ArticlePDF Available

Comparative Analysis of Factors Affecting Employee Performance According to Job Performance Measurement Method: The Case of Performing Artists

Article

Comparative Analysis of Factors Affecting Employee Performance According to Job Performance Measurement Method: The Case of Performing Artists

Abstract and Figures

There are many factors that may affect employees’ job performance such as psychological, sociological, anthropological, demographic and similar. However, related literature was mainly focusing on psychological and demographic ones, which were often analyzed through different job performance measurement methods such as self-evaluation and supervisor (or superior) evaluation. The main goal of the current study is to define and compare the factors affecting employee’s job performance according to the above mentioned measurement methods, as well as their level of importance. For the purpose of this study, data were collected through survey conducted in the Antalya region in Turkey among 305 participants coming from seven countries and consisting of both employees and supervisors working for a performing artists organization company. Data were analyzed by using CHAID analysis through classification algorithms. Results show there is a difference between variables explaining the job performance of the employees when they do self-evaluation of their own performance than when the same is done by their supervisors. In addition, when importance order of explaining variables was examined, it turns out that ranking varies according to the evaluator.
Content may be subject to copyright.
EGE AKADEMİK BAKIŞ / EGE ACADEMIC REVIEW
Cilt 21 • Sayı 1 • Ocak 2021
SS. 29 / 45
Doi: 10.21121/eab.874012
Başvuru Tarihi: 06.03.2020 • Kabul Tarihi: 20.11.2020
29
Comparative Analysis of Factors Affecting Employee
Performance According to Job Performance
Measurement Method: The Case of Performing Artists*
*Ths research was supported by Akdenz Unversty Scentfc Research Projects Coordnaton Unt. Project Number: SYL-2018-3239
1Lecturer, Akdenz Unversty Demre Dr. Hasan Ünal Vocatonal School, volkanaskun@gmal.com
2Professor, Akdenz Unversty Faculty of Economcs and Admnstratve Scences, rabaczel@akdenz.edu.tr
3PhD, Akdenz Unversty Technocty Talya Software, ajanovc87@gmal.com
Volkan AŞKUN1 İD , Rabia ÇİZEL2 İD , Edina AJANOVIC3 İD
ABSTRACT
There are many factors that may affect employees’ job performance such as psychologcal, socologcal, anthropologcal,
demographc and smlar. However, related lterature was manly focusng on psychologcal and demographc ones, whch
were often analyzed through dfferent job performance measurement methods such as self-evaluaton and supervsor
(or superor) evaluaton. The man goal of the current study s to defne and compare the factors affectng employee’s
job performance accordng to the above mentoned measurement methods, as well as ther level of mportance. For
the purpose of ths study, data were collected through survey conducted n the Antalya regon n Turkey among 305
partcpants comng from seven countres and consstng of both employees and supervsors workng for a performng
artsts organzaton company. Data were analyzed by usng CHAID analyss through classfcaton algorthms. Results show
there s a dfference between varables explanng the job performance of the employees when they do self-evaluaton
of ther own performance than when the same s done by ther supervsors. Natonalty s one of the factors affectng
performance n both evaluaton forms. Whle the performance of ndvduals wth extraverson personalty trats was hgh
n case of self-evaluaton, the performance of the men who were second-born or after was hgh n the evaluaton by the
supervsors. These results demonstrated the problematc nature of measurng job performance and makng accurate
evaluatons based on t.
Keywords: Indvdual job performance, personalty trats, demographc varables, CHAID analyss, job performance
measurement
1. INTRODUCTION
Due to ts abstract and complex structure, t s m-
possble to consder ndvdual job performance (IJP) as
only a physcal ndcator, as there s no sngle ndcator
comprehensve enough to defne such constructs.
Thus, ths mples that there s no unque and tangble
manner to evaluate performance n ths context. Often
used IJP measurement methods are those based on
subjectve evaluatons and organzatonal records,
whch are consdered as the objectve ones wthout
nvolvng human judgment. Organzaton records
keep track of drect productvty measures expressed
n number of unts produced and personal data such
as absenteesm, work accdent, beng late on work and
smlar. Subjectve evaluatons can be done through
ratng or rankng by the employees themselves or by
ther supervsors, subordnates, colleagues, customers,
and other related groups. On the other hand, there
are dfferent crtera for these assessments. These are
“mmedate crtera” outlnng measured performance
over a specfed tme, “ntermedate crtera made for
the defned moment and “ultmate crtera perfor-
mance made throughout the whole perod of tme
n the organzaton (Thorndke, 1949). These crtera
can be used n both subjectve and objectve (organ-
zaton records-based) evaluaton methods. Wth such
a multfaceted and complex assessment structure, t
s reasonable to expect that there wll be dfferences
between the assessments n the measurement of IJP,
dependng on the evaluaton method.
Volkan AŞKUN, Rabia ÇİZEL, Edina AJANOVIC
30
Because of the possble judcal and based
obser-
vng stuatons nvolved wth subjectve evaluatons, t
s possble to prefer measurement based on organzat
-
onal records due to ts advantage of storng numercal
values. However, neffcent use of the three above
mentoned crtera or rsk of manpulaton can nega-
tvely affect the valdty of the organzatonal records
as well. In lght of these assumptons, companes tend
to use and beneft from both types of performance
measurements (Bracken, Rose & Church, 2016). Ne-
vertheless, n the lterature, there are low relatonshps
between subjectve evaluatons such as gradng and
rankng n whch evaluatons are performed n the form
of employee-hmself, customer, subordnate, parent,
colleague, and 360-degree.
When analyzng studes n the feld of IJP, t can be
stated that the correlaton analyss between varous
evaluaton methods was n focus. Accordng to meta-a-
nalyss study conducted by Harrs and Schaubroeck
(1988), low correlaton of 0.35 between self-evaluaton,
evaluatons from colleagues and supervsors was
observed. Smlarly, meta-analyss studes conducted
by Conway and Huffcutt (1997), and Hedemeer and
Moser (2009) both showed correlaton of 0.22 between
these dfferent evaluaton methods, emphaszng the
problematc nature and mportance of ths topc n the
academc feld. Accordng to knowledge of the researc-
hers, analytcal methods such as CHAID analyss usng
classfcaton and segmentaton processes n decson
trees are lackng n the feld of IJP.
Nowadays n many organzatons employee’s low
performance brngs hgh damages to the employee
hmself/herself, to the workng team and overall
company, causng declne n the global economy and
organzatonal lqudaton. Due to the broad mpact
on these areas, realstc measurements of IJPs of the
employees have become a matter of great mportance.
Therefore, the current study s conducted wth the goal
to defne and compare the factors affectng employee’s
job performance accordng to the self-evaluaton and
supervsor measurement methods, as well as the level
of mportance of these factors. It s consdered that the
study conducted n ths manner wll have several contr-
butons. The frst one s the fact that the current study s
conducted among partcpants of dfferent natonaltes
where the effect of ths varable s tested together wth
other demographc varables of co-workers n the same
organzaton. Second, ths study provdes another
perspectve on the relatonal studes between IJP and
personalty. Fnally, t elaborates on how dfferent anal-
ytcal methods, such as CHAID analyss and algorthms,
can contrbute to the study on IJP. In ths context, the
study amed to nvestgate the varables that predct
performance and ther severty accordng to dfferent
measurement methods.
In the frst part of ths paper, lterature revew on
defntons, dmensons, and ndcators of ndvdual job
performance measurement wll be presented together
wth references to several evaluaton models dscussed
n the feld. Second part of the lterature revew wll be
devoted to revson of the studes that had the effect
of several demographc and psychologcal factors on
IJP n ther focus. Current paper wll contnue wth the
descrpton of the methodology approach adopted
n answerng to research questons, followed by the
presentaton of the study results. Lastly, dscusson of
the obtaned results, as well as fnal conclusons on
theoretcal and practcal mplcatons of the current
study wll be provded.
2. LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1. Defnng and Measurng Job Performance
Job performance is defined as behaviors related to
meeting expected, identified or formal role require-
ments of organization members (Campbell,
1990). The
important element of this definition is that performance
is the characteristic of group or individual behavior that
occurs during a certain period of time. Defining and
understanding the basic structure of individual job per-
formance (IJP) have represented a very interesting topic
in industrial and organizational psychology field. First of
all, IJP is important because of the ongoing globalization
of the economy. It represents one of the basic indicators
of working groups’ and company’s performance and
it significantly contributes to company’s efficiency
and competitiveness (Koopmans, 2014). On the other
hand, industry and organization psychologists were
interested in investigating the effects of determinants
such as participation, satisfaction, and personality on
IJP (Judge, Bono, Thoreson & Patton, 2001).
Generally, t s assumed that IJP dffers from one job
to another. Evaluatons of IJP found n the lterature were
manly focused on objectve crtera of job productvty
or on the qualtatve and quanttatve judgments taken
by the employee hmself/herself, hs/her colleagues
or supervsors. Job performance can be consdered as
an abstract, hdden structure that cannot be drectly
marked or measured. It conssts of multple compo-
nents or dmensons whch further nclude drectly
Comparative Analysis of Factors Affecting Employee Performance According to Job Performance Measurement Method:
The Case of Performing Artists
31
measurable ndcators. In order to conceptualze and
functonalze the IJP area, t s necessary to descrbe and
defne dmensons and ndcators of ths performance
n organzatonal settngs. Whle dmensons can be
generalzable, full lst of ndcators may vary between
jobs.
Conceptualzaton of job performance receved
con-
sderable attenton n psychology feld. Vswesvaran
and Ones (2000) defned IJP as employees’ connecton
or contrbuton to organzatonal goals or measurable
actons, behavors and outcomes. It s mportant to
make a dfference between causal varables and nd-
cators of job performance. Whle causal varables serve
to defne or predct one’s job performance, ndcators
are consdered as reflectons of ths performance (Fayer
& Hand, 2002). For example, whle job satsfacton s
regarded as determnant of job performance, job
qualty
s seen as ts ndcator.
