Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Process Management Self-Efficacy: Scale Development and Validation

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Business and Psychology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Managers, responsible for the work of others, are crucial for organizational success. A key function of managers is coordination and management of process(es) to ensure task completion (Bounty & Drucker-Godard in Human Relations, 72(3), 565-587, 2019; Mintzberg, 2009). Self-efficacy beliefs related to process management are likely to predict how well an individual manages processes. Thus, process management self-efficacy beliefs are crucial to managerial performance and, consequently, to organizational success. The lack of a scale to measure process management self-efficacy is a significant oversight, which this study attempts to remedy. In study 1, using data from four separate samples, we developed a process management self-efficacy scale (PMSES). To provide preliminary evidence of construct validity, we conducted studies 2 and 3. Using data collected from managers, their supervisors, and co-workers, results of study 2 indicated that managers’ process management self-efficacy was related to task performance evaluated by their superiors and to contextual performance rated by their co-workers. In addition, process management self-efficacy predicted additional variance in task and contextual performance, beyond a measure of generalized self-efficacy. In study 3, managers’ process management self-efficacy beliefs were related to their subordinates’ performance. We discuss implications for theory, research, and practice.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ahire, S. L., & Dreyfus, P. (2000). The impact of design management and process management on quality: An empirical investigation. Journal of Operations Management, 18, 549–575.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1991). Predicting the performance of measures in a confirmatory factor analysis with a pretest assessment of their substantive validity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 732–740.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, D. W., Krajewski, H. T., Goffin, R. D., & Jackson, D. N. (2008). A leadership self-efficacy taxonomy and its relation to effective leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 19(5), 595–608.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Antonakis, J., & Day, D. V. (Eds.). (2017). The nature of leadership. Sage.

  • Avolio, B. J. (2007). Promoting more integrative strategies for leadership theory-building. American Psychologist, 62, 25–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bakker, A. B., & Bal, M. P. (2010). Weekly work engagement and performance: A study among starting teachers. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 83(1), 189–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2007). The job demands-resources model: State of the art. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 22(3), 309–328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bakker, A. B., Du, D., & Derks, D. (2019). Major life events in family life, work engagement, and performance: A test of the work-home resources model. International Journal of Stress Management, 26(3), 238–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (1977a). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84, 191–215.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (1977b). Social learning theory. Prentice Hall.

  • Bandura, A., & Cervone, D. (1983). Self-evaluative and self-efficacy mechanisms governing the motivational effects of goal systems. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 1017–1028.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99–120.

  • Beauregard, T. A. (2012). Perfectionism, self-efficacy and OCB: The moderating role of gender. Personnel Review, 41(5), 590–608.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Betz, N. E., & Hackett, G. (1981). The relationship of career-related self-efficacy expectations to perceived career options in college women and men. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 28(5), 399–410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Betz, N. E., & Hackett, G. (1983). The relationship of mathematics self-efficacy expectations to the selection of science-based college majors. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 23(3), 329–345.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bieschke, K. J., Bishop, R. M., & Garcia, V. L. (1996). The utility of the research self-efficacy scale. Journal of Career Assessment, 4, 59–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borman, W. C., & Motowidlo, S. J. (1997). Task performance and contextual performance: The meaning for personnel selection research. Human Performance, 87, 99–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bounty, I., & Drucker-Godard. (2019). Managerial work and coordination: A practice-based approach onboard a sailboat. Human Relations, 72(3), 565–587.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equations models (pp. 136–162). Sage.

  • Cervone, D., & Peake, P. K. (1986). Anchoring, efficacy, and action: The influence of judgmental heuristics on self-efficacy judgments and behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 492–501.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, G., Gully, S. M., & Eden, D. (2001). Validation of a new general self-efficacy scale. Organizational Research Methods, 4(1), 62–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christian, M. S., Garza, A. S., & Slaughter, J. E. (2011). Work engagement: A quantitative review and test of its relations with task and contextual performance. Personnel Psychology, 64(1), 89–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cronbach, L. J., & Meehl, P. C. (1955). Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 52, 281–302.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cunningham, C. A., Cramer, R. J., Cacace, S., Franks, M., & Desmarais, S. L. (in press). The coping self-efficacy scale: Psychometric properties in an outpatient sample of active duty military personnel. Military Psychology.

