Adaptive performance

Last updated

Adaptive performance in the work environment refers to adjusting to and understanding change in the workplace. [1] An employee who is versatile is valued and important in the success of an organization. Employers seek employees with high adaptability, due to the positive outcomes that follow, such as excellent work performance, work attitude, and ability to handle stress. [2] Employees, who display high adaptive performance in an organization, tend to have more advantages in career opportunities unlike employees who are not adaptable to change. [1] In previous literature, Pulakos and colleagues [1] established eight dimensions of adaptive performance.

Contents

Dimensions

Pulakos et al. [1] proposed the following dimensions for adaptive performance:

Measurement

Pulakos et al. [1] developed a scale for adaptive performance based on their eight-dimension model. This scale, the Job Adaptability Inventory (JAI), contains 132 questions (15 – 18 questions per dimension). Another similar tool is the I-ADAPT measure (I-ADAPT-M) developed by Ployhart and Bliese, [3] based on their I-ADAPT theory. They focused on adaptability as a personality-like trait which describes individual's ability to adapt to organizational changes. Therefore, there is a difference between I-ADAPT-M and the JAI which measures adaptive performance as behaviors. The I-ADAPT-M also has eight dimensions (crisis adaptability, stress adaptability, creative adaptability, uncertain adaptability, learning adaptability, interpersonal adaptability, cultural adaptability, and physical adaptability), with 5 items for every dimension.

Predictors

Several predictors of adaptive performance have been examined systematically, including cognitive abilities, [4] Big Five personality traits, [5] [6] and goal orientation. [7] According to the meta-analytic evidence, [4] cognitive abilities promote adaptive performance. Cognitive abilities are particularly important when dealing with complex dynamic tasks. Other examined antecedences of adaptive performance seem to be less important than cognitive abilities. To illustrate, personality traits like Big Five are weakly related to adaptive performance. [5] [6] Only emotional stability and conscientiousness seem to be somewhat relevant. Motivational predictors have been examined too. However, goal orientation (e.g., learning goal orientation) is only relevant when predicting subjective (e.g., self-reported) adaptive performance. Thus, goal orientation is not useful when predicting objective adaptive performance (e.g., task outcomes). [7]

Work stress

Work stress has been considered as a major factor of many work outcomes, like performance, nonproductive behavior and turnover. [8] [9] An employee being able to adapt to change within an organization is more focused, and able to deal with stressful situations. [1] An employee who is unable to [absolve their strain] is unable to focus on what is occurring in the organization, such as organizational change. [10] Not only can work stress predict adaptive performance to a considerable extent, there are also a lot of overlaps between adaptive performance and stress coping.

Stress appraisal

It has been long recognized that work stress generally has a negative effects on job performance, [11] but there is differential influence resulting from different perceptions of stressors. When faced with a new situation, individuals would spontaneously begin to evaluate their own abilities and skills as compared with the requirements of the situation, which is referred to as stress appraisals. [10] Such stress appraisal has two stages: primary appraisal and secondary appraisal. In the primary appraisal stage, individuals evaluate what potential threats there will be, concerning the demands from situation and the goals and values of themselves. In the secondary appraisal stage, individuals evaluate the resources they have to deal with those requirements. The results of appraisal, after two stages, are indicated to fall on a continuum between two extremes of being challenged and threatened. [12] Challenge appraisals mean that individuals feel their resources, like abilities and social support to be abundant sufficient to fulfill requirements of the situation. Threat appraisals, on the other hand, mean that individuals are not confident about their abilities or other resources to respond to the situation demands. Threat appraisals and challenge appraisals could influence job performance distinctively. [13] As for adaptive performance, the more challenging (i.e., the less threatening) one's stress appraisals are, the more adaptive performance he/she would have. [14] This relationship is mediated by self-efficacy, which is a belief about one's capacities for certain tasks. Challenging rather than threatening appraisals would lead to higher levels of self-efficacy, and thus benefit individuals' adaptive performance.