Based on the conceptual classification of IJP di
men-
sion found in the literature, four broad dimensions
can be proposed (Sinclair & Tucker, 2006; Koopmans,
Hldebrandt, Buuren, Van der Beek, & De Vet, 2013,
Hashmi, Ameen & Soroya, 2019; Nadatien, Handoyo,
Pudjirahardjo & Probowati, 2019, Dåderman, Ingelgård
& Koopmans, 2020):
task performance, contextual per-
formance, adaptive performance and counter
productive
work behavior. The first dimension, task performance, is
about which central work tasks should be performed.
Contextual performance expresses the behaviors that
support the organizational, social and psychological
environment in which the technical core should func-
tion. Adaptive performance, as a third dimension, was
added to cognitive framework. Adaptive performance
refers to employee’s ability to adapt to the changes that
may occur to the organizational working system or
working role. Sinclair and Tucker (2006) provided social,
conceptual, and empirical reasons for distinguishing
adaptive performance as a separate dimension. Final
dimension, counterproductive work behavior, assumes
all types of behavior that may damage welfare of the
organization. Proactive and creative performance were
considered as two separate dimensions. Although
proactive and creative performance can be considered
as a part of task performance for some jobs, these
categories are assumed to be more appropriate to
contextual performance due to their contribution to a
positive organizational, social, and psychological work
environment (Viswesvaran, 2002).
Allen (2008) and Escorpzo (2008) were focused
on only counterproductve work behavor dmenson,
more specfcally, to presenteesm and absenteesm
categores. On the other hand, Hassan, Nevo and Wade
(2015), examned nnovatve job performance, habt
and cogntve and relatonal socal captal under the
contextual performance. Most of the prevous studes
were focusng on task and contextual performance
dmensons (Aboagye, Da & Bakpa, 2020; Akca &
Yurtcu, 2017; Uppal,2014; Alfes,Truss, Soane, Rees &
Gatenby, 2013; Mael, O’Shea, Smth, Burlng, Carman,
& Haas, 2010; Tett, Guterman, Bleer & Murphy, 2000;
Borman & Motowdlo, 1993, Zhao, Lu & Zhou, 2020).
However, some of these studes were examnng these
dmensons n relaton to organzatonal ctzenshp
behavor, manageral behavor, developng self and
others, orentaton, relablty, professonal ntellgence,
emotonal control and communcaton.
The most prominent among contemporary used
frameworks in measuring IJP is the one by Campbell,
McHenry and Wse (1990) who proposed eight per-
formance components: job-specific task proficiency,
non-specific task proficiency, written and oral com-
munication, effort, maintaining personal discipline,
facilitating peer and team performance, supervision/
leadership, and administration/management. Gener-
ally, this study created an infrastructure for the mea-
surement of IJP. Furthermore, a set of interconnected
frameworks focusing on various forms of behavior
such as citizenship behavior (Smith, Organ & Near,
1983), social behavior (Brief & Motowidlo, 1986) and
contextual performance (Borman & Motowidlo, 1993)
can be traced in the related literature. What is common
for most of these frameworks is that they focus on
positive behaviors that contribute to organizational
effectiveness, while these do not reflect basic work
tasks. These positive behaviors include helping others,
persevering and making extra efforts and supporting
the organization. Although there are differences of
these frameworks in terms of their focus, the areas
of covered behavior are largely overlapping. This was
supported by the literature which differentiates and
compares the field of task performance and the field
of citizenship / pro-social / contextual performance
(Motowidlo & Van Scotter, 1994).
By addng counter productve work behavor do-
man n hs study, Allen (2008) allowed for a broader
understandng and effectveness of the three man are-
as of performance, fnalzng the defnton of a heurstc
framework of the IJP consstng of four dmensons:
task performance, contextual performance, adaptve
performance, and counter productve work behavor.
Volkan AŞKUN, Rabia ÇİZEL, Edina AJANOVIC
32
These four dmensons can be consdered to capture
all forms of behavor that defne the IJP n almost every
job.
In the feld of work and organzatonal psychology,
tradtonally the man focus of the IJP structure s on task
performance whch can be defned as the ndvdual’s
competence to perform basc or techncal tasks central
for hs/her work. In addton to task performance, the IJP
structure conssts of contextual performance, adaptve
performance, and counterproductve work behavor,
whch should also be examned when tryng to assess
ndvdual’s job performance. Accordngly, work and or-
ganzatonal psychologsts have developed numerous
scales (Van Scotter&Motowdlo, 1996; Bennett & Robn-
son, 2000; Podsakoff &MacKenze, 1989), to measure
task performance, contextual performance,
adaptve
performance, or counterproductve work
behavor.
Despte ts mportance and popularty, t s hard to
reach compromse on how to defne and measure the
IJP. Naturally, there are many tools avalable to measure
the IJP or related structures, but after analyzng the
studes of IJP n dfferent research areas, t can be seen
a lack of a clear defnton and conceptual framework.
Ths prevents the creaton of precse measurements for
assessng ths topc. As a result, t s dffcult to establsh
the effectveness of nterventons, procedures and
strateges to mantan, mprove or optmze the IJP.
Current study hopes to beneft greatly from a short,
but comprehensve, measurement scale n order to
address ths structure.
2.2. Factors Aectng Job Performance
There are numerous factors affectng job perfor-
mance. One of them s personalty. Personalty plays
an mportant role n defnng how an ndvdual wll
behave n dfferent stuatons (Yeşlyaprak, 2012). Per-
sonalty can be defned as the pattern of characterstcs
and behavors that reflect the unque arrangements
of the ndvdual towards hs/her envronment. Man
characterstcs nclude nterests, values, motvatons,
atttudes, “self concept, abltes, behavoral, and
emotonal patterns. All of these factors are affectng job
performance (Crak, 1993). In some of the studes that
were nvestgatng the relatonshp between personalty
characterstcs and performance, a drect relatonshp
between these two varables was found (Barrck, Mount
&Strauss, 1993). Blckle (1996), proposed that there are
many work stuatons were only the effort tself wll be
effcent and enough for satsfactory performance, but
also many others where, solely, the same effort wll not
be suffcent. One person can work for many hours and
may be n a stuaton where he/she has to make varous
decsons. Despte all the tme spent at work, he/she may
be usng neffectve strateges and may not work as well
as someone who makes the rght decsons and uses
the rght strateges. These propostons are constantly
beng expanded n order to understand personalty as
an mportant predctor of IJP (Pallegama, Aryasnghe
& Perera, 2007) wth the tendency for a contnuous
research on personalty-performance relaton.
In order to obtan more nformaton about characte-
rstcs and actons from a broader perspectve, Mumford
and Gustafson (1988) focused on three ponts of relat-
onshp between personalty trats and performance. Frst,
personalty trats may facltate or prevent the effectve
use of strateges. In addton, personalty may create
motvatonal effect for performance ncrease. Fnally,
success or falure of an ndvdual can be attrbuted to
the personalty trats. These stuatons, especally related
to decson-makng, are mportant to understand how
personalty causes dfferent behavoral patterns leadng
to varatons n job performance. In general, personalty
theores are dscussed from
psychodynamc, humanstc,
socal-cogntve and
trat perspectves. From the trat
perspectve, several theores were proposed such as:
trat theory (Allport, 1966), factor analytc trat theory
(Cattel, 1979), the Bg Fve personalty trats theory
(Costa & McCrea, 1992) and bologcal trats theory
(Eysenck, 1967). Eysenck’s three-dmensonal bology
trats theory s one of the most often used theores,
especally among employees of dfferent culture. Ths s
proven by ts applcaton n more than 35 countres such
as the USA, Sweden, Chna, Ngera, Japan etc. (Schultz
& Schultz, 2017). Bologcal trats theory was appled n
the current study because the order of brth was among
examned varables and because t also comprses the
‘le’ sub- dmenson, used to test how honest and sncere
the respondents were whle evaluatng tems n the
research questonnare.
Studes from the related lterature found a negatve
correlaton between neurotcsm, psychotsm and IJP,
and a postve correlaton between extraverson and
IJP (Rothmann & Coetzer, 2003; Premuzc & Furnham,
2003; Poropat, 2011; Gözel, Atmaca, & Durat, 2017).
Accordng to these studes people wth neurotcsm
tendency are weaker and less creatve than those who
are emotonally determned. At the same tme, postve
effects of extraverson tendences n relaton to task
performance and creatvty were put forward.
Comparative Analysis of Factors Affecting Employee Performance According to Job Performance Measurement Method:
The Case of Performing Artists
33
Socal scentsts have examned the relaton betwe-
en brth order and varous outcomes for more than a
hundred years (Galton, 1874). Results of the conducted
studes showed that the frst-born chldren have tenden-
cy to reach more resource, attenton and
hgher level of
cogntve warnngs (Hertwg, Davs, & Sulloway, 2002;
Prce, 2008). Frst-born chld enters nto nteracton wth
parents alone and he/she s exposed to an envronment
wth comparatvely hgher level of cogntve maturty.
On the other hand, second-born chld nteracts both
wth parents and elder sblngs whch means that the
level of cogntve warnng s lower on average. There are
emprcal evdences showng that later-born chldren
have lower success n educaton and cogntve deve-
lopment (Barclay, 2015). In addton, focus of research
studes n ths context was on examnng the relat-
onshp between ndvdual’s brth order, ntellectual
development and educatonal outcomes. Tme parents
spend wth the chldren, mother’s age and educatonal
level, as well as the fact that the chld was the frst born
n the famly were consdered as effectve factors on
the future outcomes of the chld’s lfe. Accordng to
the study conducted n Norway among the ffth-grade
students, where the relaton between academc perfor-
mance and brth order was measured (Bonesrønnng
& Massh, 2011), results showed that wth famles that
have more than one chld, frst-borns had the sgnfcant
advantage. There are addtonal studes provng that
frst-born chldren are better n academc performance
(Iacovou, 2008).
