The document discusses different approaches to defining and measuring job performance. It explains that performance can be defined as behaviors, and that behaviors are multidimensional, not always observable, and results may be used as proxies. Performance is determined by declarative knowledge, procedural knowledge, and motivation. The document also discusses using behavior, trait, and results approaches to measuring performance and the advantages and disadvantages of each. It provides an example of diagnosing poor performance by identifying whether the issue is related to declarative or procedural knowledge.

1. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at
Defining Performance
and
Choosing a Measurement Approach
Prof. Preeti Bhaskar
Symbiosis Centre for Management
Studies, NOIDA
Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006

2. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at
Defining Performance
Performance is:
Behavior
(What employees do…)
Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006

3. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at
Characteristics of Behaviors
Evaluative
• Negative
• Neutral
• Positive
Multidimensional
• Many different kinds
of behaviors
• Capacity to Advance
or hinder
organizational goals
Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006

4. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at
Behaviors are Not always
Observable
Measurable
Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006

5. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at
Results/Consequences may be used
–To infer behavior
–As proxy for behavioral
measure
Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006

6. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at
Determinants of Performance
Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Performance =
Declarative Knowledge X Procedural Knowledge X Motivation

7. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at
A. Declarative Knowledge
1.Information about
• Facts
• Labels
• Principles
• Goals
2. Understanding of
task requirements
Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006

8. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at
B. Procedural Knowledge
Knowing
– What to do
– How to do it
Skills
– Cognitive
– Physical
– Psychomotor
– Interpersonal
Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006

9. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at
C. Motivation
Choices of behavior
Expenditure
of effort
Level of
effort
Persistence
of effort
Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
“I will go to work
today”
“I will put in my best
efforts at work “
versus “I will not try
very hard”
“I will give up after a
little while” versus “I
will persist no matter
what “
e.g.

10. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at
Diagnosing the Causes for Poor Performance
Heather works in the training department of a large
information technology (IT) organization. She is in charge
of designing and delivering interpersonal skills training,
including communication skills, networking, and new
manager training classes. Heather has excellent
knowledge of how to design training class. She
incorporates behavioral modeling and practice into all of
her classes. She has also conducted research on what
good communication consists of, how to network, and
what new managers need to know to be successful.
However, individuals who attend Heather’s training
classes often give her low ratings, stating that she has a
hard time answering specific questions in classes, and
that she does not seem approachable after the classes
when individuals want to ask questions

11. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at
Questions:
1. You are Heather’s manager. In your
opinion, what is causing Heather’s poor
performance?
Is it due to a deficiency in declarative
knowledge or procedural knowledge?
2. What can be done to remedy the
performance problem?

12. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at
Implications for Addressing Performance
Problems
Managers need information to accurately identify
source(s) of performance problems
Performance management systems must
– Measure performance
AND
– Provide information on SOURCE(s) of problems
Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006

13. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at
Factors Influencing Determinants of
Performance:
Individual
characteristics
• Procedural
knowledge
• Declarative
knowledge
• Motivation
HR practices
Work environment Survivor Syndrome
Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006

14. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at
Performance Dimensions:
Types of multi-dimensional behaviors:
Task
performance
Contextual
performance
Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
Activities that
transform raw materials
help with the transformation
process
Replenishing
Distributing
Supporting
Behaviors that
contribute to organization’s
effectiveness
and
provide a good environment in
which task performance can
occur

15. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at
Differences Between
Task and Contextual Performance
Task
Performance
• Varies across jobs
• Likely to be role
prescribed
• Influenced by
• Abilities
• Skills
Contextual Performance
• Fairly similar across jobs
• Not likely to be role
prescribed
• Influenced by
• Personality
Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006

16. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at
Why Include Task & Contextual
Performance Dimensions in PM system?
Global competition
Teamwork
Customer service
Supervisor views
Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006

17. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at
Approaches to Measuring Performance
• Emphasizes individual traits
of employees
Trait
Approach
• Emphasizes how employees
do the job
Behavior
Approach
• Emphasizes what employees
produce
Results
Approach
Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006

18. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at
Job Performance in Context
Prentice Hall, Inc. © 2006
A performer
(individual or
team)
In a given
situation
Engages in
certain
behaviors
That
produce
various
results
TRAIT BEHAVIOR RESULTS

19. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at
Approaches to Measuring Performance
• Emphasizes how employees
do the job
Behavior
Approach
• Emphasizes what employees
produce
Results
Approach
• Emphasizes individual traits
of employees
Trait
Approach

20. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at
Behavior Approach is Appropriate if-:
•Link between behaviors and
results is not obvious.
•Outcomes occur in the distant
future.
•Poor results are due to causes

21. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at
Advantages of Results Approach :
• Less time
• Lower cost
• Data appear objective
Most appropriate when:
• Workers skilled in necessary behaviors
• Behaviors and results obviously related
• Consistent improvement in results over time
• Many ways to do the job right

22. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at
Trait Approach
• Evaluate stable traits
• Cognitive abilities
• Personality
Appropriate if
• Structural changes planned for organization
Disadvantages
• Improvement not under individual’s control
• Trait may not lead to
• Desired behaviors or
• Desired results

23. Herman Aguinis, University of Colorado at
Thank You