How do organizations identify the behaviors that underlie task performance?

INDIVIDUAL OUTCOMES

INDIVIDUAL CHARACTERISTICS

GROUP MECHANISMS

ORGANIZATIONAL MECHANISMS

Organizational Culture

Teams: Characteristics &

Diversity

Ability

Personality & Cultural Values

Leadership: Power &

Negotiation

Organizational Commitment

Job Performance

Job Satisfaction

Stress

Motivation

INDIVIDUAL MECHANISMS

Trust, Justice, & Ethics

Learning & Decision Making

Organizational Structure

Leadership: Styles &

Behaviors

Teams: Processes &

Communication

coL45091_ch02_030-061.indd 30 11/27/15 08:03 PM

chapter2 Job Performance Final PDF to printer

coL45091_ch02_030-061.indd 31 11/27/15 08:03 PM

L E A R N I N G G OA L S

2.1 What is job performance? 2.2 What is task performance? 2.3 How do organizations identify the behaviors that underlie task performance? 2.4 What is citizenship behavior? 2.5 What is counterproductive behavior? 2.6 What workplace trends are affecting job performance in today’s organizations? 2.7 How can organizations use job performance information to manage employee performance?

After reading this chapter, you should be able to answer the following questions:

© John Moore/Getty Images

Final PDF to printer

32 C H A P T E R 2 Job Performance

coL45091_ch02_030-061.indd 32 11/27/15 08:03 PM

JOB PERFORMANCE

We begin our journey through the integrative model of organizational behavior with job perfor- mance. Why begin with job performance? Because understanding one’s own performance is a critical concern for any employee, and understanding the performance of employees in one’s unit is a critical concern for any manager. Consider for a moment the job performance of your univer- sity’s basketball coach. If you were the university’s athletic director, you might gauge the coach’s performance by paying attention to various behaviors. How much time does the coach spend on the road during recruiting season? How effective are the coach’s practices? Are the offensive and defensive schemes well designed, and are the plays called during games appropriate? You might also consider some other behaviors that fall outside the strict domain of basketball. Does the coach run a clean program? Do players graduate on time? Does the coach represent the univer- sity well during interviews with the media and when in public?

Of course, as your university’s athletic director, you might be tempted to ask a simpler ques- tion: Is the coach a winner? After all, fans and boosters may not care how good the coach is at the previously listed behaviors if the team fails to win conference championships or make it deep into the NCAA tournament. Moreover, the coach’s performance in terms of wins and losses has important implications for the university because it affects ticket sales, licensing fees, and booster donations. Still, is every unsuccessful season the coach’s fault? What if the coach develops a well-conceived game plan but the players repeatedly make mistakes at key times in the game? What if the team experiences a rash of injuries or inherits a schedule that turns out to be much tougher than originally thought? What if a few games during the season are decided by fluke baskets or by bad calls by the referees?

JPMorgan Chase is one of the oldest financial institutions in the United States. Its roots go back to the late 1700s when Arron Burr and Alexander Hamilton established a company to supply fresh water to the inhabitants of Lower Man- hattan. Burr inserted creative language in the company’s char- ter, allowing him to use the company’s excess capital to start a commercial bank in 1799. This bank, called The Bank of the Manhattan Co., was the only competitor to a bank Alexander Hamilton founded 15 years earlier. If you’re a history buff you may already know that the two became antagonistic, and that, in addition to serving as Thomas Jefferson’s vice president for one term, Burr also killed Hamilton in a duel in 1804.

Over the next 200 years, hundreds of mergers resulted in today’s JPMorgan Chase. Most relevant to the company’s namesake was the merger of The Bank of the Manhattan Co. and Chase National Bank in 1955, and then the merger of this company—called The Chase Manhattan Group—and J.P. Morgan and Co. in 2000. Today, with assets of $2.6 trillion and operations in 60 countries, the company’s 240,000 employ- ees must perform their jobs effectively to serve customers in investment banking, consumer financial services, small business

and commercial banks, financial transaction processing, asset management, and private equity.

So what does effective job performance mean for employees of JPMorgan Chase? Obviously the answer depends a great deal on the specific job in question. Whereas the job performance of an investment banker may depend on the amount of money a client company makes on an initial public offering, the job per- formance of a customer service representative may depend on whether concerns of customers are resolved quickly. There are also general aspects of job performance that are determined by the company’s business practices. Across jobs at JPMorgan Chase, employees need to be cooperative and have a customer focus, an entrepreneurial spirit and discipline. Finally, the com- pany has recently had costly legal and regulatory problems and has responded to these challenges, in part, by emphasizing ways in which employees contribute negatively to the company. Accordingly, effective job performance at JPMorgan Chase means that employees must not only perform their core job duties well and engage in activities that support the company’s way of doing business, but they must also refrain from engaging in behaviors that violate company policies and regulations.

JPMORGAN CHASE

Final PDF to printer

33C H A P T E R 2 Job Performance

coL45091_ch02_030-061.indd 33 11/27/15 08:03 PM

This example illustrates one dilemma when examining job performance. Is performance a set of behaviors that a person does (or does not) perform, or is performance the end result of those behaviors? You might be tempted to believe it’s more appropriate to define performance in terms of results rather than behaviors. This is because results seem more “objective” and are more connected to the central concern of managers—“the bottom line.” For example, the job perfor- mance of salespeople is often measured by the amount of sales revenue generated by each person over some time span (e.g., a month, a quarter, a year). For the most part, this logic makes per- fect sense: Salespeople are hired by organizations to generate sales, and so those who meet or exceed sales goals are worth more to the organization and should be considered high performers. It’s very easy to appreciate how the sales revenue from each salesperson might be added up and used as an indicator of a business’s financial performance.

However, as sensible as this logic seems, using results to indicate job performance creates potential problems. First, employees contribute to their organization in ways that go beyond bottom-line results, and so evaluating an employee’s performance based on results alone might give you an inaccurate picture of which employees are worth more to the organization. Second, there is evidence that managers’ focus on bottom line results can create a bottom line mentality among employees, which in turn, results in social undermining—sabotaging coworkers’ reputa- tions or trying to make them look bad.1 Similarly, as our opening example illustrates, the quest to enhance the bottom line of JPMorgan Chase may have led employees to violate policies and reg- ulations, which in turn, cost the company billions of dollars. Third, results are often influenced by factors that are beyond the employees’ control—product quality, competition, equipment, technology, budget constraints, coworkers, and supervisors, just to name a few. Fourth, even if these uncontrollable factors are less relevant in a given situation, there’s another problem with a results-based view of job performance: results don’t tell you how to reverse a “bad year.” That is, performance feedback based on results doesn’t provide people with the information they need to improve their behavior. Walgreens, for example, uses knowledge of job performance behaviors to create comprehensive training and development programs so that employees can be effective at various jobs they may have throughout their careers with the company.2 In sum, given that the field of OB aims to understand, predict, and improve behavior, we refer to job performance as behavior. We use the term “results” or “job performance results” to describe the important out- comes that are associated with those behaviors.

So what types of employee behaviors constitute job performance? To understand this ques- tion, consider that job performance is formally defined as the value of the set of employee behaviors that contribute, either positively or negatively, to organizational goal accomplishment.3 This definition of job performance includes behaviors that are within the control of employees, but it places a boundary on which behaviors are (and are not) relevant to job performance. For example, consider the behavior of a server in a restaurant that prides itself on world-class cus- tomer service. Texting a friend during a work break would not usually be relevant (in either a positive or negative sense) to the accomplishment of orga- nizational goals. That behav- ior is therefore not relevant to the server’s job performance. However, texting in the mid- dle of taking a customer’s order would be relevant (in a negative sense) to organiza- tional goal accomplishment. That behavior, therefore, is relevant to the server’s job performance.

2.1 What is job performance?

Geno Auriemma has led the University of Connecticut women’s basketball team to ten national championships, five perfect seasons, and 100 percent graduation rate for all four-year players. He’s been the Naismith College Coach of the Year six times since taking over the team in 1985. If the Huskies suf- fered through a couple los- ing seasons, would Coach Auriemma be considered a low performer?

© Mike Carlson/Getty Images

Final PDF to printer

34 C H A P T E R 2 Job Performance

coL45091_ch02_030-061.indd 34 11/27/15 08:03 PM

WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO BE A “GOOD PERFORMER”?

Our definition of job performance raises a number of important questions. Specifically, you might be wondering which employee behaviors fall under the umbrella heading of “job performance.” In other words, what exactly do you have to do to be a “good performer”? We could probably spend an entire chapter just listing various behaviors that are relevant to job performance. How- ever, those behaviors generally fit into three broad categories.4 Two categories are task perfor- mance and citizenship behavior, both of which contribute positively to the organization. The third category is counterproductive behavior, which contributes negatively to the organization. The sections that follow describe these broad categories of job performance in greater detail.

TASK PERFORMANCE Task performance includes employee behaviors that are directly involved in the transforma- tion of organizational resources into the goods or services that the organization produces.5 If you read a description of a job in an employment ad online, that description will focus on task performance behaviors—the tasks, duties, and responsibilities that are a core part of the job. Put differently, task performance is the set of explicit obligations that an employee must fulfill to receive compensation and continued employment. For a flight attendant, task performance includes announcing and demonstrating safety and emergency procedures and distributing food and beverages to passengers. For a firefighter, task performance includes searching burning buildings to locate fire victims and operating equipment to put out fires. For an accountant, task performance involves preparing, examining, and analyzing accounting records for accuracy and completeness. Finally, for an advertising executive, task performance includes developing adver- tising campaigns and preparing and delivering presentations to clients.6

Although the specific activities that constitute task performance differ widely from one job to another, task performance also can be understood in terms of more general categories. One way of categorizing task performance is to consider the extent to which the context of the job is routine, changing, or requires a novel or unique solution. Routine task performance involves well-known responses to demands that occur in a normal, routine, or otherwise predictable way. In these cases, employees tend to behave in more or less habitual or programmed ways that vary little from one instance to another.7 As an example of a routine task activity, you may recall watching an expres- sionless flight attendant robotically demonstrate how to insert the seatbelt tongue into the seatbelt buckle before your flight takes off. Seatbelts haven’t really changed since … oh … 1920, so the instructions to passengers tend to be conveyed the same way, over and over again.

In contrast, adaptive task performance, or more commonly “adaptability,” involves employee responses to task demands that are novel, unusual, or, at the very least, unpredictable.8 For example, on August 2, 2005, Air France Flight 358, carrying 297 passengers and 12 crew members from Paris, France, to Toronto, Canada, skidded off the runway while landing and plunged into a ravine. Amid smoke and flames, the flight attendants quickly responded to the emergency and assisted three-quarters of the 297 passengers safely off the plane within 52 sec- onds, before the emergency response team arrived. One minute later, the remaining passengers and 12 crew members were out safely.9 From this example, you can see that flight attendants’ task performance shifted from activities such as providing safety demonstrations and handing out beverages to performing emergency procedures to save passengers’ lives. Although flight attendants receive training so they can handle emergency situations such as this one, executing these behaviors effectively in the context of an actual emergency differs fundamentally from anything experienced previously.

Adaptive behaviors are becoming increasingly important as globalization, technological advances, and knowledge-based work increase the pace of change in the workplace.10 In fact, adaptive task performance has become crucial in today’s global economy where companies have been faced with the challenge of becoming more productive with fewer employees on staff. For example, Sheboygan Falls, Wisconsin–based Johnsonville Sausage feels that adaptability is

2.2 What is task performance?

Final PDF to printer

35C H A P T E R 2 Job Performance

coL45091_ch02_030-061.indd 35 11/27/15 08:03 PM

important for employees at all levels of the organization and has invested significant resources in training to ensure that employees develop competency in this aspect of job performance.11 As another example, at the German chemical and pharmaceutical company Bayer, the hiring of plant directors involves the search for candidates who not only possess a wide range of skills and abilities so that they can adapt to various job demands, but in addition, competence in helping others adapt to changes that occur in the workplace.12 Table 2-1 provides a number of examples of adaptability that are relevant to many jobs in today’s economy.13

Finally, creative task performance is the degree to which individuals develop ideas or physical outcomes that are both novel and useful.14 The necessity of including both novelty and usefulness in the definition of creativity can be illustrated with the following example of what effective performance for a swimsuit designer involves. Consider first the case of a swimsuit designer who suggests in a meeting that next season’s line of swimsuits should be made entirely out of chrome-plated steel. Although this idea might be very novel, for many reasons it’s not likely to be very useful. Indeed, someone who offered an idea like this would likely be consid- ered silly rather than creative. Another swimsuit designer suggests in the meeting that swimsuits for next season should be made out of materials that are attractive and comfortable. Although

TABLE 2-1 Behaviors Involved in Adaptability

BEHAVIORS SPECIFIC EXAMPLES

Handling emergencies or crisis situations

Quickly analyzing options for dealing with danger or crises and their implications; making split-second decisions based on clear and focused thinking

Handling work stress Remaining composed and cool when faced with difficult circumstances or a highly demanding workload or schedule; acting as a calming and settling influence to whom others can look for guidance

Solving problems creatively Turning problems upside-down and inside-out to find fresh new approaches; integrating seemingly unrelated informa- tion and developing creative solutions

Dealing with uncertain and unpre- dictable work situations

Readily and easily changing gears in response to unpredict- able or unexpected events and circumstances; effectively adjusting plans, goals, actions, or priorities to deal with changing situations

Learning work tasks, technologies, and work situations

Quickly and proficiently learning new methods or how to perform previously unlearned tasks; anticipating change in the work demands and searching for and participating in assignments or training to prepare for these changes

Demonstrating interpersonal adaptability

Being flexible and open-minded when dealing with others; listening to and considering others’ viewpoints and opinions and altering one’s own opinion when it’s appropriate to do so

Demonstrating cultural adaptability Willingly adjusting behavior or appearance as necessary to comply with or show respect for others’ values and cus- toms; understanding the implications of one’s actions and adjusting one’s approach to maintain positive relationships with other groups, organizations, or cultures

Source: E.E. Pulakos, S. Arad, M.A. Donovan, and K.E. Plamondon, “Adaptability in the Workplace: Development of a Taxonomy of Adaptive Performance,” Journal of Applied Psychology 85 (2000), pp. 612–24. Copyright © 2004 by the American Psychological Association. Adapted with permission. No further reproduction or distribution is permitted without permission from the American Psychological Association.

Final PDF to printer

36 C H A P T E R 2 Job Performance

coL45091_ch02_030-061.indd 36 11/27/15 08:03 PM

under some circumstances such an idea might be useful, the idea is not novel because attractive- ness and comfort are generally accepted design elements for swimsuits. Someone who offered an idea like this might be appreciated for offering input, but no one would consider this individual’s performance to be particularly creative. Finally, a third designer for this swimsuit manufacturer suggests that perhaps a two-piece design would be preferred for women, rather than a more traditional one-piece design. Although such an idea would not be considered creative today, it certainly was in 1946 when, in separate but nearly simultaneous efforts, Jacques Heim and Louis Reard introduced the bikini.15

Although you might be tempted to believe that creative task performance is only relevant to jobs such as artist and inventor, its emphasis has been increasing across a wide variety of jobs. Indeed, more than half the total wages and salary in the United States are paid to employees who need to be creative as part of their jobs, and as a consequence, some have argued that we are at the “dawn of the creative age.”16 This increase in the value of creative performance can be explained by the rapid technological change and intense competition that mark today’s business landscape.17 In this context, employee creativity is necessary to spark the types of innovations that enable organizations to stay ahead of their competition. Creative ideas do not always get implemented, thus it is important to recognize creative performance behaviors, as well as the creative outcomes that result from those behaviors.18

Now that we’ve given you a general understanding of task performance behaviors, you might be wondering how organizations identify the sets of behaviors that represent “task performance” for dif- ferent jobs. Many organizations identify task performance behaviors by conducting a job analysis. Although there are many different ways to conduct a job analysis, most boil down to three steps. First, a list of the activities involved in a job is generated. This list generally results from data from several sources, including observations, surveys, and interviews of employees. Second, each activity on this list is rated by “subject matter experts,” according to things like the importance and frequency of the activity. Subject matter experts generally have experience performing the job or managing the job and therefore are in a position to judge the importance of specific activities to the organization. Third, the activities that are rated highly in terms of their importance and frequency are retained and used to define task performance. Those retained behaviors then find their way into training pro- grams as learning objectives and into performance evaluation systems as measures to evaluate task performance.

As an example, to determine training objectives for production workers, Toyota uses a highly detailed job analysis process to identify important tasks as well as the behaviors necessary to effec- tively complete those tasks.19 The core job tasks involved in the job of a bumper-molding operator, for example, include “routine core tasks,” “machine tending,” and “quality,” and each of these tasks further consists of several more detailed steps. For example, routine core tasks include de-molding, trimming, spray-molding, and sanding. Each of these tasks can be broken down further into more detailed steps, and in turn, the specific behaviors involved in each step become the focus of the train- ing. For example, to de-mold the left side of the bumper, the worker must “use left thumb to push along edge of bumper,” “place pressure in the crease of thumb,” “push toward left side away from mold,”

and “grasp top edge when bum- per is released.” Although this level of detail might seem like an awful lot of analysis for what one might imagine to be a relatively straightforward job, Toyota competes on the basis of quality and cost, and its suc- cess in selling millions of Pri- uses, Camrys, Tacomas, and Highlanders each year has been attributed to its ability to train production workers to follow the standardized and efficient procedures.20

2.3 How do organizations identify the behaviors that underlie task performance?

Toyota production workers assemble vehicles using a

highly standardized and effi- cient set of tasks.

© Eric Gay/AP Images

Final PDF to printer

37C H A P T E R 2 Job Performance

coL45091_ch02_030-061.indd 37 11/27/15 08:03 PM

Men’s Wearhouse, the Houston-based retailer, provides another good example of an orga- nization that uses task performance information to manage its employees.21 The company first gathers information about the employee’s on-the-job behaviors. For example, the job of wardrobe consultant involves greeting, interviewing and measuring customers properly, ensur- ing proper alteration revenue is collected, and treating customers in a warm and caring man- ner. After the information is gathered, senior managers provide feedback and coaching to the employee about which types of behaviors he or she needs to change to improve. The feedback is framed as constructive criticism meant to improve an employee’s behavior. Put yourself in the place of a Men’s Wearhouse wardrobe consultant for a moment. Wouldn’t you rather have your performance evaluated on the basis of behaviors such as these rather than some overall index of sales? After all, those behaviors are completely within your control, and the feedback you receive from your boss will be more informative than the simple directive to “sell more suits next year than you did this year.”

If organizations find it impractical to use job analysis to identify the set of behaviors needed to define task performance, they can turn to a database the government has created to help with that important activity. The Occupational Information Network (or O*NET) is an online database that includes, among other things, the characteristics of most jobs in terms of tasks, behaviors, and the required knowledge, skills, and abilities (http://www.onetonline.org). Figure 2-1 shows the O*NET output for a flight attendant’s position, including many of the tasks discussed previ- ously in this chapter. Of course, O*NET represents only a first step in figuring out the important tasks for a given job. Many organizations ask their employees to perform tasks that their com- petitors do not, so their workforce performs in a unique and valuable way. O*NET cannot capture those sorts of unique task requirements that separate the most effective organizations from their competitors.

For example, the authors of a book titled Nuts identify “fun” as one of the dominant values of Southwest Airlines.22 Southwest believes that people are willing to work more productively and creatively in an environment that includes humor and laughter. Consistent with this belief, flight

O*NET, or Occupational Information Network, is an online government database that lists the characteristics of most jobs and the knowledge required for each. This sample is for the job of flight attendant.

FIGURE 2-1 O*NET Results for Flight Attendants

Final PDF to printer

38 C H A P T E R 2 Job Performance

coL45091_ch02_030-061.indd 38 11/27/15 08:03 PM

attendant task performance at Southwest includes not only generic flight attendant activi- ties, such as those identified by O*NET, but also activities that reflect a sense of humor and playfulness. Effective flight attendants at Southwest tell jokes over the intercom such as, “We’ll be dimming the lights in the cabin . . . pushing the light-bulb button will turn your reading light on. How- ever, pushing the flight atten- dant button will not turn your

flight attendant on.”23 As another example, Nisshinbo Automotive, a part of the Japanese com- pany Nisshinbo Holdings, was faced with the challenge of increasing productivity with fewer workers. They developed a system where they not only evaluated and compensated employees for behaviors reflected in their job descriptions, but also in behaviors that supported the com- pany’s mission defined more broadly.24 In summary, though O*NET may be a good place to start, the task information from the database should be supplemented with information regarding behaviors that support the organization’s values and strategy.

Before concluding our section on task performance, it’s important to note that task perfor- mance behaviors are not simply performed or not performed. Although poor performers often fail to complete required behaviors, it’s just as true that the star performers often exceed all expectations for those behaviors.25In fact, you can probably think of examples of employees who have engaged in task performance that’s truly extraordinary. As an example, consider the case of Chesley B. Sullenberger, the pilot of US Airways Flight 1549, which lost power after hitting a flock of birds shortly after taking off from New York’s LaGuardia Airport on January 15, 2009.26 Sullenberger calmly discussed the problem with air traffic control and decided that the only course of action was to land in the Hudson River. Three minutes after the bird strike, he executed a textbook landing on the water, saving the lives of all 150 passengers and crew. Experts agree that Sullenberger’s performance that day was remarkable. Not only did Sullenberger accurately assess the situation and make the right decision about where to ditch the aircraft, he also piloted the landing perfectly. If the plane had approached the water going too slow, it would have lost lift and crashed into the water nose first; if the plane had been going too fast when it touched, it would have flipped, cart-wheeled, and disintegrated.27

CITIZENSHIP BEHAVIOR Sometimes employees go the extra mile by actually engaging in behaviors that are not within their job description—and thus that do not fall under the broad heading of task performance. This situation brings us to the second category of job performance, called citizenship behavior, which is defined as voluntary employee activities that may or may not be rewarded but that con- tribute to the organization by improving the overall quality of the setting in which work takes place.28 Have you ever had a coworker or fellow student who was especially willing to help someone who was struggling? Who typically attended optional meetings or social functions to support his or her colleagues? Who maintained a good attitude, even in trying times? We tend to call those people “good citizens” or “good soldiers.”29 High levels of citizenship behavior earn them such titles. Although there are many different types of behaviors that might seem to fit the definition of citizenship behavior, research suggests two main categories that differ according to who benefits from the activity: coworkers or the organization (see Figure 2-2).30

The first category of citizenship behavior is the one with which you’re most likely to be familiar: interpersonal citizenship behavior. Such behaviors benefit coworkers and colleagues and involve assisting, supporting, and developing other organizational members in a way that

2.4 What is citizenship behavior?

The pilot of Flight 1549 displayed exceptional per-

formance and saved the lives of his passengers and crew.

© Steven Day/AP Images

Final PDF to printer

39C H A P T E R 2 Job Performance

coL45091_ch02_030-061.indd 39 11/27/15 08:03 PM

goes beyond normal job expectations.31 For example, helping involves assisting coworkers who have heavy workloads, aiding them with personal matters, and showing new employees the ropes when they first arrive on the job. Do you consider yourself a helpful person? Check the OB Assessments feature to see how helpful you really are. Courtesy refers to keeping coworkers informed about matters that are relevant to them. Some employees have a tendency to keep rel- evant facts and events secret. Good citizens do the opposite; they keep others in the loop because they never know what information might be useful to someone else. Sportsmanship involves maintaining a good attitude with coworkers, even when they’ve done something annoying or when the unit is going through tough times. Whining and complaining are contagious; good citi- zens avoid being the squeaky wheel who frequently makes mountains out of molehills.

Although interpersonal citizenship behavior is important in many different job contexts, it may be even more important when employees work in small groups or teams. A team with mem- bers who tend to be helpful, respectful, and courteous is also likely to have a positive team atmosphere in which members trust one another. This type of situation is essential to foster the willingness of team members to work toward a common team goal rather than goals that may be more self-serving.32 In fact, if you think about the behaviors that commonly fall under the “team- work” heading, you’ll probably agree that most are examples of interpersonal citizenship behav- ior (see Chapter 12 on team processes and communication for more discussion of such issues).33

The second category of citizenship behavior is organizational citizenship behavior. These behaviors benefit the larger organization by supporting and defending the company, working to improve its operations, and being especially loyal to it.34 For example, voice involves speaking up and offering constructive suggestions for change.35 Good citizens react to bad rules or policies by constructively trying to change them as opposed to passively complaining about them (see Chapter 3 on organizational commitment for more discussion of such issues).36 Civic virtue refers to participating in the company’s operations at a deeper-than-normal level by attending voluntary meetings and functions, reading and keeping up with organizational announcements, and keeping abreast of business news that affects the company. Boosterism means representing the organization in a positive way when out in public, away from the office, and away from work. Think of friends you’ve had who worked for a restaurant. Did they always say good things about the restaurant when talking to you and keep any “kitchen horror stories” to themselves? If so, they were being good citizens by engaging in high levels of boosterism.

FIGURE 2-2 Types of Citizenship Behaviors

Organizational

Interpersonal

- Helping - Courtesy - Sportsmanship

- Voice - Civic Virtue - Boosterism

Final PDF to printer

40 C H A P T E R 2 Job Performance

coL45091_ch02_030-061.indd 40 11/27/15 08:03 PM

HELPING How helpful are you? This assessment is designed to measure helping, an interpersonal form of citizenship behavior. Think of the people you work with most frequently, either at school or at work. The questions below refer to these people as your “work group.” Answer each question using the scale below, then sum up your answers. (Instructors: Assessments on sportsmanship, boosterism, political deviance, and trait creativity can be found in the PowerPoints in the Con- nect Library’s Instructor Resources and in the Connect assignments for this chapter).

SCORING AND INTERPRETATION If your scores sum up to 40 or higher, you perform a high level of helping behavior, which means you frequently engage in citizenship behaviors directed at your colleagues. This is good, as long as it doesn’t distract you from fulfilling your own job duties and responsibilities. If your scores sum up to less than 40, you perform a low level of helping behaviors. You might consider paying more attention to whether your colleagues need assistance while working on their task duties. Source: L.V. Van Dyne and J.A. LePine, “Helping and Voice Extra-Role Behaviors: Evidence of Construct and Predic- tive Validity,” Academy of Management Journal 41 (1998), pp. 108–19.

OB ASSESSMENTS

1 STRONGLY DISAGREE

2 MODERATELY

DISAGREE

3 SLIGHTLY DISAGREE

4 NEITHER

DISAGREE NOR AGREE

5 SLIGHTLY

AGREE

6 MODERATELY

AGREE

7 STRONGLY

AGREE

1. I volunteer to do things for my work group. _______________

2. I help orient new members of my work group. _______________

3. I attend functions that help my work group. _______________

4. I assist others in my group with their work for the benefit of the group. _______________

5. I get involved to benefit my work group. _______________

6. I help others in this group learn about the work. _______________

7. I help others in this group with their work responsibilities. _______________

Three important points should be emphasized about citizenship behaviors. First, as you’ve probably realized, citizenship behaviors are relevant in virtually any job, regardless of the par- ticular nature of its tasks,37 and research suggests that these behaviors can boost organizational effectiveness.38 As examples, research conducted in a paper mill found that the quantity and quality of crew output was higher in crews that included more workers who engaged in citizen- ship behavior.39 Research in 30 restaurants also showed that higher levels of citizenship behavior promoted higher revenue, better operating efficiency, higher customer satisfaction, higher per- formance quality, less food waste, and fewer customer complaints.40 Thus, it seems clear that citizenship behaviors have a significant influence on the bottom line.