Besdes personalty and brth order, gender was
also examned as a factor wth potental nfluence on
job performance. In the study conducted n the Turksh
cty of Dyarbakr among 320 partcpants, Demrok
(2018) found that there s no sgnfcant dfference n
IJP accordng to gender. In the same way, Keleş (2017)
has not detected dfference between gender and IJP
on 122 people n the study conducted n another
Turksh cty-Svas. Fnally, n one study conducted n
nternatonal company n Japan wth 643 partcpants
(Sekguch, Bebenroth, & L, 2011) and n another one
wth 300 Amercan and Lebanese partcpants (Dab
& Hazer, 2012), the sgnfcant dfference between
natonalty and IJP was found.
The goal of the above-mentoned lterature revew
was to defne the dmensons of IJP and to revew dffe-
rent methods of ts evaluaton. In addton, t examnes
the relaton between dependent varable such as IJP
and ndependent varables such as psychologcal and
demographc factors. What have not been dscussed
n the prevous lterature yet s the adequate cluste-
rng of these ndependent varables and ther level of
mportance on IJP. Guded by the followng research
questons, current study tres to address ths lterature
gap.
1.
Is there a dfference between the performance
averages of the employees accordng to the
performance evaluaton method (the self-eva-
luatons and supervsor’s evaluatons)?
2.
How are employees classfed accordng to
ndependent varables (personalty trats and
demographc trats) n terms of ther perfor-
mance?
3.
What s the mportance of ndependent var-
ables n classfyng employees n terms of ther
performance?
4.
Does the effect and sgnfcance of the nde-
pendent varables change n the classfcaton
of employees n terms of ther performance ac-
cordng to the performance evaluaton method
(self-evaluatons and supervsors’ evaluatons)?
Fgure 1 llustrates the research desgn adopted n
the current study. Further explanaton of the adopted
research method wll be presented n the contnuaton.
Fgure 1: Study Research Model
Volkan AŞKUN, Rabia ÇİZEL, Edina AJANOVIC
34
3. METHOD
The study group conssts of stage performers of
dfferent natonaltes who are employed n performng
arts organzaton company operatng n Turksh cty
of Antalya. Antalya s a well-known tourstc regon
whch attracted more than 12,5 mllon nternatonal
vstors n 2018 (TUROFED, 2019). Besdes sun, sand and
beach toursm concept, there are a lot of opportuntes
to nvolve n alternatve toursm forms n the area. In
ths manner, varous types of events and show perfor-
mances are takng place throughout the regon, such
as Adrenaln shows, whch are able to attract attenton
among both toursts and local communty. Due to the
ncreased nterest n these events and benefts they
may have on varous stakeholders n the area, t s
mportant to pay attenton to the performance of the
artsts as they have a vtal role for a successful show.
Ths s the reason why ths group of employees was
selected for the current study.
Pror to conductng a research, necessary perms-
sons were obtaned and, n total, 305 foregn emplo-
yees comng from seven countres workng n three
dfferent companes voluntarly accepted to partcpate
n the study. The three companes n the study were
selected accordng to ther ablty to perform n ultra
luxury fve star hotels n Antalya. In the current study
quanttatve method was used and data were collected
through questonnares that were dstrbuted between
February to Aprl 2018 n Englsh, Russan and Spansh.
Items of the measurement scale n the questonnare
were composed based on the revewed lterature. In
addton to demographc questons “Indvdual Job
Performance Survey” and for personalty trats “Eysenck
Personalty Survey” was used. Employees’ performance
was evaluated n two methods (self and supervsor’s
evaluatons). For performance measurement, scale
proposed by Koopmans et.al (2013) was used. Valdty
and relablty of the measurement was emprcally
tested by several studes (Abubakar, Pangl, & Othman,
2016; Cesch, Sartor, Dckert, & Costantn, 2016, Metn,
Peeters, & Tars, 2018). All of the tems ncluded n the
measurement tool used for performance measurement
are scored n the 5-pont Lkert type wth Strongly Agree
= 5, Agree = 4, Neutral = 3, Dsagree = 2, and Strongly
Dsagree = 1.
In the study, the relablty coeffcent (Cronbach’s
alpha) of the 23-tem scale used for performance me-
asurement was determned to be 0.93. In the valdty
study of the scale, explanatory factor analyss was
appled to the tems. Accordng to these results, t was
found that the 23-tem subscale had a fve-factor stru-
cture and 66.189% of the total varance was explaned
by the scale tems. After conducted factor analyss, the
followng statements were beng removed from the
proposed structure due to the fact that these dsrupt
factor structure: under “nterpersonal performance”
dmenson P6 number I take the ntatve at my job,
“adaptve performance” dmenson P14 number – I
show resstance to stress and tough stuatons and P17
number – I keep my busness sklls up to date.
When analyzng Table 1, t can be concluded that
“task performance” dmenson has the hghest varance
explanaton rate wth %17.998. Dmenson wth the
least varance explanaton rate s counterproductve
work behavor wth %9.387. As can be seen from Table
1, the total varance explanaton rate of the IJP scale
s 66.189%.
In the current study, Eysenck Personalty Quest-
onnare was used to measure the personalty chara-
cterstcs. Frst tme t was used by the Francs, Brown,
and Phlpchalk (1992), whle relablty and valdty of
ths measurement was tested n several future studes
(Sato, 2005; Maltby, Talley, Cooper & Lesle, 1995;
Karancı, Drk & Yorulmaz 2007). Ths measurement
scale conssts of 24 tems of four factors structure
(extraverson, neurotcsm, psychotcsm and le). The
lyng subscale s ntended to prevent bas durng the
mplementaton of the questonnare and to check ts
valdty. In ths questonnare, where each factor was
evaluated wth sx tems, partcpants were asked to
answer 24 questons n the format Yes (1) - No (0). The
score for each personalty trat vares from 0 to 6.
Le dmenson n Table 2 was used as a sub d-
menson n order to test how honestly and sncerely
the tems n the questonnare were answered. These
sub-dmensons queston the behavors that are assu-
med to be socally / morally wrong, but can be seen
from tme to tme, and therefore also reflect and trgger
senstvty to socal desrablty (Karancı et. al, 2007). In
ths sense, one s able to queston the behavors that
are thought to be morally wrong but that are possble
for everyone n general. In the current study, hgher
scores ndcate the desre of partcpants to reflect
themselves more postvely. It shows the probablty of
havng personalty above 3.00 n scores taken between
1-6. As can be seen n Table 2, the le subscale was the
hghest at 1.00. Ths result shows that partcpants
do not try to show themselves dfferently n terms of
evaluatng behavors that everyone can exhbt, but
whch s supposed to be morally wrong on a global
Comparative Analysis of Factors Affecting Employee Performance According to Job Performance Measurement Method:
The Case of Performing Artists
35
level. They do not have any thoughts about reflectng
themselves more postvely n other dmensons, whch
can be nterpreted as gvng closest answers to realty.
The Kuder-Rchardson 20 method was used to measure
relablty because the tems of the 24-tem personalty
nventory were evaluated wth the dual answer opton
and there were no contnuous varables (Glner, Morgan
& Leech, 2017).
Table 1: Factor Analyss Results for IJP Measurement
Factors
B1 B2 B3 B4 B5
Task Performance
P1 I am dong a hgh qualty job. .723
P2 I am makng a good plan and organzaton of my job .656
P3 In my job I am result orented. .624
P4 My job s a prorty for me. .724
P5 I work at my job ecently. .618
Interpersonal Performance
P7 I accept the feedback of the job I have done and I learn from t. .573
P8 I collaborate wth my managers and colleagues. .813
P9 I establsh eectve communcaton wth my managers and
colleagues. .790
Organzatonal Performance
P10 I take the responsblty for the work I do. .642
P11 I am customer-orented at my job. .492
P12 I am creatve at my job. .579
P13 I accept hard tasks at my job. .625
Adaptve Performance
P15 I fnd creatve soluton for new and hard problems. .550
P16 I keep my job-related nformaton up-to-dated. .513
P18 I can cope wth unknown and unpredctable work stuatons. .691
P19 I can adjust my workng goals when needed. .744
Counterproductve Work Behavor
P20 I do not show negatve behavor at my job (complanng,
exaggeratng my problems etc.) .600
P21 I do not nvolve n behavor that can harm my workng place
(dsobeyng the rules, revealng secret nformaton. etc.) .786
P22 I do not do anythng that can harm my colleagues and managers. .800
P23 I do not ntentonally make mstakes at my job. .697
Eigenvalues
Variance description rate (%)
Cumulative Variance (%)
KMO
Bartlett’ Test
3.598 2.954 2.487 2.322 1.877
17.998 14.770 12.434 11.611 9.387
17.998 32.758 45.192 56.803 66.189
.917
2895.026
Table 2: Eysenck Descrptve Statstcs of Personalty
Questonnare
The
Lowest
The
Highest Average SD
Extraverson 1,00 6,00 4,16 1,56
Neurotcsm 0,00 6,00 1,73 1,60
Psychotcsm 0,00 6,00 1,68 1,14
Le 0,00 1,00 0,65 0,27
Kuder-Rchardson alfa values were presented wth
extraverson, psychotcsm and neurotcsm dmensons
havng the 0.71, 0.66, 0.68 values respectvely. Relab-
lty of each dmenson s above 0.60 and s beng under
certan lmtatons.
In the contnuaton of the study CHAID analyss was
used n order to examne the varables that are effectve
n the classfcaton of employees n terms
of ther
Volkan AŞKUN, Rabia ÇİZEL, Edina AJANOVIC
36
performance accordng to the evaluaton method. In
accordance wth the research goal, CHAID analyss was
used to determne the relatve effects and sgnfcance of
ndependent varables on the IJP, whch was determned
as dependent varable.