  • da Silva, L. A., Damian, I. P. M., & de Pádua, S. I. D. (2012). Process management tasks and barriers: Functional to processes approach. Business Process Management Journal, 18(5), 762–776.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Delgado-Rodriguez, N., Hernandez-Fernaud, E., Rosales, C., Diaz-Vilela, L., Isla-Diaz, R., & Diaz-Cabrera, D. (2018). Contextual performance in academic settings: The role of personality, self-efficacy, and impression management. Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 34, 63–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Demerouti, E., Bakker, A. B., Nachreiner, F., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2001). The job demands-resources model of burnout. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(3), 499–512.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eden, D. (2001). Means efficacy: External sources of general and specific subjective efficacy. In M. Erez, U. Kleinbeck, & H. Thierry (Eds.), Work motivation in the context of a globalizing economy (pp. 65–77). Lawrence Erlbaum.

  • Fan, J., Meng, H., Zhao, B., & Patel, T. (2012). Further validation of a U.S. adult social self-efficacy investigation in Chinese populations. Journal of Career Assessment, 20(4), 463–478.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Faraj, S., & Xiao, Y. (2006). Coordination in fast-response organizations. Management Science, 52(8), 1155–1169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fast, N. J., Burris, E. R., & Bartel, C. A. (2014). Managing to stay in the dark: Managerial self-efficacy, ego defensiveness, and the aversion to employee voice. Academy of Management Journal, 57(4), 1013–1034.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fayol, H. (1916). Administration industrielle et générale; prévoyance, organisation, commandement,coordination, contrôle. Bulletin de la Société de l’industrie minérale 3eme Livraison (pp. 5–164).

  • Fells, M. (2000). Fayol stands the test of time. Journal of Management History, 6(8), 345–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferris, G. R., Treadway, D. C., Kolodinsky, R. W., Hochwarter, W. A., Kacmar, C. J., Douglas, C., & Frink, D. D. (2005). Development and validation of the political skill inventory. Journal of Management, 31, 126–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foster, W. M., Hassard, J. S., Morris, J., & Cox, J. W. (2019). The changing nature of managerial work: The effects of corporate restructuring on managerial jobs and careers. Human Relations, 72(3), 473–504.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greeley, A. T., Johnson, E., Seem, S., Braver, M., Dias, L., Evans, K., et al. (1989). Research self-efficacy scale. Unpublished scale presented at the Conference of the Association for Women in Psychology, Bethesda, MD.

  • Halbesleben, J. R. (2010). A meta-analysis of work engagement: Relationships with burnout, demands, resources, and consequences. In A. Bakker & M. Leiter (Eds.), Work engagement: A handbook of essential theory and research (Vol. 8, pp. 102–117). Psychology Press.

  • Hales, C. (1999). Why do managers do what they do? Reconciling evidence and theory in accounts of managerial work. British Journal of Management, 10(5), 335–350.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hales, C. (2002). Bureaucracy-lite and continuities in managerial work. British Journal of Management, 13(1), 51–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hayslip, B., Raab, C. M., Baczewski, P. C., & Petrie, T. A. (2010). The development and validation of the golf self-efficacy scale. Journal of Sport Behavior, 13(4), 427–441.

  • Hinkin, T. R. (1995). A review of scale development practices in the study of organizations. Journal of Management, 21(5), 967–988.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hinkin, T. R. (2005). Scale development principles and practices. In R. A. Swanson & E. F. Holton (Eds.), Research in organizations: Foundations and methods of inquiry (pp. 161–179). Berrett-Koehler Publishers.

