Morning employees are perceived as better employees: Employees’ start times influence supervisor performance ratings.

Yam, Kai Chi; Fehr, Ryan; Barnes, Christopher M.

doi:10.1037/a0037109

Cited by 43 publications

(44 citation statements)

References 57 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the HRM literature, a number of empirical studies have used supervisors' ratings to assess several employee outcomes, such as job performance (e.g. Yam, Fehr and Barnes, 2014), creativity (de Stobbeleir, Ashford and Buyens, 2011), customer service behaviours (Liden et al, 2014) and organizational citizenship behaviours (e.g. Bolino et al, 2006), among others.…”

Section: Data Collection and Results For Research Questionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Single‐ and Multiple‐Informant Research Designs to Examine the Human Resource Management−Performance Relationship

Llusar

Martín

Roca‐Puig

et al. 2016

British J of Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

During the last decades, many empirical studies have analysed the relationship between human resource management and firm performance. Despite the call for multiple-rater designs, a relatively large number of researchers still rely on survey responses provided by a single informant in each organization. Single-informant designs suffer from a number of problems, especially when the responses provided by different types of raters across firms are pooled into a single dataset prior to assessing their equivalence across raters. Using an illustration of the relationship between high performance work systems and firm performance, in this paper we observe that responses provided by managers holding different positions (human resource managers and sales managers) differ significantly and therefore pooling their responses into a single dataset may result in confusing conclusions. Furthermore, we demonstrate that differences arise in the estimated parameters when a multiple-key-informant approach, compared to a single-informant design, is adopted. For these reasons, data collection using multiple key informants is recommended, based on the assumption that some raters in the firm will be more knowledgeable about the variables of interest than others.

show abstract

Section: Data Collection and Results For Research Questionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Single‐ and Multiple‐Informant Research Designs to Examine the Human Resource Management−Performance Relationship

Llusar

Martín

Roca‐Puig

et al. 2016

British J of Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The authors argued that these relationships arise because of a pervasive morning bias, that is, an association between beginning the day's activities early in the morning and goodness. Interestingly, supervisors who themselves are late chronotypes are less likely to hold negative stereotypes of employees with late start times, compared with supervisors who are early chronotypes (Yam et al, ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It needs to be noted, however, that a shift of mindset is necessary in order to avoid disadvantages for employees who make use of flexible work times and decide to come to work later in the morning and finish work later in the evening. In a recent study, Yam, Fehr, and Barnes () showed that employees' start times influence supervisor performance ratings: Employees starting earlier were perceived as being more conscientious and better performers, even when accounting for total work hours and objective job performance. The authors argued that these relationships arise because of a pervasive morning bias, that is, an association between beginning the day's activities early in the morning and goodness.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

When do you procrastinate? Sleep quality and social sleep lag jointly predict self‐regulatory failure at work

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryThis study investigates antecedents of procrastination, the tendency to delay the initiation or completion of work activities. We examine this phenomenon from a self-regulation perspective and argue that depleted self-regulatory resources are an important pathway to explain why and when employees procrastinate. The restoration of self-regulatory resources during episodes of non-work is a prerequisite for the ability to initiate action at work. As sleep offers the opportunity to replenish self-regulatory resources, employees should procrastinate more after nights with low-quality sleep and shorter sleep duration. We further propose that people's social sleep lag amplifies this relationship. Social sleep lag arises if individuals' preference for sleep and wake times, known as their chronotype, is misaligned with their work schedule. Over five consecutive workdays, 154 participants completed a diary study comprising online questionnaires. Multilevel analyses showed that employees procrastinated less on days when they had slept better. The more employees suffered from social sleep lag, the more they procrastinated when sleep quality was low. Day-specific sleep duration, by contrast, was not related to procrastination. We discuss the role of sleep for procrastination in the short run and relate our findings to research highlighting the role of sleep for well-being in the long run.

show abstract

“…Questionnaires comprise a number of questions that participants are required to answer and are therefore usually a self‐report research method (Stone & Turkkan, ); although the same methods are sometimes used to rate others, such as supervisor ratings of performance (see, e.g., Yam, Fehr, & Barnes, ). Multi‐item psychometric scales, the focus of this article, are a specialized type of quantitative measure used in questionnaires (see, e.g., Nevill, Lane, Kilgour, Bowes, & Whyte, ) and the most frequently used measure in HRM research.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Using multi‐item psychometric scales for research and practice in human resource management

Robinson

2017

Human Resource Management

235

157

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Questionnaires are a widely used research method in human resource management (HRM), and multi-item psychometric scales are the most widely used measures in questionnaires. These scales each have multiple items to measure a construct in a reliable and valid manner. However, using this method effectively involves complex procedures that are frequently misunderstood or unknown. Although there are existing methodological texts addressing this topic, few are exhaustive and they often omit essential practical information. The current article therefore aims to provide a detailed and comprehensive guide to the use of multi-item psychometric scales for HRM research and practice, including their structure, development, use, administration, and data preparation. K E Y W O R D Smeasurement, multi-item scales, psychometric scales, questionnaires, surveys | INTRODUCTIONQuestionnaires are one of the most widely used research methods in the social sciences (Bourque, 2004) and multi-item psychometric scales are the most widely used measures in questionnaires. For instance, 29 of the 62 articles published in Human Resource Management during 2015 used multi-item psychometric scales to collect data about topics as diverse as organizational ambidexterity (Halevi, Carmeli, & Brueller, 2015), employee voice (Matsunaga, 2015), and performance management (Festing, Knappert, & Kornau, 2015).Despite their widespread use, however, the complex principles and procedures underlying multi-item psychometric scales are frequently misunderstood or unknown, even by experienced researchers and practitioners in human resource management (HRM). This is particularly true of HRM practitioners conducting staff surveys (e.g., employee engagement), which ostensibly appear psychometric in nature but often neglect key steps in research design and analysis. Although methodological guidance is available, most texts focus on specific topics or phases and omit essential practical information. Accordingly, this article addresses all phases of multi-item psychometric scale use-including their structure, development, administration, and the preparation of the collected data for analysis-to provide a comprehensive resource for HRM researchers and practitioners that addresses the many practical issues and common points of confusion.The article will also be useful for researchers and practitioners in other social sciences (e.g., industrial and organizational psychology, management) who use multi-item psychometric scales frequently.Questionnaires comprise a number of questions that participants are required to answer and are therefore usually a self-report research method (Stone & Turkkan, 2000); although the same methods are sometimes used to rate others, such as supervisor ratings of performance (see, e.g., Yam, Fehr, & Barnes, 2014). Multi-item psychometric scales, the focus of this article, are a specialized type of quantitative measure used in questionnaires (see, e.g., Nevill, Lane, Kilgour, Bowes, & Whyte, 2001) and the most frequently used measure in HRM rese...

show abstract

Morning employees are perceived as better employees: Employees’ start times influence supervisor performance ratings.

Cited by 43 publications

References 57 publications

Single‐ and Multiple‐Informant Research Designs to Examine the Human Resource Management−Performance Relationship

Single‐ and Multiple‐Informant Research Designs to Examine the Human Resource Management−Performance Relationship

When do you procrastinate? Sleep quality and social sleep lag jointly predict self‐regulatory failure at work

Using multi‐item psychometric scales for research and practice in human resource management

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About