The reason for usng decson
tree methods, such as CHAID analyss, s the possblty
to easly observe the order of sgnfcance of the pred-
ctor varables on the dependent varable. In addton, t
allows for dervaton of clear and understandable vsual
structures of the examned varables. Wth the help of
CHAID analyss, t s possble to determne how stage
performers are classfed accordng to ther personalty
characterstcs, gender, natonalty, martal status, order
of brth, and the mportance of each ndependent
varable on the dependent one. Besdes, frequency
and percentage values related to the classfcaton of
the ndependent varables and the stage at whch the
classfcaton wll end are gven.
4. RESULTS
Among 305 partcpants comng from seven
dfferent
countres and workng n a performng arts organzat-
on companes, 41.96% of the partcpants are female (n
= 128) and 58.04% are male (n=177). When lookng at
the employees natonaltes 59.34% are from Ukrane
(n=181),17.7% are from Russa (n=54), 10.49% from
Columba (n=32), 8.85% from Cuba (n=27), %1.64 from
Ethopa (n=5) and Italy (n=3) and Uzbekstan (n=3)
wth 0.98% rate each. When lookng at the brth order,
54.1% of partcpants are frst-born chldren of whom
68 female and 97 male, whle from the 45.9% of the
later-born chldren 60 were female and 80 are male. In
addton, t wll be sutable to emphasze that 165 of the
frst-born ndvduals 42 female and 55 male n total 97
were the only chld.
t-test was used to examne the dfference between
two performance evaluaton models. Based on the data
presented n Table 3, t can be concluded that there s
a sgnfcant dfference (p<.001) between employees
self-evaluaton of performance than the one done by
supervsors. Results showed that employees tend to
score ther performance hgher than ther supervsors.
In the study, the overall average of the IJP (𝑥̅ = 4.24)
was taken and ths value was determned as the cut-off
score, the ones above the average were classfed as 1
for success and those below the average were catego-
rzed as 0. In the study, varables such as personalty
trats, gender, natonalty, martal status, and brth order
were categorcally ncluded as ndependent varables.
Table 3: t Test Results Accordng to Performance
Evaluatons Models
Performance
Average N
𝑥̅
SSd T p
Self-
evaluations 305 4,24 0,497
608 2,432 ,001*
Supervisors’
evaluations 305 4,13 0,598
*p< .001
Important assumptons of many statstcal methods
such as normalty, lnearty, homogenety of varance
are not of the same sgnfcance n CHAID analyss. At
the same tme, although the CHAID analyss collects
the mssng values n a separate group, a regresson
equaton to be obtaned by ths analyss s kept nde-
pendent of the known classcal assumptons snce t can
dvde the whole unverse nto stable sub-nodes wth a
mean shft algorthm (Horner, Freman & Wang, 2010).
Statstcal test used n CHAID analyss depends on the
target varable or dependent varable: f t s contnuous
F and f t s categorcal ch-square (χ2). The assumpton
requred n CHAID analyss s to specfy the scale types
for the varables used. In addton, for categorcal va
-
rables, t s necessary to specfy how many categores
the target varable s dvded nto and what these are.
The lmtaton of the analyss s that the dependent
varable should be categorcal (Aksu & Güzeller, 2016).
In the current study, all dependent and ndependent
varables are categorcal varables. Personalty types
were analyzed n three categores.
Results of the CHAID analyss model were summar-
zed n Table 4. Accordng to ths, whle IJP s dependent
varable, personalty characterstcs, gender, natona-
lty, martal status, and brth order are ndependent
varables. In the frst CHAID analyss IJP evaluaton s
based on employee’s self-evaluatons. In case when an
ndvdual evaluates hs / her own work performance, t
s determned that only the natonalty and personalty
type as ndependent varables are ncluded n the
analyss as these sgnfcantly predcts the ndvdual’s
job performance.
As can be seen n Table 4, 40 of the 146 ndvduals
(27.40%) wth low IJP were correctly classfed by the
program, but 106 (72.60%) were classfed as hgh per-
formances despte the fact that they were actually low
performers. Smlarly, 17 of the 159 hgh-performng
ndvduals (10.69%) were classfed as low, despte ther
hgh performance. In ths study, t s seen that overall
success percentage n the classfcaton of hgh and
low performance employees s 59.7%. The rsk value
of the study n addton to the classfcaton table was
determned to be 40.3%.
Comparative Analysis of Factors Affecting Employee Performance According to Job Performance Measurement Method:
The Case of Performing Artists
37
Table 4: Classfcaton Table Regardng IJP Status
Observed Predcted
Method: CHAID
Dependent varable: Indvdual
Job performance (Indvdual’s self-
evaluatons)
Low High Percentage of Success
Low 40 106 27,4%
High 17 142 89,3%
Total 18,7% 81,3% 59,7%
Fgure 2 shows whch countres are decsve for classfyng employees, who are hgh and low, based on ther
own performance evaluaton scores and the order of ther mportance.
Fgure 2: Decson Tree Model of IJP Based on Employees’ Self-Evaluaton
Volkan AŞKUN, Rabia ÇİZEL, Edina AJANOVIC
38
When examnng Fgure 2, t s seen that 47.90% of
the 305 stage artsts are classfed as low and 52.10%
as hgh. It s seen that the ndependent varable that
best descrbes the performance s natonalty wth two
sub-levels (𝜒2=26.2, p<.05). When the sub-categores of
the ndependent varable wth the hghest mpact on
performance are examned, t can be observed that 62
performers (50 hgh, 12 low) from Colomba, Cuba and
Uzbekstan consttute node 1. Second node conssts
of those employees comng from Ukrane, Russa,
Italy and Ethopa. In ths second node wth a total of
243 ndvduals (109 hgh, 134 low), a sub-branch was
characterzed by personalty trats and two dfferent
nodal ponts, and psychotcsm-neurotcsm (𝜒2 = 7.6,
p <.05). In a sub-branch for the second node, the extra-
verson s extracted as the thrd node (94 low, 92 hgh),
and the psychotcsm and neurotcsm as the fourth
node (40 low, 17 hgh). When the ch-square value s
analyzed, t s seen that the best ndependent varable
for explanng success s the country from where the
employees come from (𝜒 2 = 26.2, p <.05) and the next
one s the personalty type (𝜒 2 = 7.6, p <.05). It s seen
that the extroverson personalty type s more effectve
n the classfcaton of employee performance as hgh.
As a result, t was determned that the performances of
the extrovert employees comng from Ukrane, Russa,
Italy and Ethopa were hgher.
Based on values from Table 5, frst node was found
to be the best node to dstngush between low and h-
gh-performance workers (n = 50, 31.4%). Ths s a cluster
of 62 employees from Colomba, Cuba, Uzbekstan and
80.6% of whch are classfed as accurate. In order to
determne the second-best node n the study, the gan
values were examned and the thrd node was observed
to be remarkable n terms of workng performance (n
= 92, 57.9%). Ths s the cluster n whch 186 of the
employees from Ukrane, Russa, Italy, Ethopa wth
extrovert personalty trat are classfed as accurate by
49.5%.
Table 5: Success Values Related to IJP
Node Node Success Response
Rate Index
n%n%
1 62 20,3 50 31,4 80,6 154,7
3 186 61,0 92 57,9 49,5 94,9
4 57 18,7 17 10,7 29,8 57,2
In the second model, where the ndvdual’s job per-
formance s evaluated by ther supervsors, summary
nformaton about the CHAID analyss s gven n Table
6. Accordng to ths model, the dependent varable s
IJP and ndependent varables are personalty trats,
gender, natonalty, martal status, brth order. In ths
model, the assessment of IJP was conducted by the
employees’ supervsors. In cases where ndvdual job
performance s evaluated by the supervsors, results
showed that natonalty, gender and brth order can
sgnfcantly predct the job performance as ndepen-
dent varables.
Table 6: Classfcaton Table for Supervsor’s
Evaluatons of IJP
Observed
Predcted
Method: CHAID
Dependent
Varable:
Indvdual Job
Performance
(Supervsor’s
Evaluatons)
Low High Success
Percentage
Low 40 89 31,0%
High 20 143 87,7%
Total 20,5% 79,5% 62,7%
As can be seen from Table 6, accordng to the su-
pervsors, 40 (31.0%) of 129 people wth low employee
performance were correctly classfed by the study,
whle 89 (68.99%) were actually classfed as hgh
performance despte poor performance. Smlarly, 143
out of 163 people (87.7%) were correctly classfed by
the program, but 20 people (22.27%) were classfed as
unsuccessful despte beng actually hgh performng.
The overall success of our study n the classfcaton of
low- and hgh-performance employees s 62.7%. The
rsk value of the system s 37.3% (1-62.7).
Accordng to the supervsor’s evaluaton, the
results of the analyss regardng the mportance of
the classfcaton of the low and hgh-performance
employees and ther order of mportance are shown
n Fgure 3. Accordng to supervsors, 44.2% of emp-
loyees are of low performance whle 55.8% are wth
hgh performance (𝜒2=18.9,p<.05). Accordng to ths,
two sub-levels of natonaltes can be derved. When we
look at the sub-categores of the ndependent varables
that best explan the performance stuaton, 232 people
(143 hgh, 89 low) from Colomba, Ukrane, Cuba, Italy
consttute the frst node. The second node s Russa,
Ethopa, Uzbekstan consstng of 60 partcpants (20
hgh, 40 low). The frst node performed a dfferent
sub-branch and gender was the determnant of ths
(𝜒2 = 5.4, p<.05). At ths level, the thrd node appeared
as male wth 134 persons (90 hgh, 44 low) and the
Comparative Analysis of Factors Affecting Employee Performance According to Job Performance Measurement Method:
The Case of Performing Artists
39
fourth node as female wth 98 persons (53 hgh, 45 low).
Subsequent sub-branchng occurs n the thrd node
and the order of delvery was decsve here (𝜒2 = 4.3,
p<.05). At ths level, the ffth node shows 76 people
(45 hgh, 31 low) who are frst-born chld, whle the
sxth node shows 58 people (45 hgh, 13 low) beng
later-born. When the ch-square value s analyzed, t s
seen that the most ndependent varable explanng
success s country from where partcpants are comng
(𝜒2=18.9, p<.05) followed by gender category (𝜒2= 5.4,
p<.05). The thrd node s the brth order (𝜒2 = 4.3, p
<.05). It s seen that the performance of the employees
who are born n the second and subsequent places s
more effectve n the classfcaton as hgh. As a result, t
was determned that the performances of male workers
comng from Colomba, Ukrane, Cuba and Italy were
hgher than those who were later-born.
