Time and performance a three part study examining the relationships of job experience, organizational tenure, and age with job performance

LINK DOWNLOAD MIỄN PHÍ TÀI LIỆU "Time and performance a three part study examining the relationships of job experience, organizational tenure, and age with job performance ": http://123doc.vn/document/569736-time-and-performance-a-three-part-study-examining-the-relationships-of-job-experience-organizational-tenure-and-age-with-job-performance.htm

Time and Performance CAHRS WP 01-05
Page 4
It has been long-studied, and now well-documented, that individual job performance is
dynamic (i.e., it changes over time) (Deadrick, Bennett, & Russell, 1997; Deadrick & Madigan,
1990; Henry & Hulin, 1987; Hofmann, Jacobs, & Baratta, 1993; Hoffman, Jacobs, & Gerras,
1992; Hulin, Henry, & Noon, 1990; Ployhart & Hakel, 1998). However, despite the fundamental
importance of predicting job performance to industrial-organizational psychology and
organizational practice, the field still knows relatively little about the nature of individual job
performance changes over time (Ployhart & Hakel, 1998). Although there is nothing inherently
causal about time (Hulin et al., 1990), some changes in job performance may be attributed to
effects approximated by temporal variables (Deadrick et al., 1997; Hofmann et al., 1992, 1993).
Variables such as job experience, organizational tenure, and employee age serve as easily
obtainable proxies for other constructs like job knowledge, physical skills, and organizational
socialization, and thus play crucial roles in human resource research and practice. For
example, theoretical models of work performance and behaviors frequently include job
experience, organizational tenure, and employee age (Ackerman, 1992; Campbell, 1990; Giniger,
Dispenzieri, & Eisenberg, 1983; Rhodes, 1983; Salthouse, 1979; Schmidt, Hunter, &
Outerbridge, 1986; Tesluk & Jacobs, 1998). Empirical research often employs these variables
as controls approximating job-related abilities, human capital characteristics, or motivational
factors (e.g., Forteza & Prieto, 1994; Quiñones, Ford, & Teachout, 1995; Lawrence, 1996;
Tesluk & Jacobs, 1998; Warr, 1994). In practice, job experience and seniority (i.e.,
organizational tenure) often play a significant part in human resource decisions (Campion,
Cheraskin, & Stevens, 1994; Gatewood & Feild, 2001; Olsen & Berger, 1983; Quiñones et al.,
1995; Tesluk & Jacobs, 1998). In sum, understanding the relationships of job experience,
organizational tenure, and employee age with performance is of critical concern for theory,
research, and practice. To contribute to the field’s understanding of generalizable changes of
performance over time, this paper examines the nature of the relationship between performance
and time over the span of employees’ careers.
Time and Performance CAHRS WP 01-05
Page 5
This paper explores how the temporal variables of job experience, organizational tenure,
and employee age relate to employee job performance. The study uses theoretical work on the
effects of job experience, research on organizational socialization, and the decremental theory of
aging to explain (a) the relationship of these temporal variables with job performance, and (b)
how an inverted U-shaped relationship between time and performance results when these
relationships are considered simultaneously. This study then performs a multi-method
investigation to test the issues raised herein. First, using meta-analyses, this paper tests if the
variety of past findings of these relationships may be attributable to non-linear relationships.
Second, this paper performs analyses on a sample of employees who have spent their careers
within a single organization to illustrate the nature of the relationship between time and
performance. Third, this study examines the simultaneous effects of job experience,
organizational tenure, and employee age by modeling employees’ performance trends using a
longitudinal sample. The sum of the present study’s results should help inform dynamic
performance research on the theoretical need and practical value of including temporal variables
as predictors of individual change patterns. The results should also inform various fields on the
implications of temporal variables as predictor or control variables, particularly when used in the
prediction of job performance. Furthermore, the results should contribute to practice by helping
forecast employee performance.
DYNAMIC PERFORMANCE AND TEMPORAL VARIABLES
Job Experience
Experience can be defined as the culmination of context-based events that an individual
perceives (Quiñones et al., 1995). This definition provides a distinction between knowledge
accumulated through education and the process of actually performing a job. Within the context
of a job, experience entails the accumulation of job-specific knowledge from action, practice, and
perception of the tasks and duties associated with a specific job.
Time and Performance CAHRS WP 01-05
Page 6
While the concept of experience seems straightforward, recent research into the
implications of its measurement shows it to be multifaceted (Quiñones et al., 1995; Tesluk &
Jacobs, 1998). Thus, despite much research using such approximations and terms for work
experience as job tenure, job experience, organizational tenure, and seniority interchangeably
(Hofmann et al., 1992), in-depth treatments of the variable suggest it varies by level of
specification (e.g., task, job, work-group, organization) and measurement (e.g., amount, time,
type, density) (Quiñones et al., 1995; Tesluk & Jacobs, 1998). It is beyond the scope of this
study to address every potential specification of experience. This paper focuses on experience
with a job (or set of highly similar jobs) involving multiple duties, which hereunto is referred to as
job experience, and experience with the organization (i.e., organizational tenure) to be discussed
later. Furthermore, as the focus here is on the relationships between temporal variables and
performance, job experience is examined through the quantitative measure of time (in years).
