Adaptability in the workplace: Development of a taxonomy of adaptive performance.

Pulakos, Elaine D.; Arad, Sharon; Donovan, Michelle A.; Plamondon, Kevin E.

doi:10.1037/0021-9010.85.4.612

Cited by 1,166 publications

(1,379 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

1,269

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Recently, for example, Pulakos et al (2000) suggested an addition to previous descriptions of job performance in the area of adaptability. Using content analysis techniques, Pulakos et al examined critical incidents of job performance to create a taxonomy of adaptive job performance.…”

Section: Current Models Of Job Performancementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Just as the work of Pulakos et al (2000) begins to meet the growing need to understand and enhance adaptability in organizations, the development of a taxonomy of interpersonal performance will provide a fi-amework to understand and enhance employees' abilities to interact effectively with others and use their social environments to facilitate organizational goal attainment.…”

Section: Current Models Of Job Performancementioning

confidence: 99%

“…This was administered across a variety of jobs to determine if the proposed structure would be supported in the clustering of the ratings. This two-study approach to validating a Uterature-based taxonomy was used by Pulakos et al (2000) to validate their taxonomy of adaptive job performance.…”

Section: Model Validation Overviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Following Pulakos et al's (2000) argument that job experts give greater weight to importance than time spent in determining the criticality of behaviors for job performance, criticaUty scores were based on a composite of importance and time spent ratings. A criticality index was computed for each participant that reflects greater weighting of importance.…”

Section: Study 2: Empirical Evaluation Of Interpersonal Performance Mmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Identifying and Validating a Model of Interpersonal Performance Dimensions

Carpenter¹,

Wisecarver²

2004

PsycEXTRA Dataset

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

fiSSTRACT (Maximum 200 vmrds):Current models of job performance recognize its multidimensional nature but do not provide a comprehensive picture of the interpersonal requirements of jobs. As a first step toward developing a more cogent and comprehensive understanding of interpersonal performance, a taxonomy of the interpersonal requirements of jobs was developed and validated. An extensive literature review of interpersonal performance behaviors was conducted to develop a proposed taxonomy of interpersonal performance. Two studies were then completed to validate the proposed taxonomy. In the first study empirical evidence for the taxonomy was gathered using a content analysis of critical incidents taken fi-om a job analysis. In the second study, confirmatory factor analysis was used to recreate the model based on ratings of the importance of and time spent on each interpersonal performance behavior identified in the model. Raters represented a variety of Army jobs and ranks. Confirmatory fector analyses supported the proposed taxonomy. Results also indicated that the criticality of several dimensions of interpersonal performance increased with increasing enlisted ranks. The importance of the results toward the identification of predictors of interpersonal performance is discussed. SUBJECT TERMS FOREWORDThe U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences (ARI) conducts research on manpower, personnel performance, leader development and training in support of Army goals. New and increasing demands are being placed on the Army including a need for adaptive responses within changing cultural settings. As the Army transitions to meet the demands of the new millennium. Soldiers will need to effectively make use of all resources available to them to meet Army missions. ARI has a number of research efforts in progress to help the Army with these new requirements. One effort, labeled PerforM21, focuses on developing a Soldier performance assessment system for the 21'' century. One element of performance that has been identified as critical for current and future performance requirements is interpersonal performance.The objective of the present research is to provide better definition to the interpersonal performance criterion space, comprehensively identifying performance requirements that involve interacting with others and using the social environment to achieve goals within a work setting. The model of interpersonal performance developed in this research can be used to define training requirements in the area of interpersonal skills and to identify selection tools that can predict success in jobs requiring interpersonal performance.Stephen EsQoldberg Acting Technical Director ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSWe would like to thank several people who were helpful in providing recommendations during the development of this project as well as providing comments on the analyses: Jose Cortina, Steve Zaccaro, and Martin Ford. We would also like to thank Kathryn Baughman, Lisa Boyce, Emma Gregory, and Jessica Rice for th...

show abstract

Section: Current Models Of Job Performancementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Current Models Of Job Performancementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Model Validation Overviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Study 2: Empirical Evaluation Of Interpersonal Performance Mmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Identifying and Validating a Model of Interpersonal Performance Dimensions

Carpenter¹,

Wisecarver²

2004

PsycEXTRA Dataset

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Using this task vs. non-task behavioral categorization, other subsets of work behavior can be readily classified within one of these categories. For example, adaptive performance (Hesketh & Neal, 1999;Pulakos, Arad, Donovan, & Plamondon, 2000) and proactive work behavior (Crant, 2000;Frese & Fay, 2001;Parker, Williams, & Turner, DYNAMIC JOB SATISFACTION SHIFTS 241 2006) exemplify forms of task behavior, as they directly relate to task completion. In contrast, workplace behavior related to managing the work-family interface-referred to as family-supportive supervisor behavior-can be described as a type of non-task behavior.…”

Section: Dynamic Job Satisfaction Shifts 240mentioning

confidence: 99%

Dynamic Job Satisfaction Shifts: Implications for Manager Behavior and Crossover to Employees

Caughlin¹

2000

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this dissertation, I investigated job satisfaction from a dynamic perspective.Specifically, I integrated the momentum model of job satisfaction with the affective shift model and crossover theory in an effort to move beyond traditional, static conceptions of job satisfaction and other constructs. Recent research and theoretical development has focused on the meaning of job satisfaction change for workers and how such change impacts their decisions to leave an organization. To extend this line of inquiry, I posited hypotheses pertaining to: (a) job satisfaction change with respect to positive work behavior (i.e., organizational citizenship behavior, family-supportive supervisor behavior); (b) the potential moderating effect of changes in negative work events (i.e., job demands, interpersonal conflict) on the relation between job satisfaction change and turnover intentions change and positive work behavior; and (c) the crossover of job satisfaction change from managers to employees and the potential underlying behavioral mechanisms.An archival dataset collected by the Work, Family & Health Network was used to investigate the aforementioned phenomena. Data were collected at two time points with a six-month interval via face-to-face computer-assisted personal interviews from individuals working at 30 facilities from a U.S. extended-healthcare organization. In total, data from 184 managers and 1,524 of their employees were used to test hypotheses.Data were analyzed using multilevel structural equation modeling. In an extension of the momentum model, I found that managers' job satisfaction change positively related to DYNAMIC JOB SATISFACTION SHIFTS ii changes in employee reports of their FSSB; in addition, I replicated prior findings in which job satisfaction change negatively related to turnover intentions change.Furthermore, based on my integration of the momentum model and the affective shift model, I tested the proposition that changes in negative work events (i.e., job demands, interpersonal conflict) would moderate the relationship between changes in job satisfaction and focal outcomes. For certain operationalizations of negative work events, hypothesis testing revealed significant interactions with respect to changes in all three outcomes: turnover intentions, OCB, and FSSB. The form of the interactions, however, deviated from my predictions for models including changes in turnover intentions and OCB, although my predictions were supported for models including changes in FSSB. In my integration of the momentum model and crossover theory, the associated hypotheses were met with very limited support. Specifically, the relationship between managers' job satisfaction change and employees' job satisfaction change approached significance, but the relationship between managers' level of job satisfaction and their employees' subsequent level of job satisfaction did not receive support. Similarly, the proposed mediational mechanisms (i.e., managers' OCB and FSSB) of these crossover relations went unsupported...

show abstract