Fgure 3: Decson Tree Model of IJP Based on Supervsor’s Evaluaton
Volkan AŞKUN, Rabia ÇİZEL, Edina AJANOVIC
40
From the Table 7 t can be concluded that sxth
node (n=45, %27.6) s the best n dfferentatng low
and hgh performng employees based on ther su-
pervsor’s evaluatons. Ths s a cluster of 58 employees
who were later-born chldren comng from Colomba,
Ukrane, Cuba, Italy wth correct classfcaton at 77.6%.
In order to determne the second best node, the gan
values were examned and the ffth node was found
to be remarkable n terms of workng performance (n
= 45, 27.6%). Ths s a cluster of 76 male workers from
Colomba, Ukrane, Cuba, Italy, who were frst-born
chldren, and were correctly classfed at 59.2%. In
addton, t s seen that the node that gves the least
nformaton n dstngushng employees’ performances
from supervsors’ perspectve s the second node (n =
20, 12.3%). Ths group conssts of 60 people from Russa,
Ethopa, Uzbekstan and 33.3% of them are classfed
correctly.
Table 7: Success Values Related to Supervsor’s IJP
Evaluatons
Node
Node Success Response
Rate Index
n%n%
6 58 19,9 45 27,6 77,6 139,0
5 76 26,0 45 27,6 59,2 106,1
4 98 33,6 53 32,5 54,1 96,9
2 60 20,5 20 12,3 33,3 59,7
Results show there s a dfference between varables
explanng the job performance of the employees when
they do self-evaluaton of ther own performance than
when the same s done by ther supervsors (Fgure 4).
5. DISCUSSION
Results of the CHAID analyss n the current study
reveal that the effectveness of certan factors and ther
mportance levels dffer accordng to the performance
evaluaton method. In case of self-evaluaton, t can be
concluded that employees wth extrovert personalty
trats comng from Ukrane, Russa, Italy, and Ethopa
perform the best. When ndvdual job performance s
evaluated by the employee hmself/herself, natonalty
can be consdered as one of the factors affectng per-
formance. Based on the analyss results t can be seen
that the node where employees from Columba, Cuba,
Uzbekstan are clustered s successful n dversfyng
employees wth hgh performance. In terms of job
performance, second group of employees conssts of
those comng from Ukrane, Russa, Italy and Ethopa
wth extraverson personalty trat.
Based on the supervsors’ evaluatons, t can be
concluded that hghest performng employees
come
from Columba, Ukrane, Cuba, and Italy, whle male
employees are performng better than female employe-
es. In both supervsors’ and employees’ self-evaluatons,
employees from Columba and Cuba are showng the
hghest performance levels. Ths fndng showng the
performance dfferences accordng to natonalty s
smlar to the results of prevous studes n the lterature
(Sekguch et.al., 2011; Dab & Hazer, 2012). In addton,
current study results showed there s the relaton
between brth order and performance accordng to
supervsors’ evaluaton, ndcatng that later-born
ndvduals are performng better.
Comparison of perceived
job performance based on
CHAID analysis
Individual’s self-evaluation
1. nationality
2. personality traits
(extroverts)
1. nationality
2. gender
3. birth order
(second-born and older)
Supervisor’s evaluations
Figure 4: Model of CHAID Analysis
Comparative Analysis of Factors Affecting Employee Performance According to Job Performance Measurement Method:
The Case of Performing Artists
41
The results of the study show that the varables
that explan the performance of the ndvduals when
they evaluate ther own performance and the varables
that explan the performance when evaluated by ther
supervsors are dfferent. Ths result s consstent wth
three dfferent meta-analyss studes n the related
lterature that found very low correlaton between
supervsor’s and employees’ self-evaluatons of job
performance (Harrs & Schaubroeck, 1988; Conway &
Huffcutt, 1997; Hedemeer & Moser, 2009). Smlarly,
when we examne the mportance of the varables
explanng the performance, t turns out that there s a
changng order accordng to the evaluator. When the
mportance order of the ndependent varables n the
employees’ self-evaluaton s examned, personalty
dfferences come after the natonalty, whle ths order
n supervsors’ evaluatons starts wth the natonalty
followed by gender and the order of brth varable
respectvely. Ths fndng ndcates that t s not easy
to measure performance and make an accurate assess-
ment.
Results of the current study prove the problematc
nature of measurement of job performance. Goal of
evaluatng the ndvdual’s job performance s to obtan
a mult-faceted perspectve by evaluatng the employe-
es’ performance as a whole and wth all aspects.
Theoretical implications
Current study provdes a sgnfcant contrbuton to
the theoretcal knowledge on IJP as t proved that use
of bology trats theory s useful n the context of artsts’
performance, enhanced wth the relevant propostons
related to the effect of ndependent varables such as
natonalty, gender and brth order. CHAID analyss was
used n revealng these varable results of dfferent job
performance measurement models. Ths nnovatve
model, from whch future studes on IJP can beneft
on, s consdered useful due to ts possblty to easly
observe the order of sgnfcance of the predctor
varables on the dependent varables whle dervng
clear and understandable vsual structures.
Practical implications
From practical managerial perspective the current
study is valuable as it revealed that there may be differ-
ences in methods of measuring employee performance
from different stakeholders’ position. For this reason,
multiple evaluation system can be proposed by using
different methods in the same process in measuring
and evaluating the performances of employees.
Moreover, current study verifies that the personality
dimensions of the employees should be taken into
consideration in the selection of the employees in the
performing arts companies, as well as in prediction of
creativity and managerial performance during their
career development. It is foreseen that the current
study will contribute to the body of research conducted
in the context of Turkey in the field of labor economy
and psychology in organizations, allowing for its
implementation in the other sectors as well. Similar
studies among performing arts companies in other
countries and/or other sectors, with a larger sample
size and groups, will be useful in understanding the
compatibility of the proposed theoretical frameworks
in the context of global culture. The study will be bene-
ficial for human resource professionals, employers and
managers as it uncovers the relationship between the
employee’s personality traits and job performance. In
addition, it shows that productivity can be achieved
when the necessary measurements are used to address
the effective performance of the employees.
Limitations of the study
There are several lmtatons of the current study as
well, as ths study s conducted n the specfc regon
and among specfc group of partcpants. Therefore, t
s advsable to repeat ths research desgn across several
areas and, potentally, natonaltes, n order to reach
more generalzable results. The performance evaluated
n ths study s subject to an abstract evaluaton snce t
s based on the artstc work. Therefore, the evaluaton
s complex as t dffers from that evaluaton of, for
example, employees n the producton process at a
factory. At the same tme, t s consdered wrong for
the supervsors to gve the note 3 out of 5 at the Lkert
scale. Ths s due to the tendency of the chefs to gve an
average score nstead of a hgh or low score because the
employees do not deserve very low or very hgh scores
durng the evaluaton (Lunenburg, 2012).
In addton, due to the nature of the current study, t
s not possble to address the exstence of the potental
bas that evaluators, especally supervsors, may have
when assessng employees’ performance. The man
purpose of ths study was to determne the dfferen
-
ces n IJP accordng to personalty trats. In ths way,
the pont of vew that tends to see everyone below
or below the average leads to measurement errors.
On the other hand, when conductng evaluatons,
supervsors may tend to consder the tme of evaluaton
rather than the whole process, as ndvduals do. The
recall of the supervsors’ recent performance and the
tendency of employees to mprove ther performance
Volkan AŞKUN, Rabia ÇİZEL, Edina AJANOVIC
42
durng the evaluaton perods affect the evaluaton
result (Lunenburg, 2012). Halo effect occurs when a
general mpresson of the event or a person s created
on the bass of a sngle characterstc (Phllps & Gully,
2011). Accordngly, such supervsor’s evaluatons based
on the appearance, personalty trats or behavors of
the employees, can lead to the msleadng mpresson
that the performance of the employees s very good. In
addton, n order to deeper analyze the reasons behnd
the founded dfferences n performance evaluaton, se
-
veral theoretcal frameworks and assumptons may be
used such as Hofstede’s cultural dmenson (Hofstede,
Hofstede, & Mnkov, 2010) to explan the varablty of
results among dfferent countres, or knowledge from
socal psychologcal feld related to prejudce rela-
ted-theores, actor-observer bas and smlar (Aronson,
Wlson, Akert, & Sommers, 2016) can be appled.
Comparative Analysis of Factors Affecting Employee Performance According to Job Performance Measurement Method:
The Case of Performing Artists
43
REFERENCES
Aboagye, A. K., Dai, B., & Bakpa, E. K. (2020). The effect of risk
communication on the nurses’ task and contextual perfor-
mance in disease outbreak control in Ghana: Application
of the cause model. International Journal of Health Plan-
ning and Management. https://doi.org/10.1002/hpm.2978
Abubakar, T., Pangil, F., & Othman, S. Z. (2016). Examining the
link between HRM Practices and Employees’ performance
in Nigerian public sector. Management Science Letters, 6,
395–408. https://doi.org/10.5267/j.msl.2016.4.006
Akca, M., & Yurtçu, B. G. (2017). Çalışma ortamı özelliklerinin
hekimlerin görev ve bağlamsal performansına etkisi. Inter-
national Journal of Academic Value Studies, 3(15), 197–207.
https://doi.org/10.23929/javs.562
Aksu, G., & Güzeller, C. O. (2016). Classification of PISA 2012
mathematical literacy scores using Decision-Tree Method:
Turkey sampling. Egitim ve Bilim, 41(185), 101–122. https://
doi.org/10.15390/EB.2016.4766
Alfes, K., Truss, C., Soane, E. C., Rees, C., & Gatenby, M. (2013).
