The Conceptualisation and Measurement of Pacing Styles

Abstract

Pacing style reflects how individuals distribute their effort over time in working toward deadlines. As a new construct introduced in 2002, the notion of pacing style has intuitive appeal, but has been under-researched, in part, due to a measurement need. Therefore, the purpose of this research was to improve the conceptualisation of pacing style and to develop and validate a new scale-based measure. The result was the nine-item Pacing Action Categories of Effort Distribution (PACED), consisting of deadline (complete work in a short time period just before the due date), steady (spread task activities evenly over time), and U-shaped (invest most of the effort at the start and finish of a task, with a break in between) action styles. Across eight independent samples of students, faculty, and organisational employees, we examined the dimensionality, internal consistency, stability (temporal and situational), and validity (construct, convergent, discriminant, predictive) of PACED. Results support the use of PACED as a reliable and valid measure, and we discuss several research avenues that would benefit from incorporating the concept of pacing style.

Time in Individual-Level Organizational Studies: What Is It, How Is It Used, and Why Isn’t It Exploited More Often?

“…This construct is based on the passage of objective time, with some studies implicitly addressing the timing issues of rate (how long one works) and scheduling (when this work is scheduled). Typically, an individual prefers either (a) a deadlineoriented style, in which individuals procrastinate until the deadline is on the verge of passing; (b) a steady style, in which individuals maintain consistent effort from beginning to end of a project; or (c) an early, or U-shaped, style, in which much effort is devoted early in a project and may resume as the deadline approaches (Gevers et al 2006(Gevers et al , 2013. Although empirical evidence is just emerging, studies have shown that challenge-related strain is more common for those with a deadline style or a U-shaped style (i.e., pressure is greater from the impending deadline), but that task absorption is greater for those with a steady style or a U-shaped style (i.e., earlier action allows one to lose oneself in a task; Gevers et al 2013).…”

The downside of downtime: The prevalence and work pacing consequences of idle time at work.

“…Identifying and understanding the period of a task during which people are working most slowly is necessary for developing nuanced theories and practical interventions to ameliorate these lulls. Multiple studies have unearthed various pacing patterns, such as the deadline effect, whereby workers progressively speed up as a deadline approaches (Lim & Murnighan, 1994); mid-point transitions, whereby workers tend to speed up suddenly at the midpoint of a task (Gersick, 1988(Gersick, , 1989; and U-shaped pacing, whereby work pace is fastest at the beginning and end of a task (Gevers, Mohammed, & Baytalskaya, 2015;Gevers, Rutte, & Van Eerde, 2006). Although a number of pacing patterns have been delineated (Gevers et al, 2015), research on these patterns generally shares one commonality: the assumption of tightly limited time to work, which causes workers to speed up (in some manner) as a deadline approaches.…”

Procrastination is Detrimental to Undergraduate Students’ Self-Rated Creativity: The Mediating Role of State Anxiety

“…The result suggests that procrastination is conducive to creative performance, as individuals had used the time to scrutinize available solutions and, finally, selected the ideal one. This was further documented by Gevers, Mohammed, and Baytalskaya (2015) who suggested that procrastination might be an incubation period for creativity. In addition, Díaz-Morales et al (2008) revealed that the beneficial influence of procrastination on creativity could be due to the preference for imaginative thinking style.…”