MEDIATING ROLE OF SELF-EFFICACY IN THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN WORK ENGAGEMENT AND TASK PERFORMANCE

Yıl 2024, , 153 - 160, 30.04.2024

Salih Zeki İmamoğlu , Serhat Erat , Eda Dilara Ayber

https://doi.org/10.18070/erciyesiibd.1369865

Öz

The aim of this research is to examine the relationships between work engagement, self-efficacy, and task performance and to investigate the mediating role of self-efficacy in the effect of work engagement on task performance. The sample of this study consists of 356 personnel working in the logistics sector operating throughout Kocaeli province. Questionnaire method was used as data collection tool. The collected data were analyzed the SPSS statistical package program. Research findings showed that both self-efficacy and work engagement have important roles in increasing performance. Additionally, significant contributions have been made regarding the mediating role of self-efficacy in the effect of work engagement on performance. Human resource practitioners of firms seeking to improve task performance must understand and consider the importance of both cognitive ability and emotional display when designing and evaluating selection and training process interventions.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Work Engagement, Task Performance, Self-efficacy

ÇALIŞANLARDA İŞE TUTKUNLUĞUN GÖREV PERFORMANSINA ETKİSİNDE ÖZ YETERLİLİĞİN ARACI ROLÜ

Öz

Bu araştırmanın amacı işe tutkunluk, öz yeterlilik ve görev performansı arasındaki ilişkileri incelemek ve işe tutkunluğun görev performansına etkisinde öz yeterliliğin aracı rolünü araştırmaktır. Çalışmanın örneklemini Kocaeli ili genelinde faaliyette bulunan lojistik sektöründe çalışan 356 personel oluşturmaktadır. Veri toplama aracı olarak anket yöntemi kullanılmıştır. Toplanan veriler SPSS istatistiksel paket programıyla analize tabi tutulmuştur. Araştırma bulguları hem öz yeterlilik hem de işe tutkunluğun performansı artırmada önemli rolleri olduğunu göstermiştir. Ayrıca işe tutkunluğun performansa etkisinde öz yeterliliğin aracı rolüne ait önemli katkılar sunmuştur. Görev performansını artırmak isteyen firmaların insan kaynakları uygulayıcıları, seçim ve eğitim süreçleri müdahalelerini tasarlarken ve değerlendirirken hem bilişsel becerinin hem de duygusal gösterimin önemini anlamalı ve bu unsurları dikkate almalıdır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