Stress coping

Coping, as a form of response to stressors, describes how individuals handle stressful events. It is very close to one dimension of adaptive performance by definition (i.e., the Handling Work Stress dimension), and coping has been suggested to be another form of adaptation. [3] However, they are still different constructions. Stress coping could be divided into several styles and strategies based on several theories. One general idea is to divide coping as active coping and avoidant coping. [15] Active coping means to proactively address and resolve stressful events, like quitting a stressful job and changing into a less overwhelming one. Avoidant coping means to reduce stress by ignoring it, like involving in problematic drinking. Another set of coping strategy types includes problem-focused coping and emotion-focused coping. [16] Problem-focused coping involves using skills and knowledge to deal with the cause of their problems. Emotion-focused coping involves releasing negative emotions by ways like distracting or disclaiming. Adaptive performance involves a mixture of different coping strategies. Because adaptive performance concerns positive aspects of behaviors, it is more closely related to coping strategies that have positive effects, such as active coping and problem-focused coping. [17] [18] Therefore, adaptive performance is more likely to contain such behaviors in stressful situations.

Team adaptive performance

In addition to individual adaptive performance, psychologists are also interested in adaptive performance at team level. Team adaptive performance is defined as an emergent phenomenon that compiles over time from the unfolding of a recursive cycle whereby one or more team members use their resources to functionally change current cognitive or behavioral goal-directed action or structures to meet expected or unexpected demands. It is a multilevel phenomenon that emanates as team members and teams recursively display behavioral processes and draw on and update emergent cognitive states to engage in change. Team adaptive performance is considered as the core and proximal temporal antecedents to team adaptation, which could be seen as a change in team performance in response to a salient cue or cue stream that leads to a functional outcome for the entire team. [19] Along with the definition of team adaptive performance, researchers came up with a four-stage model to describe the process of team adaptive performance. The four core constructs characterizing this adaptive cycle include: (1) situation assessment; (2) plan formulation; (3) plan execution, via adaptive interaction processes; and (4) team learning, as well as emergent cognitive states (i.e., shared mental models, team situational awareness, psychological safety), which serve as both proximal outcomes and inputs to this cycle. [19] Team adaptive performance differs from individual adaptive performance from several aspects. Team adaptive performance reflects the extent to which the team meets its objectives during a transfer performance episode, whereas individual adaptive performance reflects the extent to which each member effectively executes his or her role in the team during the transfer episode. [20] Team adaptive performance also has different antecedents compared with individual adaptive performance.

Predictors

People have identified several dispositional and contextual factors that would affect team adaptive performance. The most obvious and natural predictor of team adaptive performance is characteristics of team members, or team composition. Team composition with respect to members' cognitive ability is positively associated with team adaptive performance, with a moderation effect of team goals. Teams with difficult goals and staffed with high-performance orientation members are especially unlikely to adapt. Teams with difficult goals and staffed with high-learning orientation members are especially likely to adapt. [21] Moreover, team members' self-leadership, conscientiousness, and attitudes could also influence team adaptive performance. [22] [23] Other factors are more related to interactions between team members and team environment, like team learning climate. [24] Among them coordination of team members has been proved to be a most influential factor. Teams' ability to adapt their coordination activities to changing situational demands is crucial to team performance. A stronger increase in the teams' adaptive coordination was found to be related to better performance. [25] Researchers have posited that the maintenance of coordinated effort and activities ("coordination maintenance") is necessary for high team adaptive performance. This is because even with well-adapted individual performance, workflow at the team level often becomes disrupted, "overflowing" in particular directions. Overflow may create excessive work demands for some team members, while encouraging social loafing among those who are in the ebb of the workflow (see social loafing). [26] This suggests that, although team members may have their own task boundaries, and individual adaptive performance may depend on each member's individual capabilities, however to the team, each employee's adaptive performance may result in successful completion of the team task only if all activities are coordinated and synchronized in a holistic fashion. Team learning climate also displays a significant, positive relationship with team adaptive performance. [24]

