Page 92 - Psychological Management of Individual Performance

work design 71
More recently, discretionary behaviors over and above contextual performance have
also been suggested. Several researchers (e.g., Morrison & Phelps, 1999; Parker, 1998)
have argued that proactive behaviors, such as using initiative and introducing change,
represent aspects that are not encapsulated by the more passive concept of contextual
performance. Similarly, Pulakos, Arad, Donovan, and Plamondon (2000) have developed
a model of adaptive performance with eight specific dimensions, such as solving prob-
lems creatively and learning new work approaches. How these dimensions of adaptive
and proactive performance relate to each other, and to task and contextual performance,
has not been investigated. The broad point is that contextual, proactive, and adaptive
performance all encompass aspects over and above technical proficiency. We consider
all of these aspects to be part of individual performance and, to reflect this broader
emphasis, so we use the term individual work performance rather than individual job
performance.
As well as defining performance and its dimensions, research on this topic has es-
tablished knowledge, skill, and motivation as key determinants of work performance
(Campbell et al., 1993). Blumberg and Pringle (1982) proposed as a further determi-
nant of performance the degree of opportunity in the job, that is, the chance to apply
knowledge, skills, and motivation. Since then, and related to the notion of opportunity,
Neal and Griffin (1999) proposed technology as a factor that can affect performance
independently of knowledge, skill, and motivation.
In addition to these more proximal determinants of performance (namely knowledge,
skill, motivation, and opportunity/technology), many individual and organizational an-
tecedents have also been investigated (see Sonnentag & Frese, this volume). Our focus
in this chapter is on work design as an antecedent to task and contextual performance.
In particular, we propose that work design affects performance via the mechanisms of
knowledge, skill, motivation and opportunity. First, however, we look at work design the-
ories and identify what has already been proposed in terms of a link between performance
and work design.

WORK DESIGN

The topic of work design concerns the content and organization of employees’ day-to-
day physical, mental, and interpersonal job tasks, such as the way tasks are grouped
together and how the tasks are supervised. Work design research is concerned with
those work characteristics that affect not only employees (e.g., their attitudes, mo-
tivation, behavior, cognitions, well-being, performance) but also their organizations
(e.g., absence, productivity, turnover). A key work design characteristic is the degree of
autonomythatemployeeshaveovertheirworktasks,includingwhentasksareperformed,
by which methods, where, and by whom. Additional characteristics of work design in-
clude, for example, the variety of tasks, the feedback employees receive from their tasks,
the extent to which employees have the opportunity to learn, and the cognitive and
emotional demands present in the job (see Parker & Wall, 1998).

JOB SIMPLIFICATION AND WORK REDESIGN

Importantly, the content and arrangement of work tasks often reflect choices, albeit not
necessarily conscious or deliberate ones, made by managers, designers, engineers, and