Page 29 - Psychological Management of Individual Performance

performance as a dynamic concept 7
behaviors which aim primarily at the smooth functioning of the organization as it is
at the present moment, and proactive behaviors which aim at changing and improving
work procedures and organizational processes. The ‘stabilizing’ contextual performance
behaviors include organizational citizenship behavior with its five components altruism,
conscientiousness, civic virtue, courtesy, and sportsmanship (Organ, 1988), some as-
pects of organizational spontaneity (e.g., helping coworkers, protecting the organization,
George & Brief, 1992) and of prosocial organizational behavior (Brief & Motowidlo,
1986). The more pro-active behaviors include personal initiative (Frese, Fay, Hilburger,
Leng, & Tag, 1997; Frese, Garst, & Fay, 2000; Frese, Kring, Soose, & Zempel, 1996),
voice (Van Dyne & LePine, 1998), taking charge (Morrison & Phelps, 1999). Thus,
contexual performance is not a single set of uniform behaviors, but is in itself a multi-
dimensional concept (Van Dyne & LePine, 1998).

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TASK AND CONTEXTUAL PERFORMANCE

Task and contextual performance can be easily distinguished at the conceptual level.
There is also increasing evidence that these two concepts can also be separated empir-
ically (e.g., Morrison & Phelps, 1999; Motowidlo & Van Scotter, 1994; Van Scotter &
Motowidlo, 1996; Williams & Anderson, 1991). Additionally, task performance and
contextual performance factors such as job dedication and interpersonal facilitation con-
tribute uniquely to overall performance in managerial jobs (Conway, 1999).
Moreover, contextual performance is predicted by other individual variables than is
task performance. Abilities and skills tend to predict task performance while personality
and related factors tend to predict contextual performance (Borman & Motowidlo, 1997;
Hattrup, O’Connell, & Wingate, 1998; Motowidlo & Van Scotter, 1994). However, spe-
cific aspects of contextual performance such as personal initiative have been shown to
be predicted both by ability and motivational factors (Fay & Frese, 2001).

PERFORMANCE AS A DYNAMIC CONCEPT

Individual performance is not stable over time. Variability in an individual’s performance
over time reflects (1) learning processes and other long-term changes and (2) temporary
changes in performance.
Individual performance changes as a result of learning. Studies showed that perfor-
mance initially increases with increasing time spent in a specific job and later reaches
a plateau (Avolio, Waldman, & McDaniel, 1990; McDaniel, Schmidt, & Hunter, 1988;
Qui˜nones, Ford, & Teachout, 1995). Moreover, the processes underlying performance
change over time. During early phases of skill acquisition, performance relies largely
on ‘controlled processing’, the availability of declarative knowledge and the optimal
allocation of limited attentional resources, whereas later in the skill acquisition pro-
cess, performance largely relies on automatic processing, procedural knowledge, and
psychomotor abilities (Ackerman, 1988; Kanfer & Ackerman, 1989).
To identify the processes underlying changes of job performance, Murphy (1989)
differentiated between a transition and a maintenance stage. The transition stage occurs
when individuals are new in a job and when the tasks are novel. The maintenance
stage occurs when the knowledge and skills needed to perform the job are learned and