Within-Person Variability in Job Performance

Abstract

Although both researchers and practitioners know that an employee’s performance varies over time within a job, this within-person performance variability is not well understood and in fact is often treated as error. In the current paper, we first identify the importance of a within-person approach to job performance and then review several extant theories of within-person performance variability that, despite vastly different foci, converge on the contention that job performance is dynamic rather than static. We compare and contrast the theories along several common metrics and thereby facilitate a discussion of commonalities, differences, and theory elaboration. In so doing, we identify important future research questions on within-person performance variability and methodological challenges in addressing these research questions. Finally, we highlight how the conventional practical implications articulated on the basis of a static, between-person perspective on job performance may need to be modified to account for the dynamic, within-person nature of performance.

Personality Attitudes Affecting Employee Learning and Development: Prerequisites of Behaviour Leading to Learning and Development

“…As stated by, among others, Ghiselli and Haire (1960), Dalal, Bhave and Fiset (2014) the validity of measuring both performance and prerequisites and motivation of employees is not constant, but varies cyclically with the classic course of the recurring rise and fall. Most researchers agree on the fact that the variability of behaviour and, consequently, performance or motivation is affected by interpersonal circumstances rather than by interpersonal relationships (Day, Sin and Chen, 2004;Glomb, et al 2011).…”

“…Every manager knows employee's behaviour varies over time, but this within-person variability is not well described, understood and sometimes is treated as error (Dalal, Bhave and Fiset, 2014). Therefore this study is focused on identification of a within-person approach to employee learning and development in organisations.…”

“…Thus investigations in this area are useful because theorizing at the within-person level will provide a more scientific understanding of the process of variability of behaviour during employee education and development. On the other hand, it is important to note that within-person theorizing is usually frequently used in theory but empirical results are rare and do not differ because of their narrow focus (Dalal, Bhave and Fiset, 2014;Curran, Bauer, 2011;Beckmann, Wood and Minbashian, 2010).…”

The Two-Faced Leader: Effects of Leader Emotional Inconsistency on Follower Creative Performance

“…Whilst the theoretical scope of Woodman's model is broad, it does not offer a detailed account of the specific interrelationships that influence idea generation and implementation at each level of analysis. For example, the model lacks a within-individual perspective on creative performance explaining the antecedents and consequences of withinperson performance variability (see Dalal, Bhave, & Fiset, 2014 for an overview of the importance of considering the within-person variability in creative performance).…”

“…First, adopting a within-person lens in the examination of the effects of leadership on follower performance outcomes allows researchers to account for fluctuations with regards to both constructs over time and is particularly useful when attempting to investigate the processes underlying these relationships (Dalal et al, 2014;Hoffman & Lord, 2013). Second and specifically related to the current investigation, within-person research reduces recall bias as diary studies assess study variables closer to the conclusion of the events under investigation (e.g., the display of certain leader behaviours shortly after the event; Ohly, Sonnentag, Niessen, & Zapf, 2010).…”