İşe Tutkunluk, Görev Performansı, Öz Yeterlilik

Kaynakça

• Alessandri, G., Borgogni, L., Schaufeli, W. B., Caprara, G. V., ve Consiglio, C. (2015). From positive orientation to job performance: The role of work engagement and self-efficacy beliefs. Journal of Happiness Studies, 16, 767-788.
• Ashforth, B. E., ve Humphrey, R. H. (1995). Emotion in the workplace: A reappraisal. Human Relations, 48(2), 97-125.
• Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
• Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.
• Bandura, A. (2012). On the functional properties of perceived self-efficacy revisited. Journal of Management, 38(1), 9-44.
• Bandura, A., Barbaranelli, C., Caprara, G. V., ve Pastorelli, C. (2001). Self‐efficacy beliefs as shapers of children's aspirations and career trajectories. Child Development, 72(1), 187-206.
• Bakker, A. B., ve Bal, M. P. (2010). Weekly work engagement and performance: A study among starting teachers. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 83(1), 189-206.
• Bakker, A. B., ve Demerouti, E. (2008). Towards a model of work engagement. Career Development International, 13(3), 209-223.
• Bakker, A. B., Demerouti, E., ve Ten Brummelhuis, L. L. (2012). Work engagement, performance, and active learning: The role of conscientiousness. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 80(2), 555–564.
• Bakker, A. B., Tims, M., ve Derks, D. (2012). Proactive personality and job performance: The role of job crafting and work engagement. Human Relations, 65(10), 1359-1378.
• Baron, R. M., ve Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173.
• Bernales-Turpo, D., Quispe-Velasquez, R., Flores-Ticona, D., Saintila, J., Ruiz Mamani, P. G., Huancahuire-Vega, S., Morales-García, M., ve Morales-García, W. C. (2022). Burnout, professional self-efficacy, and life satisfaction as predictors of job performance in health care workers: The mediating role of work engagement. Journal of Primary Care & Community Health, 13, 21501319221101845.
• Betz, N. E. (2000). Self-efficacy theory as a basis for career assessment. Journal of Career Assessment, 8(3), 205-222.
• Bhatti, M. A., Alshagawi, M., ve Juhari, A. S. (2018). Mediating the role of work engagement between personal resources (self-efficacy, the big five model) and nurses’ job performance. International Journal of Human Rights in Healthcare, 11(3), 176-191.
• Bindl, U. K., ve Parker, S. K. (2010). Feeling good and performing well? Psychological engagement and positive behaviors at work. In S. L. Albrecht (Ed.), Handbook of Employee Engagement: Perspectives, Issues, Research and Practice (pp. 385-398. Edward Elgar Publishing.
• Boccoli, G., Gastaldi, L., ve Corso, M. (2023). The evolution of employee engagement: Towards a social and contextual construct for balancing individual performance and wellbeing dynamically. International Journal of Management Reviews, 25(1), 75-98.
• Bothma, F. C., ve Roodt, G. (2012). Work-based identity and work engagement as potential antecedents of task performance and turnover intention: Unravelling a complex relationship. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology, 38(1), 27-44.
• Campbell, J. P. (1990). Modeling the performance prediction problem in industrial and organizational psychology. In M. D. Dunnette & L. M. Hough (Eds.), Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology (pp. 687–732). Consulting Psychologists Press.
• Cabrera-Aguilar, E., Zevallos-Francia, M., Morales-García, M., Ramírez-Coronel, A. A., Morales-García, S. B., Sairitupa-Sanchez, L. Z., ve Morales-García, W. C. (2023). Resilience and stress as predictors of work engagement: the mediating role of self-efficacy in nurses. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 14: 1202048.
• Chiesa, R., Toderi, S., Dordoni, P., Henkens, K., Fiabane, E. M., ve Setti, I. (2016). Older workers: Stereotypes and occupational self-efficacy. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 31(7), 1152-1166.
• Cho, H. (2021). Power of good old days: how leisure nostalgia influences work engagement, task performance, and subjective well-being. Leisure Studies, 40(6), 793-809.
• Corbeanu, A., ve Iliescu, D. (2023). The link between work engagement and job performance. Journal of Personnel Psychology. 22(3), 111-122.
• Cropanzano, R., ve Wright, T. A. (2001). When a “happy” worker is really a “productive” worker: A review and further refinement of the happy-productive worker thesis. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 53(3), 182.
• Feltz, D. L., Short, S. E., ve Sullivan, P. J. (2008). Self-efficacy in sport. Human Kinetics.
• Fredrickson, B. L. (2001). The role of positive emotions in positive psychology: The broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions. American Psychologist, 56(3), 218-226.
• Fredrickson, B. L., ve Losada, M. F. (2005). Positive affect and the complex dynamics of human flourishing. American Psychologist, 60(7), 678-686.
• Gagné, M., ve Deci, E. L. (2005). Self‐determination theory and work motivation. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26(4), 331-362.
• Gagné, M., Parker, S. K., Griffin, M. A., Dunlop, P. D., Knight, C., Klonek, F. E., ve Parent-Rocheleau, X. (2022). Understanding and shaping the future of work with self-determination theory. Nature Reviews Psychology, 1(7), 378-392.
• Geraci, A., Di Domenico, L., Inguglia, C., ve D’Amico, A. (2023). Teachers’ emotional intelligence, burnout, work engagement, and self-efficacy during Covid-19 lockdown. Behavioral Sciences, 13(4), 296.
• Geue, P. E. (2018). Positive practices in the workplace: Impact on team climate, work engagement, and task performance. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 54(3), 272-301.
• Goodman, S. A., ve Svyantek, D. J. (1999). Person–organization fit and contextual performance: Do shared values matter. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 55(2), 254-275.
• Griffin, M. A., Neal, A., ve Parker, S. K. (2007). A new model of work role performance: Positive behavior in uncertain and interdependent contexts. Academy of Management Journal, 50(2), 327-347.
• Gruman, J. A., ve Saks, A. M. (2011). Performance management and employee engagement. Human Resource Management Review, 21(2), 123-136.
• Gürbüz, S. (2019). Sosyal bilimlerde aracı, düzenleyici ve durumsal etki analizleri. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
• Halbesleben, J. R. (2010). A meta-analysis of work engagement: Relationships with burnout, demands, resources, and consequences. Work Engagement: A Handbook of Essential Theory and Research, 8(1), 102-117.
• Hantula, D. A. (2015). Job satisfaction: The management tool and leadership responsibility. Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, 35(1-2), 81-94.
• Han, Y., ve Wang, Y. (2021). Investigating the correlation among Chinese EFL teachers' self-efficacy, work engagement, and reflection. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 763234.
• Hayes, A. F. (2018). Partial, conditional, and moderated moderated mediation: Quantification, inference, and interpretation. Communication Monographs, 85(1), 4-40.
• Hiller, N. J., ve Hambrick, D. C. (2005). Conceptualizing executive hubris: the role of (hyper) core self‐evaluations in strategic decision‐making. Strategic Management Journal, 26(4), 297-319.
• Hirschi, A. (2012). Callings and work engagement: Moderated mediation model of work meaningfulness, occupational identity, and occupational self-efficacy. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 59(3), 479.
• Jamillah, K., Setyanti, S. W. L. H., ve Mufidah, A. (2023). The effect of work life balance and self efficacy on employee performance with employee engagement as intervening variable. Journal of Economics, Finance and Management Studies, 6(1), 304-312.
• Judge, T. A., Jackson, C. L., Shaw, J. C., Scott, B. A., ve Rich, B. L. (2007). Self-efficacy and work-related performance: The integral role of individual differences. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(1), 107-127.
• Kahn, W. A. (1990). Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at work. Academy of Management Journal, 33(4), 692–724.
• Kahn, W. A. (1992). To be fully there: Psychological presence at work. Human Relations, 45(4), 321-349.
• Kato, Y., Chiba, R., Shimazu, A., Hayashi, Y., ve Sakamoto, T. (2023). Antecedents and outcomes of work engagement among psychiatric nurses in Japan. Healthcare, 11 (3), 295.
• Lai, F. Y., Tang, H. C., Lu, S. C., Lee, Y. C., ve Lin, C. C. (2020). Transformational leadership and job performance: The mediating role of work engagement. Sage Open, 10(1), 2158244019899085.
• Lisbona, A., Palaci, F., Salanova, M., ve Frese, M. (2018). The effects of work engagement and self-efficacy on personal initiative and performance. Psicothema, 30(1), 89-96.
• Liu, C., Marchewka, J. T., Lu, J., ve Yu, C. S. (2005). Beyond concern-a privacy-trust-behavioral intention model of electronic commerce. Information & Management, 42(2), 289-304.
• Luthans, F., ve Youssef, C. M. (2007). Emerging positive organizational behavior. Journal of Management, 33(3), 321-349.
• Macey, W. H., ve Schneider, B. (2008). Engaged in engagement: We are delighted we did it. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 1(1), 76-83.
• Machmud, S. (2018). The influence of self-efficacy on satisfaction and work-related performance. International Journal of Management Science and Business Administration, 4(4), 43-47.
• MacKinnon, D. P., Lockwood, C. M., ve Williams, J. (2004). Confidence limits for the indirect effect: Distribution of the product and resampling methods. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 39(1), 99-128.
• Mazzetti, G., Robledo, E., Vignoli, M., Topa, G., Guglielmi, D., ve Schaufeli, W. B. (2023). Work engagement: A meta-analysis using the job demands-resources model. Psychological Reports, 126(3), 1069-1107.
• Mazzetti, G., Schaufeli, W. B., ve Guglielmi, D. (2016). Are workaholism and work engagement in the eye of the beholder? European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 34(1), 30-40.
• Mauno, S., Kinnunen, U., Mäkikangas, A., ve Feldt, T. (2010). Job demands and resources as antecedents of work engagement: A qualitative review and directions for future research. In S. L. Albrecht (Ed.), Handbook of employee engagement: Perspectives, Issues, Research and Practice (pp. 111–128). Edward Elgar Publishing.
• Meng, Q., ve Zhang, Q. (2023). The influence of academic self-efficacy on university students’ academic performance: The mediating effect of academic engagement. Sustainability, 15(7), 5767.
• Musenze, I. A., Mayende, T. S., Wampande, A. J., Kasango, J., ve Emojong, O. R. (2021). Mechanism between perceived organizational support and work engagement: Explanatory role of self-efficacy. Journal of Economic and Administrative Sciences, 37(4), 471-495.
• Nagarajan, R., Alagiriswamy, R., ve Parayitam, S. (2023). The effect of job crafting on performance and satisfaction: Physical engagement as a mediator and cognitive and emotional engagement as moderators. IIM Kozhikode Society & Management Review, 12(2), 135-156.
• Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.
• Orgambídez, A., Borrego, Y., ve Vázquez‐Aguado, O. (2019). Self‐efficacy and organizational commitment among Spanish nurses: The role of work engagement. International Nursing Review, 66(3), 381-388.
• Ouweneel, E., Schaufeli, W. B., ve Le Blanc, P. M. (2013). Believe, and you will achieve: Changes over time in self‐efficacy, engagement, and performance. Applied Psychology: Health and Well‐Being, 5(2), 225-247.
• Panda, A., Sinha, S., ve Jain, N. K. (2022). Job meaningfulness, employee engagement, supervisory support and job performance: A moderated-mediation analysis. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 71(6), 2316-2336.
• Preacher, K. J., Rucker, D. D., ve Hayes, A. F. (2007). Addressing moderated mediation hypotheses: Theory, methods, and prescriptions. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 42(1), 185-227.
• Ren, S., ve Chadee, D. (2017). Ethical leadership, self-efficacy and job satisfaction in China: The moderating role of guanxi. Personnel Review, 46(2), 371-388.
• Rich, B. L., Lepine, J. A., ve Crawford, E. R. (2010). Job engagement: Antecedents and effects on job performance. Academy of Management Journal, 53(3), 617-635.
• Ryan, R. M., ve Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68-78.
• Schaufeli, W. B., ve Bakker, A. B. (2004). Job demands, job resources, and their relationship with burnout and engagement: A multi‐sample study. Journal of Organizational Behavior: The International Journal of Industrial, Occupational and Organizational Psychology and Behavior, 25(3), 293-315.
• Schaufeli, W. B., Bakker, A. B., ve Salanova, M. (2006). The measurement of work engagement with a short questionnaire: A cross-national study. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66(4), 701-716.
• Schaufeli, W. B., Bakker, A. B., ve Van Rhenen, W. (2009). How changes in job demands and resources predict burnout, work engagement, and sickness absenteeism. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 30(7), 893-917.
• Schaufeli, H. B., ve Salanova, M. (2010). How to improve work engagement? In S. L. Albrecht (Ed.), Handbook of Employee Engagement: Perspectives, Issues, Research and Practice (pp. 399-415). Edward Elgar Publishing.
• Schaufeli, W. B., Salanova, M., González-Romá, V., ve Bakker, A. B. (2002). The measurement of engagement and burnout: A two sample confirmatory factor analytic approach. Journal of Happiness Studies, 3, 71-92.
• Schaufeli, W. B., Taris, T. W., ve Van Rhenen, W. (2008). Workaholism, burnout, and work engagement: Three of a kind or three different kinds of employee well‐being? Applied Psychology, 57(2), 173-203.
• Schwarzer, R., ve Jerusalem, M. (1995). Generalized self-efficacy scale. In M. Johnston, J. Weinman, S. C. Wright (Eds.), Measures in Health Psychology: A User’s Portfolio (pp. 35-37). Nfer-Nelson.
• Seggelen - Damen, I., ve Dam, K. (2016), Self-reflection as a mediator between self-efficacy and well-being, Journal of Managerial Psychology, 31(1), 18-33.
• Seligman, M. E., ve Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000). Special issue: Positive psychology. American Psychologist, 55(1), 5-14.
• Shu, K. (2022). Teachers’ commitment and self-efficacy as predictors of work engagement and well-being. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 850204.
• Sitzmann, T., ve Yeo, G. (2013). A meta‐analytic investigation of the within‐person self‐efficacy domain: Is self‐efficacy a product of past performance or a driver of future performance? Personnel Psychology, 66(3), 531-568.
• Stajkovic, A. D., ve Luthans, F. (1998). Self-efficacy and work-related performance: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 124(2), 240-261.
• Stanley, P. J., ve Schutte, N. S. (2023). Merging the self-determination theory and the broaden and build theory through the nexus of positive affect: A macro theory of positive functioning. New Ideas in Psychology, 68, 100979.
• Steinbauer, R., Renn, R. W., Chen, H. S., ve Rhew, N. (2018). Workplace ostracism, self-regulation, and job performance: Moderating role of intrinsic work motivation. The Journal of Social Psychology, 158(6), 767-783.
• Susila, M. R. (2023). The role of work engagement in mediating the effect of job characteristics and compensation on performance. Asian Management and Business Review, 3(1), 60-73.
• Tian, G., Wang, J., Zhang, Z., ve Wen, Y. (2019). Self-efficacy and work performance: The role of work engagement. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 47(12), 1-7.
• Tsai, W. C., Chen, C. C., ve Liu, H. L. (2007). Test of a model linking employee positive moods and task performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(6), 1570.
• Tu, B., Luo, X., Sitar, S., ve Huang, C. (2022). Job demands, resources, and task performance in Chinese social workers: Roles of burnout and work engagement. Frontiers in Public Health, 10.
• Van Zyl, L. E., Van Oort, A., Rispens, S., ve Olckers, C. (2021). Work engagement and task performance within a global Dutch ICT-consulting firm: The mediating role of innovative work behaviors. Current Psychology, 40, 4012-4023.
• Vancouver, J. B., ve Kendall, L. N. (2006). When self-efficacy negatively relates to motivation and performance in a learning context. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(5), 1146.
• Vancouver, J. B., Thompson, C. M., Tischner, E. C., ve Putka, D. J. (2002). Two studies examining the negative effect of self-efficacy on performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(3), 506.
• Xu, Y., Liu, D., ve Tang, D. S. (2022). Decent work and innovative work behaviour: Mediating roles of work engagement, intrinsic motivation and job self‐efficacy. Creativity and Innovation Management, 31(1), 49-63.
• Yao, J., Qiu, X., Yang, L., Han, X., ve Li, Y. (2022). The relationship between work engagement and job performance: Psychological capital as a moderating factor. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 729131.
• Yongxing, G., Hongfei, D., Baoguo, X., ve Lei, M. (2017). Work engagement and job performance: The moderating role of perceived organizational support. Anales de Psicología/Annals of Psychology, 33(3), 708-713.
• Yun, M., ve Beehr, T. (2023). Too much of a good thing? Curvilinear effect of instrumental social support on task performance via work engagement. Applied Psychology, 72(2), 674-696.
• Zhao, X., Lynch Jr, J. G., ve Chen, Q. (2010). Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: Myths and truths about mediation analysis. Journal of Consumer Research, 37(2), 197-206.
• Zimmerman, B. J. (1995). Self-efficacy and educational development. Self-efficacy in Changing Societies, 1(1), 202-231.