Josette Gevers, Brigitte Claessens, Wendelien van Eerde, Christel Rutte

About This Presentation

Title:

Josette Gevers, Brigitte Claessens, Wendelien van Eerde, Christel Rutte

Description:

/faculteit technologie management. Josette Gevers, Brigitte ... Time Urgency x Temporal Perspective (Waller, Conte, Gibson, & Carpenter, 2001) Pacing Scale ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:189

Avg rating:3.0/5.0

Slides: 20

Provided by: tm148

Category:

more less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Josette Gevers, Brigitte Claessens, Wendelien van Eerde, Christel Rutte

1
Beyond conscientiousnessTesting the predictive
validity of pacing styles

Josette Gevers, Brigitte Claessens, Wendelien van
Eerde, Christel Rutte
Eindhoven University of Technology, The
Netherlands
Robert Roe
Maastricht University, The Netherlands

2
Meeting Deadlines

Both individuals and teams struggle to meet
deadlines, some more than others.
Approach
Time Urgency x Temporal Perspective (Waller,
Conte, Gibson, Carpenter, 2001)
Pacing Scale

3
Pacing Scale I
Gevers, 2004 Gevers, Rutte, Van Eerde, 2006
4
Pacing Scale II
Claessens, 2004
5
Pacing Style

How a person generally allocates work activities
over time when working under deadline conditions
speed of work processes
distribution of work processes over time

Pace is largely overlooked in literature on
time-related individual differences
Pace is central to temporal enactment (see
Ballard's contribution to the conference)

6
Research Questions

Which pacing styles do people use?
How do pacing styles relate to conscientiousness?
How do pacing styles relate to individual and
team-based performance and do they have
predictive validity beyond conscientiousness?

7
Three studies Three samples

43 student project teams working on 13-week
organization-based engineering projects
167 employees from 7 service- or production
companies working in autonomous jobs
33 groups of employees from a Dutch company,
participating in a business simulation game as
part of a company training.

8
Measures
9
Results

Which pacing styles do people use?

10
Results

How do pacing styles relate to conscientiousness?

Strong support for negative relationship between
conscientiousness and pacing styles,
at individual level and at team level
except for U-shape and inverted U-shape pacing
styles.

11
Results

How do pacing styles relate to individual and
team-based performance and do they have
predictive validity beyond conscientiousness?
Yes, but not under all conditions

12
Results

Study 1 While controling for conscientiousness,
Timeliness No effects of pacing styles
Quality The effect of mean pacing style is
moderated by the diversity in pacing styles
? homogeneous teams of early workers
? homogeneous teams of deadline workers

13
Results

Study 2 While controling for conscientiousness,
Job performance
lower performance ratings for U-shape pacing
style (in comparison to deadline action pacing
style)
Effectiveness
higher effectiveness ratings for inverted U-shape
pacing style (in comparison to deadline action
pacing style)

14
Results

Study 3 While controling for conscientiousness,
Deadlines missed No effects of pacing styles
Profit No effects of pacing styles

15
Conclusions and Questions

The graphs have high face validity and
communicative value
Pacing styles have predictive validity beyond
conscientiousness, but not under all conditions.
To what extent is pacing constrained by the
situation?

16
Conclusions and Questions

U-shape pacing style is an important addition to
the original scale, but is not related to
conscientiousness
What is the motivation behind this style?
What does the dip mean?
In teams both the mean pacing style and diversity
in pacing styles are important.
How should we use the U-shape pacing style in
team research?

17
Implications and Future Research