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

• Practical value
• High face validity
• Scientific value
• Additional validation required (construct,
  content, convergence)
• Future research
• Team composition
• Longitudinal effects
• Team time management
• Team conflict

18
(No Transcript)
19
Results

• How do pacing styles relate to conscientiousness?

• Individual level
• study 1 r -.39, p lt .001
• study 2 significant differences between early
  deadline,
• constant deadline
• study 3 significant differences between early
  deadline,
• constant deadline, constant U-shape
• Team level
• study 1 r -.58, p lt .01
• study 3 proportion constant r .35, p lt .05