Approach or Avoidance (Or Both?): Integrating Core Self‐evaluations Within an Approach/Avoidance Framework

Abstract

Core self-evaluations (CSE) represent a new personality construct that, despite an accumulation of evidence regarding its predictive validity, provokes debate regarding the fundamental approach or avoidance nature of the construct. This set of studies sought to clarify the approach/avoidance nature of CSE by examining its relation with approach/avoidance personality traits and motivation constructs (Study 1); we subsequently examined approach/avoidance motivational mechanisms as mediators of the relation between CSE and job performance (Study 2). Overall, the studies demonstrate that CSE is best conceptualized as representing both (high) approach tendencies and (low) avoidance tendencies; implications of these findings for CSE theory are discussed.

The effect of state core self-evaluations on task performance, organizational citizenship behaviour, and counterproductive work behaviour

“…High CSE people are typically high on approach and low on avoidance motivation, which implies that they have a heightened sensitivity for positive, whereas being less focused on negative stimuli. This specific combination-high approach and low avoidance motivation-makes people perform better (Ferris et al, 2011). Instead, employees with low CSEs are less approach-and more avoidant-oriented than people high in CSEs, which implies that they focus more on negative stimuli while overlooking the positive ones.…”

“…Because people high in CSEs approach their goals differently than people low in CSEs do, the relationship between CSEs and job performance can be explained using the approach-avoidance framework (Chang et al, 2012;Ferris et al, 2011). High CSE people are typically high on approach and low on avoidance motivation, which implies that they have a heightened sensitivity for positive, whereas being less focused on negative stimuli.…”

“…Instead, employees with low CSEs are less approach-and more avoidant-oriented than people high in CSEs, which implies that they focus more on negative stimuli while overlooking the positive ones. This low approach and high avoidance orientation makes them perform less than high CSE employees (Chang et al, 2012;Ferris et al, 2011). According to Ferris et al (2011), the effect of approach-avoidance motivation on performance can be understood from the fact that avoidance motivation depletes more self-regulatory resources than approach motivation.…”

“…This low approach and high avoidance orientation makes them perform less than high CSE employees (Chang et al, 2012;Ferris et al, 2011). According to Ferris et al (2011), the effect of approach-avoidance motivation on performance can be understood from the fact that avoidance motivation depletes more self-regulatory resources than approach motivation. Because these self-regulatory resources are put to work in all situations in which a person actively wants to change, modify, or alter her/his behaviours to achieve desired outcomes (Vohs, 2006;Vohs et al, 2008), and since these resources are finite, a loss of self-regulatory resources leads to poorer self-control (Vohs, 2006).…”

Core self-evaluations and workplace deviance: The role of resources and self-regulation

“…One of the most influential paradigms in predicting employee behavior has been the core selfevaluations (CSE) construct (Judge and Bono, 2001;Judge, Erez, Bono, and Thoressen, 2003;Judge, Locke, and Durham, 1997;Judge, Locke, Durham and Kluger, 1998), which concerns the fundamental assessment individuals make regarding their worth, competence, and capabilities (Judge, Bono, Erez, and Locke, 2005). Initially conceptualized as a predictor of job satisfaction (Judge et al, 1997), CSE has also shown positive relationships with job performance (Ferris et al, 2011;Grant and Wrzesniewski, 2010;Judge and Bono, 2001), motivation (Erez and Judge, 2001), and engagement (Rich, LePine, and Crawford, 2010). As such, whilst CSE is in essence an evaluation of the self, evidence suggests it may also influence how an individual interacts within the wider social context.…”