Referents or role models? The self-efficacy and job performance effects of perceiving higher performing peers.

Abstract

What are the effects of perceiving peers’ higher performance? Social–cognitive theory emphasizes the positive influence that perceiving higher performers can have on observer task and job performance (because observational learning from role models enhances self-efficacy). Social comparison theory emphasizes the negative self-evaluations that accompany perceiving higher performers, which should under many circumstances reduce self-efficacy and subsequent task and job performance. To more fully understand the effects of perceiving higher performance, we argue the effects of perceived higher performers on observer task and job performance depend on individuals’ disposition in how they cognitively process coworkers’ performance. Drawing on goal orientation theory, we suggest individuals with higher levels of performance prove goal orientation (PPGO) primarily interpret perceived higher performers as comparative referents rather than as instructive role models, inhibiting social learning and reducing self-efficacy. Results from a 2 studies (a field study of 110 corporate employees as well as an experimental study with 107 undergraduate students) support these ideas: Individuals with higher levels of PPGO have decreased self-efficacy and performance when observing higher performing coworkers, and individuals with lower levels of PPGO have increased self-efficacy and performance when observing higher performing coworkers.

Are Leaders and Followers Receiving What They Give? A Long-Term Examination of the Reciprocal Relationship Between Relative LMX and Relative OCB-Helping

“…In this regard, as a fourth contribution, our study also extends the research focusing on how others treat higher performers. This latter stream of research has particularly focused on whether higher (lower) performers experience victimization at work (Aquino & Bommer, 2003;Campbell et al, 2017;Downes et al, 2020;Jensen et al, 2014;Kim & Glomb, 2014;Lam et al, 2011). Our study suggests that performing higher ROCB is rewarding, and that leaders are more likely to reciprocate this higher relative contribution in a fair and proportional manner by providing higher LMX treatment than average.…”

How Do Determiners of Job Performance Matter During COVID-19? The Conservation of Resource Theory

“…The concept of self-efficacy was initially proposed by Bandura (1977) , which refers to an individual’s judgment of his or her capability of engaging in certain activities. Self-efficacy can generally be classified into two types, that is, general self-efficacy and domain-specific self-efficacy ( Alisic et al, 2020 ; Downes et al, 2021 ). Occupational self-efficacy belongs to domain-specific self-efficacy, which is developed based on self-efficacy, and is generally defined as “the generic terms for a series of behavioral efficacy judgments about occupational adjustments and range of choice during the job selection of individuals” ( Lent and Hackett, 1987 ; De Clercq et al, 2019 ).…”

“…The low work efficiency often has a negative effect on the business efficiency and profitability of the entire organization, which makes the discussion on employees’ job performance become essential ( De Clercq et al, 2019 ; Lee et al, 2021 ). Job performance has always been the focus within the organization ( Downes et al, 2021 ). During the pandemic, organizational performance is the key factor to establish the survival capability of the organization.…”

“…Individual psychological capital is generally more important than human capital and social capital, which is a core psychological factor to promote individual development and improve job performance, as well as the key to enhance organizational competitiveness ( Luthans et al, 2004 ; Lin and Si, 2010 ). In a general way, psychological capital contains four dimensions of self-efficacy, hope, optimism and restoring force, among which self-efficacy is the individual internal resource that has the most significant effect on job performance ( De Clercq et al, 2019 ; Downes et al, 2021 ). Besides, previous research report that self-efficacy plays a vital role in improving individual performance in the face of dilemma ( Amini and Noroozi, 2018 ; Jemini-Gashi et al, 2019 ; Liguori et al, 2019 ).…”

Formal supervisors' role in stimulating team members' informal leader emergence: Supervisor and member status as critical moderators

“…After all, prior research has shown pronounced differences both in individual supervisors' ability to influence their team members (Buengeler et al, 2016; Triana et al, 2017) and in individual members' susceptibility toward supervisory influence (Rank et al, 2009; Wellman et al, 2019). Social learning theory supports this notion, arguing that processes of behavioral mimicry hinge on both a potential role model's and an observer's characteristics (Bandura, 1977, 1986; Downes et al, 2021). Hence, different supervisors' initiating structure and consideration may yield strikingly different consequences for their individual members' respective behaviors, depending on attributes of both the supervisor enacting this behavior and the member targeted with it.…”