Performance Management
Journal of Applied Psychology 2001, Vol. 86, No. 5. 984-996
Copyright 2001 by the American Psychological Association, Inc. 0021-9010/01/S5.00 DOI: 10.1037//0021-9010.86.5.984
The Relative Importance of Task and Contextual Performance Dimensions to Supervisor Judgments of Overall Performance
Jeff W. Johnson Personnel Decisions Research Institutes
Although evidence supports the unique contribution of task performance and contextual performance to overall evaluations, little is known about the relative contribution that specific dimensions of contextual performance make to overall performance judgments. This study evaluated the extent to which supervisors consider task and contextual performance by using relative weights (J. W. Johnson, 2000) to statistically describe the relative importance of specific dimensions of each type of performance to overall performance ratings. Within each of 8 job families in a large organization, each of 4 dimensions of contextual performance made not only a unique contribution but a relatively important contribution to the overall evaluation. Evidence also supports the adaptive performance dimension of handling work stress as an aspect of contextual performance and job-task conscientiousness as an aspect of both task and contextual performance.
A great deal of attention has recently been paid to the distinction between task performance and contextual performance (cf. Borman & Motowidlo, 1993). Task performance consists of activities that (a) directly transform raw materials into the goods and services produced by the organization or (b) service and maintain the technical core by replenishing supplies; distributing products; and providing planning, coordination, supervising, and staff functions that allow for efficient functioning of the organization (Motowidlo, Borman, & Schmit, 1997). Contextual performance (also called citizenship performance; Coleman & Borman, 2000; Organ, 1997) consists of activities that support the
Copyright 2001 by the American Psychological Association, Inc. 0021-9010/01/S5.00 DOI: 10.1037//0021-9010.86.5.984
The Relative Importance of Task and Contextual Performance Dimensions to Supervisor Judgments of Overall Performance
Jeff W. Johnson Personnel Decisions Research Institutes
Although evidence supports the unique contribution of task performance and contextual performance to overall evaluations, little is known about the relative contribution that specific dimensions of contextual performance make to overall performance judgments. This study evaluated the extent to which supervisors consider task and contextual performance by using relative weights (J. W. Johnson, 2000) to statistically describe the relative importance of specific dimensions of each type of performance to overall performance ratings. Within each of 8 job families in a large organization, each of 4 dimensions of contextual performance made not only a unique contribution but a relatively important contribution to the overall evaluation. Evidence also supports the adaptive performance dimension of handling work stress as an aspect of contextual performance and job-task conscientiousness as an aspect of both task and contextual performance.
A great deal of attention has recently been paid to the distinction between task performance and contextual performance (cf. Borman & Motowidlo, 1993). Task performance consists of activities that (a) directly transform raw materials into the goods and services produced by the organization or (b) service and maintain the technical core by replenishing supplies; distributing products; and providing planning, coordination, supervising, and staff functions that allow for efficient functioning of the organization (Motowidlo, Borman, & Schmit, 1997). Contextual performance (also called citizenship performance; Coleman & Borman, 2000; Organ, 1997) consists of activities that support the