Several theories lend understanding to the relationship between job experience and
performance. Human Capital Theory suggests that employees make investments of experience
in themselves, which enhance their ability, and thus influence job performance (Ehrenberg &
Smith, 2000). Learning theory also predicts that job experience enhances job ability (Weiss,
1990). Both perspectives suggest that job performance changes over time because individuals
accumulate job experience. As job experience leads to the accumulation of relevant knowledge,
skills, and abilities, performance should improve. From this basis, models of performance posit
that job experience has a positive affect on job performance (e.g., Campbell, 1990; Hunter, 1983;
Schmidt, Hunter, & Outerbridge, 1986). Providing a detailed treatment of this hypothesis,
Schmidt et al. (1986) showed job experience influences job knowledge and task proficiency,
which in turn affect job performance. Their model also suggested that the effect of experience
may not be linear. Schmidt and colleagues argued that the relative advantage of one year of job
experience is significantly greater at lower levels of job experience than at higher levels
Time and Performance CAHRS WP 01-05
Page 7
(McDaniel et al., 1988; Schmidt et al., 1986), a finding that has been replicated (Avolio,
Waldman, & McDaniel, 1990; McDaniel et al., 1988). Therefore, we hypothesize:
H1: There is a non-linear relationship between job experience and
job performance.
Organizational Tenure
Organizational experience suggests an accumulation of work-related information that is
conceptually distinct from job experience (Quiñones et al., 1995; Tesluk & Jacobs, 1998).
Accurate specification of the context through which experience is accumulated (i.e., job vs.
group vs. organizational level) furthers our understanding of relationships with critical variables
(Tesluk & Jacobs, 1998). The accumulation of organizational experience, or organizational
tenure, may have effects on individual development beyond those of job experience. The
literature on organizational socialization (e.g., Chatman, 1991; Feldman, 1976; Louis, 1990; Van
Maanen & Schein, 1979) most directly addresses the effects of accumulating organizational
experience.
Organizational socialization is the process by which an individual comes to understand
the social knowledge, values, and expected behaviors necessary to assume an organizational
role (Chatman, 1991; Van Maanen & Schein, 1979). Through socialization, employees learn
how to function within an organization’s culture by gaining familiarity with the organization’s
systems, becoming trusted by coworkers, and establishing friendships (Feldman, 1976).
Some have argued that when experience is measured at the organizational level of
specification, it is more appropriately linked to such phenomena as organizational commitment
rather than job performance (Quiñones et al., 1995; Tesluk & Jacobs, 1998). While
organizational experience may appear less directly related to job performance, the accumulation
of knowledge of expected behaviors and acceptance by coworkers should affect one’s
proficiency within an organization. Similarly, changes in the organizational environment may
lead to changes in job performance. Thus, measuring familiarity with the environment or how to
Time and Performance CAHRS WP 01-05
Page 8
function within the organization captures a level of understanding beyond that explained by
changes in job experience over time. Take for example two research scientists, both with 10
years experience. All else equal, we would expect one with those ten years of experience within
the same organization to be more knowledgeable about how to get a project done (e.g., knowing
who to contact for help, building upon established relationships with colleagues, locating
resources, and obtaining necessary information or supplies) than another scientist who is just
beginning to work for the organization. As with job experience, though, the benefit of
accumulated organizational experience on job performance is likely to change over time. We
would expect that socialization is most pronounced for new employees as compared with
veteran employees. Thus, any effect of organizational tenure on performance should be non-
linear: with a larger positive effect at low levels of organizational tenure and with a diminishing
effect as organizational tenure increases. Therefore, we predict
H2: There is a non-linear relationship between organizational tenure
and job performance.
Age
Simultaneous to the accumulation of job experience and organizational tenure, the
individual necessarily is getting older. Thus, aging may also play a role in describing how an
individual changes over time, and subsequently may affect how performance changes over time
(Waldman & Avolio, 1993).
There has long been a view of a negative age-performance relationship (Rhodes, 1983),
although the belief has endured without conclusive empirical support (McEvoy & Cascio, 1989).