  • Hobfoll, S. E. (1989). Conservation of resources: A new attempt at conceptualizing stress. American Psychologist, 44(3), 513–524.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoch, J. E., Bommer, W. H., Dulebohn, J. H., & Wu, D. (2018). Do ethical, authentic, and servant leadership explain variance above and beyond transformational leadership? A meta-analysis. Journal of Management, 44(2), 501–529.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huang, J. L., Liu, M., & Bowling, N. A. (2015). Insufficient effort responding: Examining an insidious confound in survey data. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100(3), 828–845.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jawahar, I. M., Meurs, J. A., Ferris, G. R., & Hochwarter, W. A. (2008). Self-efficacy and political skill as comparative predictors of task and contextual performance: A two-study constructive replication. Human Performance, 21(2), 138–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jawahar, I. M., Stone, T. H., & Kluemper, D. (2019). When and why leaders trust followers: LMX as a mediator and empowerment as a moderator of the trustworthiness-trust relationship. Career Development International, 24(7), 702–716.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jöreskog, K., & Sörbom, D. (1993). LISREL 8: Structural equation modeling with the SIMPLIS command language. Lawrence Erlbaum.

  • Judge, T. A., & Bono, J. E. (2001). Relationship of core self-evaluations trait—self-esteem, generalized self-efficacy, locus of control, and emotional stability—with job satisfaction and job performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 80–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Judge, T. A., Erez, A., & Bono, J. A. (1998). The power of being positive: The relation between positive self-concept and job performance. Human Performance, 11, 167–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karasek, R. A. (1979). Job demands, job decision latitude, and mental strain: Implications for job redesign. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24(2), 285–308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klein, K., Ziegert, J., Knight, A., & Xiao, Y. (2006). Dynamic delegation: Shared, hierarchical, and deindividualized leadership in extreme action teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 51(4), 590–621.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malik, P., & Garg, P. (2020). Learning organization and work engagement: The mediating role of employee resilience. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 13(8), 1071–1094.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martocchio, J., & Judge, T. A. (1997). Relationships between conscientiousness and learning in employee training: Mediating influences of self-deception and self-efficacy. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 764–773.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGonagle, A. K., Huang, J. L., & Walsh, B. M. (2016). Insufficient effort survey responding: An underappreciated problem in work and organizational healthy psychology research. Applied Psychology. An International Review, 65, 287–321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mintzberg, H. (1973). The nature of managerial work. Harper and Row.

  • Mintzberg, H. (1978). The structuring of organizations: A synthesis of the research. Prentice-Hall Inc..

  • Mintzberg, H. (2009). Managing. Berrett–Koehler Publishers.

  • Okhuysen, G., & Bechky, B. (2009). Coordination in organizations: An integrative perspective. The Academy of Management Annals, 3(1), 463–502.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paim, R., Caulliraux, H. M., & Cardoso, R. (2008). Process management tasks: A conceptual and practical view. Business Process Management Journal, 14(5), 694–723.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, J. C., & Russell, R. K. (1994). Research self-efficacy, the research training environment, and research productivity among graduate students in counseling psychology. The Counseling Psychologist, 22, 628–641.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rigotti, T., Schyns, B., & Mohr, G. (2008). A short version of the occupational self-efficacy scale: Structural and construct validity across five countries. Journal of Career Assessment, 16(2), 238–255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rooney, R. A., & Osipow, S. H. (1992). Task-specific occupational self-efficacy scale: The development and validation of a prototype. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 40(1), 14–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosemann, M., & vom Brocke, J. (2015). The six core elements of business process management. In Handbook on business process management 1 (pp. 105–122). Springer.

  • Saks, A. M. (1995). Longitudinal field investigation of the moderating and mediating effects of self-efficacy on the relationship between training and newcomer adjustment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80, 211–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schleicher, D. J., Baumann, H. M., Sullivan, D. W., Levy, P. E., Hargrove, D. C., & Barros-Rivera, B. A. (2018). Putting the system into performance management systems: A review and agenda for performance management research. Journal of Management, 44(6), 2209–2245.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwarzer, R., & Jerusalem, M. (1995). Generalized self-efficacy scale. In J. Weinman, S. Wright, & M. Johnston (Eds.), Measures in health psychology: A user’s portfolio. Causal and control beliefs (pp. 35–37). NFER-NELSON.

