			Home About us Contact

Workplace Performance (workplace + performance)

Distribution by Scientific Domains

Business, Economics, Finance and Accounting	50%
Psychology	33%

Selected Abstracts

Workplace performance: a comparison of subjective and objective measures in the 2004 Workplace Employment Relations Survey

INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS JOURNAL, Issue 2 2008
John Forth
ABSTRACT Understanding what determines workplace performance is important for a variety of reasons. In the first place, it can inform the debate about the UK's low productivity growth. It also enables researchers to determine the efficacy of different organisational practices, policies and payment systems. In this article, we examine not the determinants of performance but how it is measured. Specifically, we assess the alternative measures of productivity and profitability that are available in the 2004 Workplace Employment Relations Survey (WERS). Previous WERS have been an important source of data in research into workplace performance. However, the subjective nature of the performance measures available in WERS prior to 2004 has attracted criticism. In the 2004 WERS, data were again collected on the subjective measure but, in addition, objective data on profitability and productivity were also collected. This allows a comparison to be made between the two types of measures. A number of validity tests are undertaken and the main conclusion is that subjective and objective measures of performance are weakly equivalent but that differences are also evident. Our findings suggest that it would be prudent to give most weight to results supported by both types of measure. [source]

Workplace performance,PLUS: Empowerment and voice through professional development and democratic processes in health care training

PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT QUARTERLY, Issue 4 2009
Kathleen P. King
Based on the theory of transformative learning (Mezirow, 1980) and critical pedagogy (Freire, 1980), mixed-methods research (Tashakkori & Teddlie, 1998) of a hospital workers' union and training organization addressed the impact of a custom-designed, group-focused, results-driven professional development model with 130 participants. Employees across many job titles participated. Findings reveal substantial content learning, along with the development of empowerment and voice. The purpose of the research was to determine the ways and the extent that worker voice, satisfaction, attitude, communication, and problem solving improved as workers and managers put into practice knowledge and skills learned through the training (Winchester, 2003). The scope of results includes efficiency and skill improvements and qualitative changes intersecting professional and personal realms. [source]

Employer burden of mild, moderate, and severe major depressive disorder: mental health services utilization and costs, and work performance,

DEPRESSION AND ANXIETY, Issue 1 2010
Howard G. Birnbaum Ph.D.
Abstract Background: Treatment utilization/costs and work performance for persons with major depressive disorder (MDD) by severity of illness is not well documented. Methods: Using National Comorbidity Survey-Replication (2001,2002) data, US workforce respondents (n=4,465) were classified by clinical severity (not clinically depressed, mild, moderate, severe) using a standard self-rating scale [Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology Self-Report (QIDS-SR)]. Outcomes included 12-month prevalence of medical services/medications use/costs and workplace performance. Treatment costs (employer's perspective) were estimated by weighing utilization measures by unit costs obtained for similar services used by MDD patients in claims data. Descriptive analysis across three severity groups generated ,2 results. Results: Using a sample of 539 US workforce respondents with MDD, 13.8% were classified mild, 38.5% moderate, and 47.7% severe cases. Mental health services usage, including antidepressants, increased significantly with severity, with average treatment costs substantially higher for severe than for mild cases both regarding mental health services ($697 vs. $388, ,2=4.4, P=.019) and antidepressants ($256 vs. $88, ,2=9.0, P=.001). Prevalence rates of unemployment/disability increased significantly (,2=11.7, P=.003) with MDD severity (15.7, 23.3, and 31.3% for mild, moderate, and severe cases). Severely and moderately depressed workers missed more work than nondepressed workers; the monthly salary-equivalent lost performance of $199 (severely depressed) and $188 (moderately depressed) was significantly higher than for nondepressed workers (,2=10.3, P<.001). Projected to the US workforce, monthly depression-related worker productivity losses had human capital costs of nearly $2 billion. Conclusions: MDD severity is significantly associated with increased treatment usage/costs, treatment adequacy, unemployment, and disability and with reduced work performance. Depression and Anxiety, 2010. © 2009 Wiley-Liss, Inc. [source]

Workplace performance: a comparison of subjective and objective measures in the 2004 Workplace Employment Relations Survey

Motherhood as a Status Characteristic

JOURNAL OF SOCIAL ISSUES, Issue 4 2004
Cecilia L. Ridgeway
We present evidence that many of the disadvantaging effects that motherhood has on women's workplace outcomes derive from the devalued social status attached to the task of being a primary caregiver. Using expectation states theory, we argue that when motherhood becomes a salient descriptor of a worker it, like other devalued social distinctions including gender, downwardly biases the evaluations of the worker's job competence and suitability for positions of authority. We predict that the biases evoked by the motherhood role will be more strongly discriminatory than those produced by gender alone because the perceived conflicts between the cultural definitions of the good mother and the ideal worker make motherhood seem more directly relevant to workplace performance. [source]

SELF-ESTEEM AND JOB PERFORMANCE: THE MODERATING ROLE OF SELF-ESTEEM CONTINGENCIES

PERSONNEL PSYCHOLOGY, Issue 3 2010
D. LANCE FERRIS
Although theoretical perspectives suggest self-esteem level (i.e., high/low) should have main and moderating effects on job performance, empirical and narrative reviews of the literature suggest such effects are either nonexistent or highly variable. To account for these mixed findings, we hypothesized that self-esteem level should only have main and moderating effects on job performance when one's self-esteem is not contingent upon workplace performance. Using multisource ratings across 2 samples of working adults, we found that the importance of performance to self-esteem (IPSE) moderated the effect of self-esteem level on job performance and moderated the buffering interaction between self-esteem level and role conflict in the prediction of job performance. Our results thus support IPSE as an important moderator of both main and moderating effects of self-esteem level. [source]