The relationship between line manager behavior, per-
ceived HRM practices, and individual performance: Exam-
ining the mediating role of engagement. Human Resource
Management, 52(6), 839–859. https://doi.org/10.1002/
hrm.21512
Ali-Hassan, H., Nevo, D., & Wade, M. (2015). Linking dimensions
of social media use to job performance: The role of social
capital. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 24(2),
65–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsis.2015.03.001
Allen, H. (2008). Using routinely collected data to augment the
management of health and productivity loss. Journal of
Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 50(6), 615–632.
https://doi.org/10.1097/JOM.0b013e31817b610c
Allport, G. W. (1966). Traits revisited. American Psychologist,
21(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0023295
Aronson, E., Wilson, T. D., Akert, R. M., & Sommers, S. R. (2016).
Social Psychology (9th ed.). London: Pearson Education.
Barclay, K. J. (2015). Birth order and educational attainment:
Evidence from fully adopted sibling groups. Intelligence,
48, 109–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2014.10.009
Barrick, M. R., Mount, M. K., & Strauss, J. P. (1993). Conscien-
tiousness and performance of sales representatives: Test
of the mediating effects of goal setting. Journal of Ap,
78(5), 715–722.
Bennett, R. J., & Robinson, S. L. (2000). Development of a
measure of workplace deviance. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 85(3), 349–360. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-
9010.85.3.349
Blickle, G. (1996). Personality traits, learning strategies, and
performance. European Journal of Personality, 10(5),
337–352. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-0984
Bonesrønning, H., & Massih, S. S. (2011). Birth order effects on
young students’ academic achievement. Journal of So-
cio-Economics, 40(6), 824–832. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
socec.2011.08.010
Borman, W. C., & Motowidlo, S. J. (1993). Expanding the criterion
domain To include elements of contextual performance.
In N. Schmitt & W. C. Borman (Eds.), Personnel selection in
organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Bracken, D. W., Rose, D. S., & Church, A. H. (2016). The evolution
and devolution of 360° feedback. Industrial and Organiza-
tional Psychology, 9(4), 761–794. https://doi.org/10.1017/
iop.2016.93
Brief, A. P., & Motowidlo, S. J. (1986). Prosocial organizational
behaviors. The Academy of Management Review, 11(4), 710.
https://doi.org/10.2307/258391
Campbell, J. P. (1990). Modeling the performance prediction
problem in industrial and organizational psychology. In
M. D. Dunnette & L. M. Hough (Eds.), Handbook of Industrial
and Organizational Psychology (pp. 687–732). Palo Alto:
Consulting Psychologists Press.
Campbell, J. P., McHenry, J. J., & Wise, L. L. (1990). Modeling job
performance in a population of jobs. Personnel Psychology,
43(2), 313–575. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1990.
tb01561.x
Cattell, R. (1979). Personality and learning theory. Vol. 1: The
structure of personality in its environment. New York, NY:
Springer.
Ceschi, A., Sartori, R., Dickert, S., & Costantini, A. (2016). Grit or
honesty-humility? New insights into the moderating role
of personality between the health impairment process and
counterproductive work behavior. Frontiers in Psychology,
7(1799), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01799
Chamorro-Premuzic, T., & Furnham, A. (2003). Personality
predicts academic performance: Evidence from two
longitudinal university samples. Journal of Research in
Personality, 37(4), 319–338. https://doi.org/10.1016/
S0092-6566(02)00578-0
Conway, J. M., & Huffcutt, A. I. (1997). Psychometric properties
of multisource performance ratings: A meta-analysis of
subordinate, supervisor, peer, and self-ratings. Human
Performance, 10(4), 331–360. https://doi.org/10.1207/
s15327043hup1004_2
Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1988). Personality in adulthood:
A six-year longitudinal study of self-reports and spouse
ratings on the NEO Personality Inventory. Journal of Per-
sonality and Social Psychology, 54(5), 853–863. https://doi.
org/10.1037/0022-3514.54.5.853
Craik, K. H. (1993). Fifty years of personality psychology. New
York, NY: Plenum Press.
Volkan AŞKUN, Rabia ÇİZEL, Edina AJANOVIC
44
Dåderman, A. M., Ingelgård, A., & Koopmans, L. (2020).
Cross-cultural adaptation, from Dutch to Swedish lan-
guage, of the individual work performance questionnaire.
Work, 65(1), 97–109. https://doi.org/10.3233/WOR-193062
Demirok, A. (2018). Örgütsel sinizm ve iş performansı arasındaki
ilişki: Diyarbakır’da çalışan kadrolu ve sözleşmeli personel
örneği(Unpublished master’s thesis). Türk Hava Kurumu
Üniversitesi, Ankara.
Diab, D. L., & Hazer, J. T. (2012). Effect of rater nationality on the
relationships among ratee task, contextual, and counter-
productive behaviors and salary estimates. International
Journal of Selection and Assessment, 20(3), 359–375. https://
doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2389.2012.00606.x
Escorpizo, R. (2008). Understanding work productivity and
its application to work-related musculoskeletal disorders.
International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 38(3–4),
291–297. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ergon.2007.10.018
Eysenck, H. J. (1967). The biological basis of personality. Spring-
field, IL: Thomas.
Fayers, P. M., & Hand, D. J. (2002). Causal variables, indicator
variables and measurement scales: an example from
quality of life. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 165(2),
233–261. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-985X.02020
Francis, L. J., Brown, L. B., & Philipchalk, R. (1992). The devel-
opment of an abbreviated form of the revised Eysenck
personality questionnaire (EPQR-A): Its use among
students in England, Canada, the U.S.A. and Australia. Per-
sonality and Individual Differences, 13(4), 443–449. https://
doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(92)90073-X
Galton, F. (1874). English men of science: their nature and nur-
ture. London: Macmillan.
Gliner, J. A., Morgan, G. A., & L, L. N. (2017). Research methods
in applied settings: An integrated approach to design and
analysis. New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.
Gözel, G., Atmaca, G. D., & Durat, G. (2017). Hemşirelerin kişilik
özellikleri ile iş performansları arasındaki ilişkinin değer-
lendirilmesi. Kocaeli Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi, 3(1),
11–16.
Harris, M. M., & Schaubroeck, J. (1988). A meta-analysis
of self-supervisor, self-peer, and peer-supervisor rat-
ings. Personnel Psychology, 41(1), 43–62. https://doi.
org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1988.tb00631.x
Hashmi, F., Ameen, K., & Soroya, S. (2019). Does post graduate
degree make any difference in job performance of infor-
mation professionals? Library Management, 41(1), 14–27.
https://doi.org/10.1108/LM-07-2019-0042
Heidemeier, H., & Moser, K. (2009). Self–other agreement in
job performance ratings: A meta-analytic test of a process
model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(2), 353–370.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.94.2.353
Hertwig, R., Davis, J. N., & Sulloway, F. J. (2002). Parental
investment: How an equity motive can produce inequal-
ity. Psychological Bulletin, 128(5), 728–745. https://doi.
org/10.1037/0033-2909.128.5.728
Hofstede, G., Hofstede, G. J., & Minkov, M. (2010). Cultures and
organizations: Software of the mind (Rev. 3rd). New York,
NY: McGraw-Hill.
Horner, S. B., Fireman, G. D., & Wang, E. W. (2010). The relation
of student behavior, peer status, race, and gender to deci-
sions about school discipline using CHAID decision trees
and regression modeling. Journal of School Psychology,
48(2), 135–161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2009.12.001
Iacovou, M. (2008). Family size, birth order, and educational
attainment. Marriage and Family Review, 42(3), 35–57.
https://doi.org/10.1300/J002v42n03_03
Judge, T. A., Thoresen, C. J., Bono, J. E., & Patton, G. K. (2001). The
job satisfaction–job performance relationship: A qualita-
tive and quantitative review. Psychological Bulletin, 127(3),
376–407. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.127.3.376
Karancı, N., Dirik, G., & Yorulmaz, O. (2007). Eysenck kişilik
anketi-gözden geçirilmiş kısaltılmış formunun (EKA-GGK)
Türkiyede geçerlik ve güvenilirlik çalışması. Türk Psikiyatri
Dergisi, 18(3), 254–261.
Keleş, K. (2017). Etkileşimci ve dönüşümcü liderliğin işten ayrılma
niyeti ve iş performansına etkisi(Unpublished master’s the-
sis). Cumhuriyet Üniversitesi, Sivas.
Koopmans, L. (2014). Measuring individual work performance.
Zutphen: CPI Koninklijke Wöhrmann.
Koopmans, L., Bernaards, C., Hildebrandt, V., Van Buuren, S., Van
Der Beek, A. J., & de Vet, H. C. w. (2012). Development of an
individual work performance questionnaire. International
Journal of Productivity and Performance Management,
62(1), 6–28. https://doi.org/10.1108/17410401311285273
Lunenburg, F. C. (2012). Organizational structure: Mintzberg’s
framework. International Journal of Scholarly, Academic,
Intellectual Diversity, 14(1), 1–8.
Mael, F. A., O’Shea, P. G., Smith, M. A., Burling, A. S., Carman,
K. L., Haas, A., & Rogers, K. S. (2010). Development of a
model and measure of process-oriented quality of care for
substance abuse treatment. Journal of Behavioral Health
Services and Research, 37(1), 4–24. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s11414-009-9180-4
Maltby, J., Talley, M., Cooper, C., & Leslie, J. C. (1995). Personality
effects in personal and public orientations toward religion.
Personality and Individual Differences, 19(2), 157–163.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(95)00036-6
Metin, U. B., Peeters, M. C. W., & Taris, T. W. (2018). Correlates
of procrastination and performance at work: The role of
having “good fit.Journal of Prevention & Intervention in the
Community, 46(3), 228–244. https://doi.org/10.1080/1085
2352.2018.1470187
Comparative Analysis of Factors Affecting Employee Performance According to Job Performance Measurement Method:
The Case of Performing Artists
45
Motowidlo, S. J., & Van Scotter, J. R. (1994). Evidence that task
performance can be distinguished from contextual per-
formance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79(4), 475–480.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.79.4.475
Mumford, M. D., & Gustafson, S. B. (1988). Creativity syndrome:
Integration, application, and innovation. Psychological
Bulletin, 103(1), 27–43.
