The Role of Job Security in Understanding the Relationship Between Employees' Perceptions of Temporary Workers and Employees' Performance.

On the basis of psychological contract and social cognition theories, the authors explored the role of full-time employees' perceived job security in explaining their reactions to the use of temporary workers by using a sample of 149 full-time employees who worked with temporaries. As hypothesized, employees' perceived job security negatively related to their perceptions that temporaries pose a threat to their jobs, but it did not relate to their perceptions that temporaries are beneficial. Furthermore, employees' job security moderated the relationships between benefit and threat perceptions and supervisor ratings of job performance. For those with high job security, there was a positive relationship between benefit perceptions and performance. For those with low job security, there was a negative relationship between threat perceptions and performance. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Proactive personality and career success.

This study examined the relationship between proactive personality and career success by surveying a sample of 496 employees (320 men and 176 women) from a diverse set of occupations and organizations. Proactive personality was positively associated with both self-reported objective (salary and promotions) and subjective (career satisfaction) indicators of career success. Hierarchical regression analyses showed that proactive personality explained additional variance in both objective and subjective career success even after controlling for several relevant variables (demographic, human capital, motivational, organizational, and industry) that have previously been found to be predictive of career outcomes. These findings were consistent using both self-report and significant-other ratings of proactive personality. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Antecedents and outcomes of organizational support for development: The critical role of career opportunities.

This study examines antecedents and behavioral outcomes of employees' perceptions of organizational support for development. We first propose that employees' past participation in formal developmental activities and experience with developmental relationships positively relate to their perceptions of organizational support for development. We then propose that perceived career opportunity within the organization moderates the relationship between organizational support for development and employee performance and turnover. Using a sample of 264 exempt-level employees and their supervisors, we found that participation in training classes, leader–member exchange, and career mentoring were each positively related to employees' perceptions of organizational support for development. We also found support for the moderator hypotheses. Specifically, development support positively related to job performance, but only when perceived career opportunity within the organization was high. Further, development support was associated with reduced voluntary turnover when perceived career opportunity was high, but it was associated with increased turnover when perceived career opportunity was low. Our study demonstrates that social exchange and career motivation theory work together to explain when and how employees' perceptions of organizational support for development relate to turnover and job performance. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)     

Management of poor performance: A comparison of manager, group member, and group disciplinary decisions.

Managers and 231 members of 41 work groups representing 4 diverse organizations participated in an experiment involving disciplinary decisions. Managers and group members responded individually to scenarios describing a group member's poor performance, followed by group members meeting to reach consensus on the disciplinary decisions. As hypothesized, manager disciplinary decisions were more severe than decisions made by individual group members. Contrary to predictions, the severity of manager and group disciplinary decisions did not differ. A test of choice shifts revealed that when the prevailing view among individual group members was for a relatively lenient disciplinary action, the group consensus decision was more severe than the average of the individual decisions. Attributions and outcome seriousness were found to influence the severity of manager, group member, and group decisions. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)