Performance adaptation mechanism under the performance dynamism

被引:0
|
作者
Ma J. [1 ]
Fan Z. [1 ,2 ]
Yang Q. [1 ]
机构
[1] School of Management, Shanghai University, Shanghai
[2] School of Economics and Management, Hubei University of Technology, Wuhan
基金
中国国家自然科学基金;
关键词
Cognitive crafting; Performance dynamism threat; Performance standard commitment; Subsequent task performance; Task focus;
D O I
10.12011/SETP2019-2004
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Based on the performance adaptation mechanism of adaptive performance, the adaptive process from cognitive crafting to ask focus is introduced, and a two-stage moderating mediated model is constructed. Three hundred and twenty-eight valid samples of six enterprises are tested by regression analysis, bootstrap and Johnson Neyman method. The results show that the performance dynamism threat does not necessarily lead to the improvement of subsequent performance, but under the moderated role of cognitive crafting in the first stage, the performance dynamism threat will be transformed into performance standard commitment, and then under the mediated role of task focus in the second stage, performance standard commitment will be transformed into task performance improvement. The theoretical value of the research lies in the construction of a complete performance adaptation mechanism to deal with the performance dynamism threat, and the practical implication lies in that it provides theoretical enlightenment for enterprises to deal with the challenges of changes, that is, through two stages of transition adaptation and reacquisition adaptation, guiding employees to focus on the challenges of tasks on the basis of reorganization of job cognition, so as to realize the performance dynamism threat is an opportunity for performance improvement. © 2021, Editorial Board of Journal of Systems Engineering Society of China. All right reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:1828 / 1839
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Tidd B J, Bessant J, Pavitt K., Managing innovation: Integrating technological, market and organizational change, Technovation, 18, 1, pp. 369-370, (2011)
  • [2] Zott C, Amit R., Business model design and the performance of entrepreneurial firms, Organization Science, 18, 2, pp. 181-199, (2007)
  • [3] Grant A M, Parker S K., Redesigning work design theories: The rise of relational and proactive perspectives, The Academy of Management Annals, 3, 1, pp. 317-375, (2009)
  • [4] Lee H H, Yang T T., Employee goal orientation, work unit goal orientation and employee creativity, Creativity and Innovation Management, 24, 4, pp. 659-674, (2015)
  • [5] Casas Arce P, Holzhacker M, Mahlendorf M D, Et al., Relative performance evaluation and the ratchet effect, Contemporary Accounting Research, 35, 4, pp. 1702-1731, (2018)
  • [6] Sijbom R B L, Anseel F, Crommelinck M, Et al., Why seeking feedback from diverse sources may not be sufficient for stimulating creativity: The role of performance dynamism and creative time pressure, Journal of Organizational Behavior, 39, 3, pp. 355-368, (2018)
  • [7] Fugate M, Prussia G E, Kinicki A J., Managing employee withdrawal during organizational change: The role of threat appraisal, Journal of Management, 38, 3, pp. 890-914, (2012)
  • [8] Wang H, Lu C, Siu O., Job insecurity and job performance: The moderating role of organizational justice and the mediating role of work engagement, Journal of Applied Psychology, 100, 4, pp. 1249-1258, (2015)
  • [9] Li F, Deng H, Leung K, Et al., Is perceived creativity-reward contingency good for creativity? The role of challenge and threat appraisals, Human Resource Management, 56, 4, pp. 693-709, (2017)
  • [10] Hobfoll S E., Conservation of resource caravans and engaged settings, Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 84, 1, pp. 116-122, (2011)