  • Sherer, M., & Adams, C. H. (1983). Construct validation of the self-efficacy scale. Psychological Reports, 53, 899–902.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sherer, M., Maddux, J. E., Mercandante, B., Prentice-Dunn, S., Jacobs, B., & Rogers, R. W. (1982). The self-efficacy scale: Construction and validation. Psychological Reports, 51, 663–671.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, H. M., & Betz, N. E. (2000). Development and validation of a scale of perceived social self-efficacy. Journal of Career Assessment, 8, 288–301.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stajkovic, A. D., & Luthans, F. (1998). Self-efficacy and work-related performance: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 240–261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stone, T. H., Foster, J., Harrison, J., & Jawahar, I. M. (2016). Gender differences in supervisors’ multidimensional performance ratings. Human Performance, 29(5), 428–446.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, F. (1916). The principles of scientific management. In J. Shafritz & J. Ott (Eds.), Classic Organization Theory (pp. 66–79). Wadsworth.

  • Tengblad, S. (2006). Is there a ‘new managerial work’? A comparison with Henry Mintzberg’s classic study 30 years later. Journal of Management Studies, 43(7), 1438–1461.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tengblad, S. (Ed.). (2012). The work of managers. Oxford University Press.

  • Themanson, J. R., & Rosen, P. J. (2015). Examining the relationship between self-efficacy, task-relevant attentional control, and task performance: Evidence from event-related brain potentials. British Journal of Psychology, 106, 253–271.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tsai, W. C., Chen, C. C., & Liu, H. L. (2007). Test of a model linking employee positive moods and task performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 1570–1583.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tseng, S. T., & Levy, P. E. (2019). A multilevel leadership process framework of performance management. Human Resource Management Review, 29(4), 100668.

  • Uhl-Bien, M., Riggio, R. E., Lowe, K. B., & Carsten, M. K. (2014). Followership theory: A review and research agenda. The Leadership Quarterly, 25(1), 83–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vie, O. E. (2010). Have post-bureaucratic changes occurred in managerial work? European Management Journal, 28(3), 182–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wheeler, A. R., Shanine, K. K., Leon, M. R., & Whitman, M. V. (2014). Student-recruited samples in organizational research: A review, analysis, and guidelines for future research. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 87(1), 1–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, L. J., & Anderson, S. E. (1991). Job satisfaction and organizational commitment as predictors of organizational citizenship and in-role behaviors. Journal of Management, 17, 601–617.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolff, G., & Spurk, D. (2020). Developing and validating a short networking behavior scale (SNBS) from Wolff and Moser’s (2006) measure. Journal of Career Assessment, 28(2), 277–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woocheol, K. (2017). Examining mediation effects of work engagement among job resources, job performance, and turnover intention. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 29(4), 407–425.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wood, R., & Bandura, A. (1989). Impact of conceptions of ability on self-regulatory mechanisms and complex decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 407–415.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wright, T. A., Quick, J. C., Hannah, S. T., & Hargrove, M. B. (2017). Best practice recommendations for scale construction in organizational research: The development and initial validation of the Character Strength Inventory (CSI). Journal of Organizational Behavior, 38, 615–628.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zairi, M. (1997). Business process management: A boundaryless approach to modern competitiveness. Business Process Management Journal, 3(1), 64–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Management & Quantitative Methods, College of Business, Illinois State University, Normal, IL, 61790, USA

    I. M. Jawahar

  2. University High School, Normal, IL, 61790, USA

    Zach J. Mohammed

Authors
  1. I. M. Jawahar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Zach J. Mohammed
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to I. M. Jawahar.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Jawahar, I.M., Mohammed, Z.J. Process Management Self-Efficacy: Scale Development and Validation. J Bus Psychol 37, 339–352 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-021-09749-0

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-021-09749-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation