Page 174 - Psychological Management of Individual Performance

delineation of performance potential analysis 157
cannot be argued in length within the scope of this chapter—can thus be understood
as the degree to which individuals fulfill their tasks which belong to their position and
which should have been identified by job analysis techniques (Lohaus, 1998). According
to Campbell (1999) performance comprises eight higher-order components which are:
job-specific and non-job-specific task proficiency; communication proficiency; demon-
stration of effort; maintenance of personal discipline; facilitation of team and peer per-
formance; supervision/leadership proficiency; as well as management/administration
proficiency.
After having specified the meaning of the term performance, the attention is directed
to the term potential. The word potential is Latin in origin and means ability, capacity,
power. It is the total power of employable means to achieve a specific end. Potential
clearly sets the upper limit of what a person can achieve. This definition includes a
future-oriented aspect but does not comprise a reference to the individual’s motivation
to reach the aimed-at goal.
Pringle (1994) has defined potential for the context of individual performance and,
according to him, potential comprises the physiological and the cognitive capability (that
includes ability, knowledge, experience, intelligence, state of health, level of education,
energy level, motor skills) to perform a task effectively. However, it does not cover a
person’s willingness to do so. Willingness refers to emotional and psychological factors
that affect the degree to which a person is inclined to perform a task and includes motiva-
tion, job satisfaction, personality, norms of the individual, values, job involvement, etc.
In Pringle’s understanding motivation is a distinct aspect and not a component of poten-
tial. However, in contrast to the aforementioned lexical definition, Pringle’s definition
of potential does not refer to the future.
According to Sarges (1996), potential is not only the skill but also the will to develop
or perform on a higher level in future. This definition explicitly includes motivation
and refers to the future. This understanding cannot be directly derived from the term
potential and it seems to be influenced by practical considerations. In the context of
organizations and human resources development it might be useful to adopt this view-
point, i.e., to assume an existing readiness in certain circumstances to enhance one’s
qualification and take on more responsibility.
As we see it, potential refers to the capability of an individual to perform on a certain
level and, as such, it is the prerequisite for performance. It sets the upper limit of the
achievableperformancelevel.However,fortheapplicationinthecontextoforganizations
this definition is too restricted. For potential to be actually transferred into performance,
motivation has to supervene. This motivation includes a personality-caused as well as
a situation-caused aspect. Put simply, an individual who has the capability to perform
on a high level but is not achievement-motivated or not ambitious might not use her
or his potential and may actually perform on a moderate level. And this personality-
caused motivation can well compensate for capability to a certain extent. Moreover, you
can imagine an individual to have the capability and be ambitious and still perform on
a moderate level. In this case one can assume that motivation is also determined by
situational circumstances, such as the scope of action and the requirements of the task in
general, or the reward contingencies in the organization and/or the work team. Further,
potential is future-oriented in the way that it takes into account, that actual performance
reflects typical behavior but needs not necessarily be the maximum that could be reached
when job requirements change or different jobs are taken on.