalvariables is relatively small.

2 Within moderator categories, there were several cases in which self -efficacymade unique contributions to Work-Related performance . For example, Self-Efficacy predicted perfor-mance in jobs or tasks of low complexity but not those of medium or high complexity, and self -efficacypredicted performance for task but not job performance . Overall, results suggest that the predictivevalidity of Self-Efficacy is attenuated in the presence of individual differences , though this attenuationdoes depend on the : Self-Efficacy , motivation, personality, cognitive ability, performanceSocial cognitive theory has been described as the theory heard round the world (D.)

3 Smith, 2002, p. 30). Its creator, AlbertBandura, has been credited as the fourth most influential psychol-ogist in the history of psychology (Haggbloom, Warnick, & War-nick, 2002) and ranks among the top five psychologists in thenumber of citations in psychology texts (Knapp, 1985). Social cognitive theory or its central variable Self-Efficacy has beenstudied in more than 10,000 investigations in the past 25 years. In2004 alone, there were published an average of articles perday on Self-Efficacy . Social cognitive theory has been labeled one of the few grand theories that continues to thrive at thebeginning of the 21st century (Zimmerman & Schunk, 2003, ).

4 Thus, it is fair to say that Self-Efficacy has proven to be oneof the most focal concepts in contemporary psychology industrial organizational (I-O) psychology, Self-Efficacy hasbeen remarkably popular as well. In the past 25 years, more than800 articles on Self-Efficacy have been published in organizationaljournals. Virtually every area in organizational research has uti-lized Self-Efficacy , including training (Kozlowski et al., 2001),leadership (Chen & Bliese, 2002), newcomer socialization andadjustment (Saks, 1995), performance evaluation (Bartol, Durham,& Poon, 2001), stress (Jex, Bliese, Buzzell, & Primeau, 2001;Schaubroeck, Jones, & Xie, 2001), political influence behaviors(Bozeman, Perrewe , Hochwarter, & Brymer, 2001), creativity(Redmond, Mumford, & Teach, 1993), negotiation (Stevens &Gist, 1997), and group team processes (Feltz & Lirgg, 1998).

5 In1989, Landy called Self-Efficacy the wave of the future (p. 410)in work motivation research; judging from interest in the conceptin the past 20 years, Landy s prevision has been borne out by I-O psychology, perhaps the most focal variable to whichself-efficacy has been related is Work-Related performance ( , joband task performance ). Meta-analytic evidence suggests that Self-Efficacy is rather strongly related to performance ( .34; Stajk-ovic & Luthans, 1998). At the same time, because there are other,purportedly more distal, predictors of work performance thatwould appear to be associated with Self-Efficacy , this simple cor-relation does not speak to the predictive validity of self -efficacyover and above individual differences .

6 Bandura (1999) has arguedagainst the importance of traits and other stable individual differ-ences, notingGiven the highly conditional nature of human functioning, it is unre-alistic to expect personality measures cast in nonconditional general-ities to shed much light on the contribution of personal factors topsychosocial functioning in different task domains under diversecircumstances across all situations. (p. 160)However, because Self-Efficacy is defined as individuals beliefsabout their capabilities to produce designated levels of perfor-mance (Bandura, 1994), it appears likely that individuals bringTimothy A.

7 Judge, Brent A. Scott, and Bruce L. Rich, Department ofManagement, Warrington College of Business, University of Florida;Christine L. Jackson, Department of Organizational Behavior and HumanResource Management, Krannert Graduate School of Management, PurdueUniversity; John C. Shaw, Department of Management and InformationSystems, College of Business and Industry, Mississippi State L. Rich is now at the College of Business Administration,California State University at San concerning this article should be addressed to TimothyA. Judge, Department of Management, Warrington College of Business,University of Florida, 211D Stuzin Hall, Box 117165, Gainesville, FL32611-7165.

8 E-mail: of Applied PsychologyCopyright 2007 by the American Psychological Association2007, Vol. 92, No. 1, 107 1270021-9010/07/$ DOI: them to the work situation certain characteristics that arerelated to this Self-Efficacy (Kanfer, 1990).Given the conceptual association of Self-Efficacy and purport-edly distal individual differences with performance , and theirpossible associations with each other, it is important to investigatetheir joint influence on Work-Related performance . Yet, surpris-ingly little research has investigated these joint influences.

9 Ac-cordingly, in this study, we present and test a model that estimatesthe relative contribution of Self-Efficacy , general mental ability(GMA), personality in the form of the Big Five traits, and expe-rience to the prediction of Work-Related performance . In the nextsection of the article, we review past research on the relationshipsof individual differences to Self-Efficacy and present a model thattests their mutual influences on Work-Related , Individual differences , and PerformanceThe model that was tested, which determined the unique asso-ciation of Self-Efficacy with Work-Related performance in the con-text of the distal variables, is displayed in Figure 1.

10 In the model,the distal characteristics cognitive ability, personality (Big Fivetraits), and experience are hypothesized to predict Self-Efficacy ,and Self-Efficacy , in turn, is hypothesized to predict work-relatedperformance. The model also posits direct ( , not mediated byself-efficacy) links from the distal variables to performance , be-cause there are many ways that the variables can affect perfor-mance beyond Self-Efficacy . For example, one of the ways inwhich both cognitive ability and experience affect work-relatedperformance is through the accumulation of job knowledge intelligent employees are better able to acquire the knowledgerequired to perform a job successfully (Weekley & Ployhart,2005), and experience provides needed opportunities for knowl-edge acquisition (Schmidt, Hunter, & Outerbridge, 1986).


Related search queries