Nadatien, I., Handoyo, S., Pudjirahardjo, W. J., & Probowati,
Y. (2019). The influence of organizational pride on the
performance of lecturers in health at the Nahdlatul Ulama
university in Surabaya. Indian Journal of Public Health
Research and Development, 10(1), 538–542. https://doi.
org/10.5958/0976-5506.2019.00105.0
Pallegama, R. W., Ariyasinghe, S., & Perera, H. A. D. (2007).
Influence of personality traits on the attitudes towards
the teaching program and the academic performance
of dental undergraduate. Proceedings of the Peradeniya
University Research Sessions, 12(1), 126–127.
Phillips, J. M., & Gully, S. M. (2011). Organizational behavior:
Tools for success. Natorp Boulevard: South-Western Cen-
gage Learning.
Podsakoff, P. M., & S.B., M. (1989). A second generation measure
of organizational citizenship behavior. Bloomington: Indi-
ana University.
Poropat, A. E. (2011). The Eysenckian personality factors and
their correlations with academic performance. British
Journal of Educational Psychology, 81(1), 41–58. https://
doi.org/10.1348/000709910X497671
Price, J. (2008). Parent-child quality time: Does birth order mat-
ter? Journal of Human Resources, 43(1), 240–265. https://
doi.org/10.3368/jhr.43.1.240
Rothmann, S., & Coetzer, E. P. (2003). The big five personality
dimensions and job performance. Journal of Industrial
Psychology, 29(1), 68–74. https://doi.org/10.4102/sajip.
v29i1.88
Sato, T. (2005). The Eysenck personality questionnaire brief ver-
sion: Factor structure and reliability. Journal of Psychology:
Interdisciplinary and Applied, 139(6), 545–552. https://doi.
org/10.3200/JRLP.139.6.545-552
Schultz, D. P., & Schultz, S. E. (2017). Theories of personality (11th
ed.). Boston: Cengage Learning.
Sekiguchi, T., Bebenroth, R., & Li, D. (2011). Nationality back-
ground of MNC affiliates’ top management and affiliate
performance in Japan: knowledge-based and upper ech-
elons perspectives. The International Journal of Human
Resource Management, 22(5), 999–1016. https://doi.org/1
0.1080/09585192.2011.556774
Sinclair, R. R., & Tucker, J. S. (2006). Stress-CARE: An integrated
model of individual differences in soldier performance
under stress. In A. Adler, T. Britt, & C. Castro (Eds.), Military
life: The psychology of serving in peace and combat: Vol. 1
military performance (pp. 202–231). Westport: Greenwood
Publishing Group.
Smith, C. A., Organ, D. W., & Near, J. P. (1983). Organizational citi-
zenship behavior: Its nature and antecedents. In Journal of
Applied Psychology (Vol. 68).
Tett, R. P., Guterman, H. A., Bleier, A., & Murphy, P. J. (2000).
Development and content validation of a “hyperdimen-
sional” taxonomy of managerial competence. Human
Performance, 13(3), 205–251. https://doi.org/10.1207/
S15327043HUP1303_1
Thorndike, R. L. (1949). Personnel selection: Test and measure-
ment techniques. New York, NY: Wiley.
Turkish Hoteliers Federation – TUROFED (2019). Toursim
Report. 2019/1 https://www.turofed.org.tr/_files/_pdf/
RAPOR/turofed-turizm-raporu-2019.pdf
Uppal, N. (2014). Moderation effects of job characteristics on
the relationship between neuroticism and job perfor-
mance. International Journal of Selection and Assessment,
22(4), 411–421. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijsa.12087
Van Scotter, J. R., & Motowidlo, S. J. (1996). Interpersonal
facilitation and job dedication as separate facets of con-
textual performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81(5),
525–531. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.81.5.525
Viswesvaran, C. (2002). Assessment of individual job perfor-
mance: A review of the past century and a look ahead. In
N. Anderson, D. S. Ones, H. K. Sinangil, & C. Viswesvaran
(Eds.), Handbook of industrial, work and organizationalpsy-
chology, Volume 1: Personnel psychology. Thousand Oaks,
CA: SAGE Publications.
Viswesvaran, Chockalingam, & Ones, D. S. (2000). Perspectives
on models of job performance. International Journal of
Selection and Assessment, 8(4), 216–226. https://doi.
org/10.1111/1468-2389.00151
Yeşilyaprak, B. (2012). Mesleki rehberlik ve kariyer danışmanlığı
kurumdan uygulamaya. Ankara: Pegem Akademi
Zhao, S., Liu, Y., & Zhou, L. (2020). How does a boundaryless
mindset enhance expatriate job performance? The me-
diating role of proactive resource acquisition tactics and
the moderating role of behavioural cultural intelligence.
International Journal of Human Resource Management,
31(10), 1333–1357. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.20
16.1253033
... Performance is a complex topic with hidden structure and abstract notions that make it difficult to give a specific definition; it reflects different dimensions, employed in a variety of contexts and with different usage [39,40]. ...
... In the literature, the definitions vary depending on the usage and context of study. For example, task performance can mean the main work tasks (i.e., basic or technical) that play a central role and should be performed according to the competence of the worker [40]. It is also defined as measuring the effectiveness of a predetermined standard, norm or goal in a systematic way [41]. ...
... However, some scholars divide performance into three dimensions: contextual performance, counterproductive work behavior and task performance [39]. Others have added further dimensions such as adaptive performance, interpersonal performance and organizational performance [40]. To narrow the scope of this study, the current research focuses on the task performance of academic staff in carrying out different duties, tasks and activities that are related to their academic being as a demand or responsibility. ...
Article
Full-text available
COVID-19 has changed the way we live, communicate and work, as well as altering our feelings. The higher education sector, alongside other sectors, has been severely affected by the pandemic and its serious repercussions. Academic and teaching staff have had to work from home and convert to online teaching, a change which has been met with both negative and positive feelings. The need for new competencies and upskilling, among other challenges, has been encountered. Therefore, the objectives of this study are aligned with exploring the impact of three constructs—selfefficacy, positive feelings and negative feelings—on the performance of academic and teaching staff at public and private universities in Bahrain during the COVID-19 lockdown. Additionally, the impact of self-efficacy on these feelings was explored. A cross-sectional quantitative survey instrument was developed, validated and distributed using 83 valid responses. A two-way approach was followed to evaluate the model using the partial least squares (PLS-SEM) and multi-layer perceptron-artificial neural network (MLP-ANN) techniques. Tests support the validity, reliability and consistency of the measurement scale, as well as the validity of the postulated model. The results revealed a statistically significant relationship between the three constructs and performance. Interestingly, attention is drawn to the impact of self-efficacy on increasing positive feelings and task performance. The impact of self-efficacy on reducing negative feelings is also evident. Analyses of PLS-SEM augmented by MLP-ANN enhanced our understanding of the relationships and gave more support to the use of dual approach analyses in future research. This research adds to COVID-19 global research and the findings increase the knowledge within the literature. The implications of the study’s outcomes should be given attention from higher education authorities and management to raise staff morale and offer training to help sustain performance and mental wellbeing. Lasty, limitations and future directions are discussed.
... Performance is a complex topic with hidden structure and abstract notions that make it difficult to give a specific definition; it reflects different dimensions, employed in a variety of contexts and with different usage [39,40]. ...
... In the literature, the definitions vary depending on the usage and context of study. For example, task performance can mean the main work tasks (i.e., basic or technical) that play a central role and should be performed according to the competence of the worker [40]. It is also defined as measuring the effectiveness of a predetermined standard, norm or goal in a systematic way [41]. ...
... However, some scholars divide performance into three dimensions: contextual performance, counterproductive work behavior and task performance [39]. Others have added further dimensions such as adaptive performance, interpersonal performance and organizational performance [40]. To narrow the scope of this study, the current research focuses on the task performance of academic staff in carrying out different duties, tasks and activities that are related to their academic being as a demand or responsibility. ...
Article
Full-text available
COVID-19 has changed the way we live, communicate and work, as well as altering our feelings. The higher education sector, alongside other sectors, has been severely affected by the pandemic and its serious repercussions. Academic and teaching staff have had to work from home and convert to online teaching, a change which has been met with both negative and positive feelings. The need for new competencies and upskilling, among other challenges, has been encountered. Therefore, the objectives of this study are aligned with exploring the impact of three constructs—self efficacy, positive feelings and negative feelings—on the performance of academic and teaching staff at public and private universities in Bahrain during the COVID-19 lockdown. Additionally, the impact of self-efficacy on these feelings was explored. A cross-sectional quantitative survey instrument was developed, validated and distributed using 83 valid responses. A two-way approach was followed to evaluate the model using the partial least squares (PLS-SEM) and multi-layer perceptron-artificial neural network (MLP-ANN) techniques. Tests support the validity, reliability and consistency of the measurement scale, as well as the validity of the postulated model. The results revealed a statistically significant relationship between the three constructs and performance. Interestingly, attention is drawn to the impact of self-efficacy on increasing positive feelings and task performance. The impact of self-efficacy on reducing negative feelings is also evident. Analyses of PLS-SEM augmented by MLP-ANN enhanced our understanding of the relationships and gave more support to the use of dual approach analyses in future research. This research adds to COVID-19 global research and the findings increase the knowledge within the literature. The implications of the study’s outcomes should be given attention from higher education authorities and management to raise staff morale and offer training to help sustain performance and mental wellbeing. Lastly, limitations and future directions are discussed.