Leadership

Studies show that for an individual to show leadership, they must not only perform well but the individual would need to be an adaptive learner as well. [27] An individual who displays adaptive qualities and productivity in a team will most likely also display strong leadership characteristics. [28] Organizations value adaptive performance in the leadership characteristics an individual possess, as it has proven to help workers maintain productivity in a dynamic work environment. [29] For leaders to successfully perform their roles, they must be able to effectively address tasks and also be able to overcome social challenges. [30] Adaptive performance is a critical characteristic to have when being the leader of an organization because it aids in successfully handling any workplace situations that may arise and helping an organization progress. [31] Instead of resisting change in the workplace, a team leader with adaptive performance establishes a new behavior appropriate to the situation to shift a potential problem into a positive outcome. [32] The correct type of leadership makes a positive change in the characteristics of a team's adaptability to assist in maintaining a healthy and positive workforce. [27] Employees who display adaptive performance in leadership set an example for their colleagues specifically in showcasing the best way to prepare and handle adaptation in occurring organizational changes. [33] Adaptive performance in leadership is valued by employers because an employee who displays those two characteristics tends to exemplify and motivate adaptive behavior within other individuals in the workforce. [31]

Transformational leadership

In organizational situations where adaptability to the environment and difficult challenges occur often, an individual who possess transformational leadership is preferred. [34] Transformational leadership is a leadership style that encourages team members to imagine new ideas of change and to take action on these ideas to help handle certain situations. [33] This particular leadership style is commonly used in organizations, due to its positive outcomes such as higher work engagement, motivation, and creativity in employees. [34] Parker and Mason's 2010 study introduced a relationship between transformational leadership with work adaptation and work performance. [32] The study stated that transformational leadership relates to adaptive performance by having team members become creative in the different strategies that can be used when approaching a certain situation which eventually leads to a higher performance. [32] Being creative and handling stressful situations the team leader as well as the team exemplifies the dimensions of adaptive performance. [35] This particular leadership style has also been shown as a motivator to increase the behavior of performance and adaptability in employees. [33] An individual showcasing transformational leadership has the ability to encourage more adaptive and productive behavior within team members through presenting new ideas and possible outcomes in the workplace. [33]

Leadership and adaptive decision making

An individual who displays leadership adaptability is one who is able to adjust their thoughts and behavior to attain appropriate responses to complex situations helping them make appropriate decisions. [35] A leader must make decisions and be adaptable to any organizational changes in order for the team to collectively continue workplace productivity. [27] An adaptive leader makes decisions to perform a specific action to better fit the organization and help it become productive. [36] By a leader displaying adaptive performance when making a decision, the team leader shows their awareness of a situation leading to new actions and strategies to reestablish fit and effectiveness. [28] Organizations value the characteristic of adaptive decision making in an individual as it displays an individual's understanding and adjusting capabilities to a difficult situation further aiding in the decision making process. [36]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Industrial and organizational psychology</span> Branch of psychology

Industrial and organizational psychology is the science of human behavior in the workplace. It is an applied discipline within psychology. Depending on the country or region of the world, I-O psychology is also known as occupational psychology in the United Kingdom, organisational psychology in Australia and New Zealand, and work and organizational (WO) psychology throughout Europe and Brazil. Industrial, work, and organizational (IWO) psychology is the broader, more global term for the science and profession.

Stress management is a wide spectrum of techniques and psychotherapies aimed at controlling a person's level of stress, especially chronic stress, usually for the purpose of improving everyday functioning. Stress produces numerous physical and mental symptoms which vary according to each individual's situational factors. These can include a decline in physical health, such as headaches, chest pain, fatigue, and sleep problems, as well as depression. The process of stress management is named as one of the keys to a happy and successful life in modern society. Life often delivers numerous demands that can be difficult to handle, but stress management provides a number of ways to manage anxiety and maintain overall well-being.

Coping refers to conscious strategies used to reduce unpleasant emotions. Coping strategies can be cognitions or behaviours and can be individual or social.

Organizational climate is a concept that has academic meaning in the fields of organizational behavior and I/O psychology as well as practical meaning in the business world There is continued scholarly debate about the exact definition of organizational climate for the purposes of scientific study. The definition developed by Lawrence R. James (1943-2014) and his colleagues makes a distinction between psychological and organizational climate.

"Psychological climate is defined as the individual employee’s perception of the psychological impact of the work environment on his or her own well-being. When employees in a particular work unit agree on their perceptions of the impact of their work environment, their shared perceptions can be aggregated to describe their organizational climate ."

Psychological resilience is the ability to cope mentally or emotionally with a crisis or to return to pre-crisis status quickly. The term was popularized in the 1970s and 1980s by psychologist Emmy E. Werner as she conducted a forty-year-long study of a cohort of Hawaiian children who came from low socioeconomic status backgrounds. Resilience exists when the person uses "mental processes and behaviors in promoting personal assets and protecting self from the potential negative effects of stressors". In simpler terms, psychological resilience exists in people who develop psychological and behavioral capabilities that allow them to remain calm during crises/chaos and to move on from the incident without long-term negative consequences. A lot of criticism of this topic comes from the fact that it is difficult to measure and test this psychological construct because resiliency can be interpreted in a variety of ways. Most psychological paradigms have their own perspective of what resilience looks like, where it comes from, and how it can be developed. Despite numerous definitions of psychological resilience, most of these definitions center around two concepts: adversity and positive adaptation. Many psychologists agree that positive emotions, social support, and hardiness can influence an individual to become more resilient.

The term eustress means "beneficial stress"—either psychological, physical, or biochemical/radiological (hormesis).

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Richard Lazarus</span>

Richard S. Lazarus was an American psychologist who began rising to prominence in the 1960s. A Review of General Psychology survey, published in 2002, ranked Lazarus as the 80th most cited psychologist of the 20th century. He was well renowned for his theory of cognitive-mediational theory within emotion.

Appraisal theory is the theory in psychology that emotions are extracted from our evaluations of events that cause specific reactions in different people. Essentially, our appraisal of a situation causes an emotional, or affective, response that is going to be based on that appraisal. An example of this is going on a first date. If the date is perceived as positive, one might feel happiness, joy, giddiness, excitement, and/or anticipation, because they have appraised this event as one that could have positive long-term effects, i.e. starting a new relationship, engagement, or even marriage. On the other hand, if the date is perceived negatively, then our emotions, as a result, might include dejection, sadness, emptiness, or fear. Reasoning and understanding of one's emotional reaction becomes important for future appraisals as well. The important aspect of the appraisal theory is that it accounts for individual variability in emotional reactions to the same event.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Affective events theory</span> Psychological model

Affective events theory (AET) is a model developed by organizational psychologists Howard M. Weiss and Russell Cropanzano to explain how emotions and moods influence job performance and job satisfaction. The model explains the linkages between employees' internal influences and their reactions to incidents that occur in their work environment that affect their performance, organizational commitment, and job satisfaction. The theory proposes that affective work behaviors are explained by employee mood and emotions, while cognitive-based behaviors are the best predictors of job satisfaction. The theory proposes that positive-inducing as well as negative-inducing emotional incidents at work are distinguishable and have a significant psychological impact upon workers' job satisfaction. This results in lasting internal and external affective reactions exhibited through job performance, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment.

Job performance assesses whether a person performs a job well. Job performance, studied academically as part of industrial and organizational psychology, also forms a part of human resources management. Performance is an important criterion for organizational outcomes and success. John P. Campbell describes job performance as an individual-level variable, or something a single person does. This differentiates it from more encompassing constructs such as organizational performance or national performance, which are higher-level variables.

Protection motivation theory (PMT) was originally created to help understand individual human responses to fear appeals. Protection motivation theory proposes that people protect themselves based on two factors: threat appraisal and coping appraisal. Threat appraisal assesses the severity of the situation and examines how serious the situation is, while coping appraisal is how one responds to the situation. Threat appraisal consists of the perceived severity of a threatening event and the perceived probability of the occurrence, or vulnerability. Coping appraisal consists of perceived response efficacy, or an individual's expectation that carrying out the recommended action will remove the threat, and perceived self efficacy, or the belief in one's ability to execute the recommended courses of action successfully.

Emotions in the workplace play a large role in how an entire organization communicates within itself and to the outside world. "Events at work have real emotional impact on participants. The consequences of emotional states in the workplace, both behaviors and attitudes, have substantial significance for individuals, groups, and society". "Positive emotions in the workplace help employees obtain favorable outcomes including achievement, job enrichment and higher quality social context". "Negative emotions, such as fear, anger, stress, hostility, sadness, and guilt, however increase the predictability of workplace deviance,", and how the outside world views the organization.

Counterproductive work behavior (CWB) is employee behavior that goes against the legitimate interests of an organization. These behaviors can harm organizations or people in organizations including employees and clients, customers, or patients. It has been proposed that a person-by-environment interaction (the relationship between a person's psychological and physical capacities and the demands placed on those capacities by the person's social and physical environment.) can be utilized to explain a variety of counterproductive behaviors. For instance, an employee who is high on trait anger is more likely to respond to a stressful incident at work with CWB.

Social undermining is the expression of negative emotions directed towards a particular person or negative evaluations of the person as a way to prevent the person from achieving their goals.

Psychological hardiness, alternatively referred to as personality hardiness or cognitive hardiness in the literature, is a personality style first introduced by Suzanne C. Kobasa in 1979. Kobasa described a pattern of personality characteristics that distinguished managers and executives who remained healthy under life stress, as compared to those who developed health problems. In the following years, the concept of hardiness was further elaborated in a book and a series of research reports by Salvatore Maddi, Kobasa and their graduate students at the University of Chicago.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Psychological stress</span> Feeling of strain and pressure

In psychology, stress is a feeling of emotional strain and pressure. Stress is a type of psychological pain. Small amounts of stress may be beneficial, as it can improve athletic performance, motivation and reaction to the environment. Excessive amounts of stress, however, can increase the risk of strokes, heart attacks, ulcers, and mental illnesses such as depression and also aggravation of a pre-existing condition.

Work motivation "is a set of energetic forces that originate both within as well as beyond an individual's being, to initiate work-related behavior, and to determine its form, direction, intensity, and duration." Understanding what motivates an organization's employees is central to the study of I–O psychology. Motivation is a person's internal disposition to be concerned with and approach positive incentives and avoid negative incentives. To further this, an incentive is the anticipated reward or aversive event available in the environment. While motivation can often be used as a tool to help predict behavior, it varies greatly among individuals and must often be combined with ability and environmental factors to actually influence behavior and performance. Results from a 2012 study, which examined age-related differences in work motivation, suggest a "shift in people's motives" rather than a general decline in motivation with age. That is, it seemed that older employees were less motivated by extrinsically related features of a job, but more by intrinsically rewarding job features. Work motivation is strongly influenced by certain cultural characteristics. Between countries with comparable levels of economic development, collectivist countries tend to have higher levels of work motivation than do countries that tend toward individualism. Similarly measured, higher levels of work motivation can be found in countries that exhibit a long versus a short-term orientation. Also, while national income is not itself a strong predictor of work motivation, indicators that describe a nation's economic strength and stability, such as life expectancy, are. Work motivation decreases as a nation's long-term economic strength increases. Currently work motivation research has explored motivation that may not be consciously driven. This method goal setting is referred to as goal priming. Effects of primed subconscious goals in addition to goals that are consciously set related to job performance have been studied by Stajkovic, Latham, Sergent, and Peterson, who conducted research on a CEO of a for-profit business organization using goal priming to motivate job performance. Goal priming refers to the achievement of a goal by external cues given. These cues can affect information processing and behaviour the pursuit of this goal. In this study, the goal was primed by the CEO using achievement related words strategy placed in emails to employees. This seemingly small gesture alone not only cost the CEO very little money, but it increased objectively measured performance efficiency by 35% and effectiveness by 15% over the course of a 5-day work week. There has been controversy about the true efficacy of this work as to date, only four goal priming experiments have been conducted. However, the results of these studies found support for the hypothesis that primed goals do enhance performance in a for-profit business organization setting.

