An exploratory study of self‐regulating activities and their effects on job performance

Abstract

The present study attempted to assess the extent to which job incumbents engage in performance relevant self-regulatory activities. Specifically, the degrees to which 62 insurance salespersons; (1) set performance goals, ( 2 ) monitored performance levels, and ( 3 ) exercised contingent self-reward or punishment with respect to goal achievement or goal failure were measured; and, the consequences that such activities had on performance were examined. The results of this study indicate that, in general, subjects set goals, but typically of a distal/result-orientated, as opposed to a proximal/behaviourally orientated-nature. Goal setting per se had no effects on sales performance, although an objective measure of goal difficulty was related to this criterion. With respect to self-monitoring, it was discovered that the greatest amount of performance feedback came from oneself and one's supervisor, as opposed to one's co-workers. In terms of performance, there was an interaction of feedback source and feedback preference such that the ability to generate internal feedback was related to performance only for individuals who had a preference for such internal feedback. There appeared to be n o substantial amount of contingent self-reward occurring within this organization, although contingent self-punishment (in the form of self-criticism) was in evidence; and, such self-admonishment seemed to have detrimental effects on performance. While the three classes of variables independently explained 26 per cent of the variance in performance, the interactive effects suggested by theories of self-regulation (Bandura, 1977;Kanfer, 1971) were not in evidence. SELF-REGULATION IN THE WORKPLACE: AN EXPLORATORY STUDYMost contemporary approaches to understanding employee motivation are seen as influenced by various assumptions on the part of researchers about the nature of managerial work. Two of these assumptions are, (1) managers are responsible for regulating the behaviours of their subordinates, i.e., for getting work done effectively through their subordinates, and (2) managers can best fulfill this responsibility by somehow arranging the work environments of their subordinates so as to have a positive effect on employee motivation. For example, the literatures concerned with goal setting, performance appraisal, and compensation reflect these assumptions, in that managers are viewed as key'determinants of the direction, amount, and persistence of their subordinate's efforts by assigning goals, providing performance feedback, and allocating financial rewards. Thus, current research on employee motiva-

Workforce training transfer: A study of the effect of relapse prevention training and transfer climate

“…Specifically, it is hypothesized that the relapse prevention modules will produce higher training transfer in unsupportive transfer climates. Because individuals do not naturally engage in appropriate self-management skills (Brief & Hollenbeck, 1985), supportive coping mechanisms must be learned (Manz, Mossholder, & Luthans, 1987;Thoresen & Mahoney, 1974). Consequently, the need for learning additional coping skills should be higher in unsupportive work climates.…”

Human Resource Training and Development

“…Brief & Hollenbeck (1985) surveyed salespersons to measure the extent to which self-regulatory activities occur in the absence of training. For example, if a person labeled as a problem employee continues to be seen as a problem employee, why should the person exert considerable effort to change?…”

2. Developing adaptability: A theory for the design of integrated-embedded training systems

“…Second, metacognitive skill is related to goal setting; self-set goals are more effective for trainees with high metacognitive skills (Ridley et al, 1992). Third, motivation and encouragement should help trainees use their current level of metacognitive skill (Brief & Hollenbeck, 1985;Garner, 1990). Although metacognitive skills may vary across trainees, it may also be possible to train, influence, or leverage the use of metacognitive skills by increasing motivation (e.g., Garner, 1990) or influencing the SRS.…”