... The concept of employee performance is approached by different authors from different angles, and there is no universal definition of this concept. This is a very interesting topic in the field of industrial and organizational psychology (Aşkun et al., 2021). For example, Purnaya et al. (2016) state that the employee's performance is the result of the work he has achieved in performing the tasks assigned to him, based on skills, experience, sincerity, and time. ...
... Erlina (2020) also agrees with the influence of a whole range of factors. These factors may be psychological, sociological, anthropological, demographic, and similar (Aşkun et al., 2021). In terms of business, there are different types of compensation, benefits, health care, safety, and working conditions (Aldogan et al., 2021). ...
Article
Full-text available
Research background: Human resource management is a process that includes several consecutive phases. Employee performance evaluation is one of them. It is a starting point for rewarding employees as well as for several other personnel activities, such as personnel planning, job analysis, employee deployment, and more. The company may approach the evaluation of employee performance itself in different ways. Employee performance can be evaluated in different ways and with different frequencies. The setting up of the employee performance evaluation system is based on global and local conditions, corporate culture, and the needs of the company's management. Purpose of the article: The article aims discuss the approach of the companies in the Czech Republic to the evaluation of employee performance and to evaluate whether or not there have been any changes in this system due to the global pandemic COVID-19. Methods: The starting point of our research is quantitative data on companies in the Czech Republic, obtained by a questionnaire survey immediately before the COVID-19 pandemic and after its first year. Using the chi-square test the attitudes of these companies to the evaluation of employee performance and their changes as a result of COVID-19 are evaluated. Findings & Value added: Conclusions are drawn regarding changes in the system of employee performance evaluation, the method of implementation and frequency of evaluation, and its use in personnel work in the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Article
In today’s volatile, uncertain and hyper-competitive business environment, enhancing employees’ task performance is a major concern. Therefore, organizations need to find out the antecedents of task performance. In this context, the present study was undertaken to find the relationship between employees’ knowledge of administrative law, political skills, workplace dignity, constructive deviance and task performance. To our knowledge, no previous study investigated the simultaneous relationships between these variables. Data were collected through questionnaires from 117 faculty members across different universities in Saudi Arabia. Since there was a lack of valid scales to measure knowledge of administrative law, the study developed a questionnaire to assess the same. Drawing support from the personal initiative theory, affective events theory and self-determination theory, the present study found that knowledge about administrative law influences employees’ political skills and workplace dignity, motivating them to exhibit constructive deviance, ultimately improving task performance. This is the first such study to be conducted in Saudi Arabia, as no previous studies have empirically examined this aspect. Hence, it is a new significant contribution to management literature.
Article
Full-text available
Purpose Since 2005, various public and private sector institutions have been offering a postgraduate degree in Library and Information Management (LIM) in Pakistan and a good number of professionals working in different sectors have got MPhil degree. However, locally, no study has been conducted to measure the impact of higher education on the job performance of information professionals (IPs) in any aspect. The purpose of this paper is to measure job performance of MPhil degree (18 years of education) holder IPs. Design/methodology/approach It is a quantitative study based on the theoretical framework of job performance comprised of its four constructs, i.e. task performance, contextual performance, counterproductive work behaviors (CWB) and adaptive performance. An adopted self-administered questionnaire was used to collect data from professionals who have graduated from any LIM schools of the Punjab province with at least one-year work experience after completion of MPhil degrees. For the purpose of the present study, demographic information like age, job experience and library context was also asked about to explore their impact on job performance. Findings Findings revealed that MPhil degree has a significant positive impact on the job performance of IPs. The professionals reported a significant positive change in their CWB regarding experience after getting a degree. Furthermore, results revealed that professionals were capable of technical skills but needed training regarding time management, teamwork and improving emotional intelligence. Originality/value This is the first study reported from Pakistan on the subject. The results of the study may help the LIM schools to review their MPhil programs for the desired results. It may also help organizations to encourage their personnel for higher education.
Article
Full-text available
BACKGROUND: There is a need for a short, self-rated, validated and reliable instrument for individual work performance suitable for generic use in the Swedish work and organizational context. The Individual Work Performance Questionnaire (IWPQ), comprising originally 47 items, was initially developed in the Netherlands, based on a four-dimensional conceptual framework, in which individual work performance consisted of task performance, contextual performance, adaptive performance, and counterproductive work behavior. During the development process, IWPQ was shortened to 18 items with three scales formally labeled as Task performance, Contextual performance, and Counterproductive work behavior (CWB), capturing three work performance types. The current version of the IWPQ, consisting of 18 items and three scales, was then translated as well as cross-culturally adapted to American-English and Indonesian contexts. OBJECTIVES: To translate and adapt the current IWPQ version, consisting of 18 items, from the Dutch to the Swedish context, to assess its content validity through cognitive interviews, to apply it to a pilot group to present descriptive statistics, to calculate the questionnaire’s internal consistency, as well as to clarify whether the translated items capture three or four performance types. METHODS: The Dutch version of the IWPQ, consisting of 18 items, was translated into Swedish. A six-stage translation and adaptation process was used: forward translation, synthesis, back translation, harmonization, cognitive interviews, revision, and sampling and analyses of pilot data for 206 managers (149 women) from five Swedish municipalities. RESULTS: IWPQ instructions, wording of a few items and one response form were slightly modified. The pilot testing showed Cronbach’s alphas similar to the Dutch version of the IWPQ, ranging between .73 and .82, good mean-inter-item correlations (all above .36). In deciding how many factors to retain, we employed both parallel analysis (PA), and Velicer’s minimum average partial (MAP) test. The number of factors to retain was, as indicated by PA, four, and by MAP, three or four. Exploratory factor analysis (principal axis factoring) revealed clearly separate factors, corresponding to four, rather than three, performance types. A new factor, roughly representing adaptive performance, comprised in the original, longer version of the IWPQ, emerged. CONCLUSIONS: The Swedish version of the IWPQ was successfully translated and adapted in a pilot group of managers. Before it is used, it should be validated in a larger group of managers and in more heterogeneous groups of both white- and blue-collar workers.
Article
Full-text available
Objective: Knowing the personality traits of employees can help to determine their performances. In this study, it was aimed to examine the relationship between personality traits and individual performance standards of nurses.Methods: The study was a descriptive research. The sample size of the study consisted of 171 nurses who agreed to participate to the research. Eysenck Personality Questionnaire Revised/Abbreviated Form (EPQR-A), Quality of Nursing Work Life Scale and Interview form were used. Descriptive statistics were given as mean, standard deviation, frequency, percentage, minimum and maximum. Non parametric comparisons were made by Mann Whitney U test and Kruskal Wallis test. Values of p < 0.05 were considered statistically significant.Results: It was found statistically significant negative and weak correlations between work/working environment and neuroticism sub-dimensions (p=0,05, r= -0,145). There was negative and weak correlation between support services and psychotics sub-dimensions (p=0,01, r= -0,187).Conclusions: : This research has shown that personality traits and job performance are affected by each other.
Article
Background The re‐emerging of infectious disease outbreaks is a menace in Ghana. As the acceptance of risk communication rises, health workers are using it to control outbreaks. Yet, research in risk communication and health workers' performance remains unexplored in Ghana. Objective This study explores how risk communication works among nurses and its effect on their task (behaviors that are delineated based on role requirements and identified by a thorough analysis of the job) and contextual performance (behaviors that do not fall within the employee's assigned duties, but are a very important part of job performance). Thus, we adopted the CAUSE model, which proposes that effective risk communication creates five goals (Confidence, Awareness, Understanding, Satisfaction, and Enactment) amongst communicators. Method This study involves a quantitative approach complemented with qualitative data. It was conducted in three hospitals in Ghana, from which a sample of 398 nurses were selected. Result The result depicts that risk communication has a significant and positive effect on task performance (β = .65; P < .001), and contextual performance (β = .55; P < .001). Conclusion Our study shows that confidence is the strongest predictor of risk communication in influencing task and contextual performance. Yet, risk communication overall improves nurses' task and contextual performance.
Article
Pride is needed in individual motivation and performance, because a person will respond to profitable identities, which are relevant to developing members’ psychological sense in the organization, as identification or commitment (Tyler & Blader, 2003). Unusa is a college concentrating on health education programs. Data from Unusa regarding the dharma of conducting research and community service in 2014, found that out of 117 lecturers who had carried out the research, the number had only reached 42,7%, community service was 44,4%. Demonstrating the performance of Unusa lecturers is not optimal. Research objectives, to prove the influence of Organizational Pride on the Performance of Unusa Lecturers. Observational research design, type of explanatory research, using a cross sectional approach. Respondents were 105 lecturers. Independent variables are Organizational Pride. Dependent variables are Lecturer Performance (task performance, contextual performance, adaptive performance, counterproductive work behavior). Data analysis used linear regression test, α = 0.05. The results of the study prove that Organizational Pride influences Lecturer Performance (p = 0.002; b = 0.301). This study shows that Pride of the Organization can play a role in encouraging the increase of Lecturer Performance. The higher the Pride of the Organization ultimately increases the Lecturers’ Performance. Efforts to strengthen the pride of the lecturers, individually and in institutions are carries out through training and SGD (Small Group Discussion) with routine. Finally, it will improve and strengthen the sense of love, belonging and loyal to optimize the performance of the tridharma. © 2019, Indian Journal of Public Health Research and Development. All rights reserved.
Article
The equity heuristic is a decision rule specifying that parents should attempt to subdivide resources more or less equally among their children. This investment rule coincides with the prescription from optimality models in economics and biology in cases in which expected future return for each offspring is equal. In this article, the authors present a counterintuitive implication of the equity heuristic: Whereas an equity motive produces a fair distribution at any given point in time, it yields a cumulative distribution of investments that is unequal. The authors test this analytical observation against evidence reported in studies exploring parental investment and show how the equity heuristic can provide an explanation of why the literature reports a diversity of birth order effects with respect to parental resource allocation.
Book
Assembling original papers by the field's foremost investigators, this history demonstrates the continuity and progress made across five decades of personality psychology research. In addition to providing a historical perspective for the discipline, the work aims to inspire a more coherent agenda for future research.