One theoretical rationale for the hypothesized negative relationship is the decremental theory of
aging (Giniger, et al., 1983), which suggests that increased age causes a deterioration in
abilities, such as speed, dexterity, motor coordination, and strength (Giniger et al., 1983;
Rhodes, 1983; Salthouse, 1979). Similarly, Kliegl and Mayr (1992) have advanced a model that
suggests there is an underlying single negative affect of age-related influences on a wide range
Time and Performance CAHRS WP 01-05
Page 9
of cognitive variables. Although the simplest single factor model (i.e., one underlying factor,
affected solely by age, accounts for all declines in cognitive functions) has been shown to be too
simplistic, a large number of studies do present evidence of the negative effects of aging, and a
form (albeit somewhat more complex than the simplest model) of the single factor model is
strongly supported (Verhaeghen & Salthouse, 1997). Notably, age has also been shown to be
associated with decreases in performance on tests of learning, memory, reasoning, spatial
abilities, and psychomotor speed (Lindenberger & Baltes, 1994; Salthouse, 1991; Schaie &
Willis, 1993; Verhaeghen & Salthouse, 1997).
Aging may also affect performance through motivation. Wright and Hamilton (1978)
suggest that older employees go through a "grinding down" stage where they accept what is
available to them and lessen their expectations. Supporting this proposition, empirical work
demonstrates a negative relationship between age and ambition, aspirations, and overall
motivation (Giblin, 1986; Judge & Hulin, 1993; Judge & Locke, 1993; Kuhlen, 1977; Rhodes,
1983; Slocum, Cron, Hansen, & Rawlings, 1985).
Aging may also affect how others perceive, and therefore treat, an individual. Research
suggests that older workers are evaluated more harshly than younger workers (Cleveland, &
Landy, 1983, 1987; Siegel & Ghiselli, 1971), are given raises less readily (Siegel & Ghiselli,
1971), and are offered fewer training and networking opportunities (Kuhlen, 1977; Lawrence,
1988). Thus, even if an individual does not change in terms of performance-causing
characteristics, other employees may fulfill their own expectations of performance changes by
reducing opportunities for performance or development, or by giving lower evaluations.
Despite the theory suggesting that aging will affect performance, and empirical evidence
showing aging’s effects on performance-related constructs, research on the age/performance
relationship has shown mixed results. Rhodes (1983) reported approximately equal numbers of
studies with positive, negative, and no relationships. Meta-analyses have shown that age alone
accounts for little variance in job performance (McEvoy & Cascio, 1989; Waldman & Avolio,
Time and Performance CAHRS WP 01-05
Page 10
1986). It should be noted that not all examinations of aging suggest negative effects. In
particular, crystallized intelligence (e.g., Cattell, 1963)—which entails the cognitive processes
and abilities that are embedded in learned cultural meaning, acquired through prior experience
(Warr, 1994)—has been found to be higher among older people (Dixon, Kramer, & Baltes, 1985;
Labouvie-Vief, 1985). Others have made similar arguments, that while physical and mechanical
abilities may decline over time, pragmatic abilities may increase (Salthouse, 1995). Thus,
performance may remain constant at higher age levels because job experience may
compensate for any detrimental affect of aging (Tesluk & Jacobs, 1998). Accounting for
experience, though, should reveal the relationship with age (Avolio et al., 1990).
The theoretical position positing a relationship between age and performance does not
imply that the effect of age on performance is linear. Again, we expect a non-linear relationship,
with the negative effects of age becoming stronger as employees age. Thus, the total
relationship between employee age and job performance should be non-linear (Avolio et al.,
1990). Evidence supporting this position is mixed. McEvoy and Cascio (1989) found some
support for a curvilinear hypothesis. Specifically, they examined studies with young employees
versus those of all ages and found that the young samples had a higher age/performance
correlation than the other studies. While this result is informative, as no other meta-analysis had
yet examined such a moderator, it is limited in that it had only a few studies in the younger group
(K= 4 in one analysis; K = 9 in another). More importantly, it did not treat age as a continuous
variable and thus did not examine the potential non-linear relationship between age and
performance over the plausible range of age values. Others have found support for non-linear
effects of age, but lacked a sufficient range (particularly of older workers) in the sample to fully
test the nature of the age/performance relationship at all values potentially facing modern
employers (Avolio et al., 1990). For these reasons, stronger support of a non-linear relationship
may not have been detected by this previous research, and further work is necessary to
substantiate this proposed non-linear relationship. Furthermore, no study has looked for a non-
Time and Performance CAHRS WP 01-05
Page 11
linear relationship between age and performance after controlling for the effects (and in
particularly, non-linear effects) of job experience and organizational tenure. Based on available
theory, and in line with previous predictions (e.g., Giniger et al., 1983; McEvoy & Cascio, 1989)
this paper posits
H3: There is a non-linear relationship between age and job performance.