Emotional approach coping is a psychological construct that involves the use of emotional processing and emotional expression in response to a stressful situation. As opposed to emotional avoidance, in which emotions are experienced as a negative, undesired reaction to a stressful situation, emotional approach coping involves the conscious use of emotional expression and processing to better deal with a stressful situation. The construct was developed to explain an inconsistency in the stress and coping literature: emotion-focused coping was associated with largely maladaptive outcomes while emotional processing and expression was demonstrated to be beneficial.

Self-blame is a cognitive process in which an individual attributes the occurrence of a stressful event to oneself. The direction of blame often has implications for individuals’ emotions and behaviors during and following stressful situations. Self-blame is a common reaction to stressful events and has certain effects on how individuals adapt. Types of self-blame are hypothesized to contribute to depression, and self-blame is a component of self-directed emotions like guilt and self-disgust. Because of self-blame's commonality in response to stress and its role in emotion, self-blame should be examined using psychology's perspectives on stress and coping. This article will attempt to give an overview of the contemporary study on self-blame in psychology.

Stress exposure training is the practicing of important existing skills in a stressful and distracting environment to develop the ability to perform them reliably in spite of the circumstances.

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Pulakos, E. D., Arad, S., Donovan, M. A., & Plamondon, K. E. (2000). Adaptability in the workplace: development of a taxonomy of adaptive performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(4), 612-624.
  2. ↑ Leiz, Niessan, Swarowsky. "Age and adaptation to changes in the workplace". Journal of Managerial Psychology. 2009, p. 356-383.
  3. 1 2 Ployhart, Robert E.; Bliese, Paul D. Burke, C. Shawn (Ed); Pierce, Linda G. (Ed); Salas, Eduardo (Ed), (2006). Understanding adaptability: A prerequisite for effective performance within complex environments. Advances in human performance and cognitive engineering research (Vol 6)., (pp. 3-39). Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier, xi, 287 pp.
  4. 1 2 Stasielowicz, L. (2020). How important is cognitive ability when adapting to changes? A meta-analysis of the performance adaptation literature. Personality and Individual Differences, 166.
  5. 1 2 Huang, J. L., Ryan, A. M., Zabel, K. L., & Palmer, A. (2014). Personality and adaptive performance at work: A meta-analytic investigation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 99(1), 162–79.
  6. 1 2 Woo, S. E., Chernyshenko, O. S., Stark, S. E., & Conz, G. (2014). Validity of six openness facets in predicting work behaviors: A meta-analysis. Journal of Personality Assessment, 96(1), 76–86.
  7. 1 2 Stasielowicz, L. (2019). Goal orientation and performance adaptation: A meta-analysis. Journal of Research in Personality, 82.
  8. ↑ Agolla, J., & Ongori, H. (2008). Occupational stress in organizations and its effects on organizational performance. Journal of Management Research, 8(3), 123-135.
  9. ↑ Rajkumar, S., & Swaminathan, R. (2013). Stress levels in organizations and their impact on employee's behavior. BVIMR Management Edge, 6(1), 79-88.
  10. 1 2 Folkman, S., Lazarus, R. S., Dunkel-Schetter, C., DeLongis, A., & Gruen, R. J. (1986). Dynamics of a stressful encounter: cognitive appraisal, coping, and encounter outcomes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50(5), 992.
  11. ↑ Motowidlo, S. J., Packard, J. S., & Manning, M. R. (1986). Occupational stress: its causes and consequences for job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71(4), 618.
  12. ↑ Blascovich, J., & Mendes, W.B. (2000). Challenge and threat appraisals: The role of affective cues. In J. Forgas (Ed.), Feeling and thinking: The role of affect in social cognition (pp. 59-82). New York: Cambridge University Press.
  13. ↑ Schneider, T. R. (2004). The role of neuroticism on psychological and psychological stress responses. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,40(6), 795-804.
  14. ↑ Stokes, C. K., Schneider, T. R., & Lyons, J. B. (2008). Predicting Adaptive Performance in Multicultural Teams: a Causal Model. In NATO HFM Symposium on Adaptability in Team Coalitions, Copenhagen, Denmark.
