Job performance forms a critical aspect of any organization. From time to time, agencies conduct evaluations in an attempt to find out whether employees’ output is in tandem with the stipulated requirements. Individual performance is taken to be of high relevance for both organizations and individuals. Displaying high performance when doing tasks leads to satisfaction, self-efficacy as well as mastery (Sonnentag & Frese, 2013). Additionally, individuals who perform highly get promoted, awarded and honored. This article discusses four types of job performance and how they can be measured.
The first type of job performance is referred to as task performance. In this approach, individuals are evaluated on how well they can accomplish various assigned tasks. For instance, a teacher may be graded based on how he or she delivers the requirements of the syllabus. Task performance may be measured using production data approach. This method evaluates the number of assigned tasks that have been completed and rates the various employees on how well they have executed the duties. The second form of job performance is known as organizational citizenship behaviors. They are behaviors that people do at work which are not formally part of their job task behaviors but help in the overall performance of the organization (Sonnentag & Frese, 2013). They may include, socialization skills, working overtime and so forth. Organizational citizenship behaviors are measured using judgmental scales whereby the employee responds to questions about how often he or she does the stated item.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Adaptive job performance measures how individuals adjust to the changes that may arise in the organization. People respond to change in different ways, hence this approach of evaluating job performance. Since change is varied, researchers suggest that organizations ought to carry out surveys to establish how individuals respond to various phenomena such as emergencies, stress, learning work tasks, technologies, among others and record how each employee responds. The last type is called counterproductive work behavior. It refers to undesirable actions that may harm the organization such as stealing, unethical conduct, lateness, and absenteeism. One of the most appropriate methods of measuring this type of performance is conducting judgmental surveys that are completed by supervisors and coworkers.
The video on Hiring for Attitude gives a snippet of some of the considerations that ought to be borne in mind when hiring new employees. The article on the same topic gives details of some of the pertinent issues presented in the video. The idea of attitude being a bigger issue than skills is helpful because some individuals may have the practical skills necessary for doing certain tasks but may have bad conduct that may give an organization a bad public image. The characteristics given of low performers are useful especially during job performance evaluation. Some of them include resistance to change, lack of taking the initiative, blaming others, among others (Murphy, 2018). The third compelling aspect of the article is the interview questions that ought not to be asked. For instance, asking an interviewee to describe himself or herself. Most individuals give themselves the best qualities which may not be true during actual work performance.
In conclusion, the Hiring for Attitude summary is related to the provided textbook discussion. Most of the qualities that are measured in work performance are same as the questions that are asked during the interviewing process. Additionally, supervisors try to establish whether the qualities described during the interview reflect in the actual work performance.
References
Murphy, M. (2018). Hiring for Attitude . Retrieved 15 January 2018, from https://www.icpak.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/Book-Summary-Hiring-for-Attitude-L.pdf
Sonnentag, S., & Frese, M. (2013). Performance concepts and performance theory. Psychological management of individual performance , 23 (1), 3-25.