Considering Temporal Variables Simultaneously: The Inverted U-Shaped Hypothesis
In sum, the literature relevant to understanding how temporal variables relate to job
performance describe two key phenomena. First, job experience and organizational tenure are
expected to have positive relationships with performance, but the strength of this effect is
expected to diminish over time. Second, employee age should be negatively related to
performance, with the effect increasing in magnitude as age increases. These effects should
operate simultaneously. Furthermore, it is important to note that the strength of the effects
varies over time. Thus, the positive effects of job experience and organizational tenure should
be initially strong, but grow weaker over time; simultaneously, the expected negative effects of
age should be at first small, but become increasingly stronger while the positive effects of
experience and seniority are diminishing. Note that because the expected magnitude of the
forces changes over time, their effects should not simply cancel each other out. Rather, the
combination of these forces should yield an inverted U-shaped relationship between time and
performance (Avolio et al., 1990).
The hypothesis of an inverted U-shaped relationship between time and performance is a
proposal that individual job performance follows a given, generalizable pattern over individuals’
careers. This is in contrast to an implicit null hypothesis that performance is unrelated to time.
This null hypothesis suggests that, for performance prediction, individual job performance
regresses to an overall grand mean (zero in standardized units), which further suggests that
when considering performance over time, changes in performance would in part be captured by
the tendency to regress to this mean. The inverted U-shaped hypothesis proposes that
Time and Performance CAHRS WP 01-05
Page 12
individual job performance does not regress to a single overall grand mean with the passage of
time; rather, performance follows a generalizable pattern with time, and thus some of
performance dynamism may be attributable to the changes captured by this inverted U-shaped
curve. Thus, for the development of performance theory related to dynamic performance, and
for the purpose of informing empirical research exploring the nature of performance over time, it
is important to search for generalizable patterns of performance over employees’ careers. Note
that this proposition of an inverted U-shaped relationship is not new (e.g., Avolio et al., 1990;
McEvoy & Cascio, 1989; Rhodes, 1983); however, previous research has failed to provide
conclusive empirical evidence either for or against this relationship (McEvoy & Cascio, 1989;
Rhodes, 1983). The search for this inverted U-shaped hypothesis remains important for
research and practice to confirm or falsify the notion that there exists generalizable changes in
individual job performance levels over the span of individuals’ careers.
The lack of support in the literature for an inverted U-shaped relationship may be
attributable to the lack of older workers in examined samples. This would make the observation
of the inverted U-shaped relationship difficult. For example, the McDaniel et al. (1988) study
clearly demonstrated a non-linear relationship between experience and performance; however, it
only investigated the experience/performance relationship for a population with an average
experience of less than 6 years, and their last reference group in their analysis was "12 years
and up." Thus, although the study did not provide support for the existence of an inverted U-
shaped relationship, due to its lack of range, their study did not provide evidence to the contrary.
Avolio et al. (1990) investigated the age/performance and experience/ performance relationships.
They too found non-linear relationships, but failed to support (or reject) the notion of an inverted
U-shaped curve for the majority of their sample. Avolio et al. (1990) did find, however, that the
non-linear terms in all of their equations were significant and negative. The negative non-linear
terms means that the positive relationship of age and experience with performance diminishes at
higher levels, and may even become negative and form an inverted U-shape. Had the Avolio et
Time and Performance CAHRS WP 01-05
Page 13
al. (1990) sample included more older employees, they might have supported the inverted U-
shaped hypothesis; however, only 6% of Avolio et al.'s (1990) sample were aged 55 or more.
The trend toward increased workforce participation by older individuals (Ahlburg &
Kimmel, 1986; Warr, 1994) combined with more frequent employee movements between jobs,
organizations, and careers (Hall & Associates, 1996; Hall & Mirvis, 1995), suggests that
organizations will increasingly encounter diverse ranges of job experience, organizational tenure,
and age levels. This trend highlights the need for research to explore the temporal variable/
performance relationships over a wider range of the time-related variables. This paper posits
that there are theoretical reasons to expect an inverted U-shaped relationship between time and
performance which, although potentially difficult to observe, should help predict individual
performance levels over employees’ careers. Thus, the joint review of job experience/
performance, organizational tenure/performance, and age/performance relationships suggests
the following hypothesis:
H4: There exists an inverted U-shaped relationship between temporal
variables (i.e., job experience, organizational tenure, and employee
age) and job performance.
METHODS
Fully testing this study’s hypotheses presents a major methodological challenge because
it requires substantial ranges of the independent variables (i.e., job experience, organizational
tenure, and employee age). Given the modern trends toward frequent employee movements
between jobs, organizations, and careers (Hall & Associates, 1996; Hall & Mirvis, 1995), data
sets with high levels and diverse ranges of job experience and organizational tenure are
increasingly rare. Furthermore, if such data sets are obtainable, they may lack generalizability to
more typical samples. Yet the very trends that make finding samples with high levels of job
experience and organizational tenure less likely also increase the diversity of these values
across workplaces, underscoring the need to investigate how these variables simultaneously