  15. ↑ Aspinwall, L. G., & Taylor, S. E. (1997). A stitch in time: self-regulation and proactive coping. Psychological bulletin, 121(3), 417.
  16. ↑ Carver, C. S., & Connor-Smith, J. (2010). Personality and coping. Annual Review of Psychology, 61, 679-704.
  17. ↑ Shields, N. (2001). Stress, active coping, and academic performance among persisting and nonpersisting college students. Journal of Applied Biobehavioral Research, 6(2), 65-81.
  18. ↑ Struthers, C. W., Perry, R. P., & Menec, V. H. (2000). An examination of the relationship among academic stress, coping, motivation, and performance in college. Research in higher education, 41(5), 581-592.
  19. 1 2 Burke, C. S., Stagl, K. C., Salas, E., Pierce, L., & Kendall, D. (2006). Understanding team adaptation: a conceptual analysis and model. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(6), 1189–207.
  20. ↑ Chen, G., Thomas, B., & Wallace, J. C. (2005). A multilevel examination of the relationships among training outcomes, mediating regulatory processes, and adaptive performance. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(5), 827–41.
  21. ↑ LePine, J. a. (2005). Adaptation of teams in response to unforeseen change: effects of goal difficulty and team composition in terms of cognitive ability and goal orientation. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(6), 1153–67.
  22. ↑ Hauschildt, K., & Konradt, U. (2012). Self-leadership and team members' work role performance. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 27(5), 497–517.
  23. ↑ Thoms, P., Pinto, J. K., Parente, D. H., & Druskat, V. U. (2002). Adaptation to Self-Managing Work Teams. Small Group Research, 33(1), 3–31.
  24. 1 2 Han, T. Y., & Williams, K. J. (2008). Multilevel Investigation of Adaptive Performance: Individual- and Team-Level Relationships. Group & Organization Management.
  25. ↑ Burtscher, M. J., Wacker, J., Grote, G., & Manser, T. (2010). Managing Nonroutine Events in Anesthesia: The Role of Adaptive Coordination. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 52(2), 282–294.
  26. ↑ Karau, S. J., & Williams, K. D. (1993). Social loafing: A meta-analytic review and theoretical integration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65(4), 681.
  27. 1 2 3 Hall, D., & Karaevli, A. (2006). How career variety promotes the adaptability of managers: a theoretical model. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 69(6), 359-373.
  28. 1 2 Curnow, C., Fallesen, J., & Glaze, H. (2011). A selective review of leadership studies in the u.s. army. MILITARY PSYCHOLOGY, 23(1), 462-478.
  29. ↑ Xenikou, A., & Simosi, M. (2006). Organizational culture and transformational leadership as predictors of business unit performance. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 21(6), 566-579.
  30. ↑ Halpin, S. (2011). Historical influences on the changing nature of leadership within the military environment. MILITARY PSYCHOLOGY, 23(1), 479-488.
  31. 1 2 Herman, J., Nelson, J., & Zaccaro, S. (2010). Strategic information provision and experiential variety as tools for developing adaptive leadership skills. Consulting Psychology Journal:Practice and Research, 62(2), 131-142.
  32. 1 2 3 Mason, C., & Parker, M. (2010). Leader vision and the development of adaptive and proactive performance: a longitudinal study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95(1), 174-182.
  33. 1 2 3 4 Akremi, A., Vandenberghe, C., & Voirin, A. (2010). A multilevel model of transformational leadership and adaptive performance and the moderating role of climate for innovation. Group & Organization Management, 35(3), 699-726.
  34. 1 2 Conchie, S. (2013). Transformational leadership, intrinsic motivation, and trust: a moderated-mediated model of workplace safety. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 18(2), 198-210.
  35. 1 2 Balthazard, P., Hannah, S., Jennings, P., & Waldman, D. (2013). The psychological and neurological bases of leader self-complexity and effects on adaptive decision-making. Journal of Applied Psychology,98(3), 393-411.
  36. 1 2 Kwantes, P., Neal, A., & Vuckovic, A. (2013). Adaptive decision making in a dynamic environment: a test of a sequential sampling model of relative judgment. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 19(3), 266-284.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.