Adaptive performance


Adaptive performance in the work environment refers to adjusting to and understanding change in the workplace. An employee who is versatile is valued and important in the success of an organization. Employers seek employees with high adaptability, due to the positive outcomes that follow, such as excellent work performance, work attitude, and ability to handle stress. Employees, who display high adaptive performance in an organization, tend to have more advantages in career opportunities unlike employees who are not adaptable to change. In previous literature, Pulakos and colleagues established eight dimensions of adaptive performance.

Dimensions

Pulakos et al. proposed the following dimensions for adaptive performance:
  • Handling emergencies and crisis situations: making quick decisions when faced with an emergency.
  • Handling stress in the workforce: keeping composed and focused on task at hand when dealing with high demand tasks
  • Creative problem solving: thinking outside the boundary limits, and innovatively to solve a problem.
  • Dealing with uncertain and unpredictable work situations: able to become productive despite the occurrence of unknown situations.
  • Learning and manipulating new technology, task, and procedures: approach new methods and technological constructs in order to accomplish a work task.
  • Demonstrating interpersonal adaptability: being considerate of other people's points of view when working in a team to accomplish a certain goal.
  • Demonstrating cultural adaptability: being respectful and considerate of different cultural backgrounds.
  • Demonstrating physically oriented adaptability: physically adjusting one's self to better fit the surrounding environment.

    Measurement

Pulakos et al. developed a scale for adaptive performance based on their eight-dimension model. This scale, the Job Adaptability Inventory, contains 132 questions.
Another similar tool is the I-ADAPT measure developed by Ployhart and Bliese, based on their I-ADAPT theory. They focused on adaptability as a personality-like trait which describes individual's ability to adapt to organizational changes. Therefore, there is a difference between I-ADAPT-M and the JAI which measures adaptive performance as behaviors. The I-ADAPT-M also has eight dimensions, with 5 items for every dimension.

Predictors

Several predictors of adaptive performance have been examined systematically, including cognitive abilities, Big Five personality traits, and goal orientation. According to the meta-analytic evidence, cognitive abilities promote adaptive performance. Cognitive abilities are particularly important when dealing with complex dynamic tasks. Other examined antecedences of adaptive performance seem to be less important than cognitive abilities. To illustrate, personality traits like Big Five are weakly related to adaptive performance. Only emotional stability and conscientiousness seem to be somewhat relevant. Motivational predictors have been examined too. However, goal orientation is only relevant when predicting subjective adaptive performance. Thus, goal orientation is not useful when predicting objective adaptive performance.

Work stress

has been considered as a major factor of many work outcomes, like performance, nonproductive behavior and turnover. An employee being able to adapt to change within an organization is more focused, and able to deal with stressful situations. An employee who is unable to is unable to focus on what is occurring in the organization, such as organizational change. Not only can work stress predict adaptive performance to a considerable extent, there are also a lot of overlaps between adaptive performance and stress coping.

Stress appraisal

It has been long recognized that work stress generally has a negative effects on job performance, but there is differential influence resulting from different perceptions of stressors. When faced with a new situation, individuals would spontaneously begin to evaluate their own abilities and skills as compared with the requirements of the situation, which is referred to as stress appraisals. Such stress appraisal has two stages: primary appraisal and secondary appraisal. In the primary appraisal stage, individuals evaluate what potential threats there will be, concerning the demands from situation and the goals and values of themselves. In the secondary appraisal stage, individuals evaluate the resources they have to deal with those requirements. The results of appraisal, after two stages, are indicated to fall on a continuum between two extremes of being challenged and threatened. Challenge appraisals mean that individuals feel their resources, like abilities and social support to be abundant sufficient to fulfill requirements of the situation. Threat appraisals, on the other hand, mean that individuals are not confident about their abilities or other resources to respond to the situation demands.
Threat appraisals and challenge appraisals could influence job performance distinctively. As for adaptive performance, the more challenging one's stress appraisals are, the more adaptive performance he/she would have. This relationship is mediated by self-efficacy, which is a belief about one's capacities for certain tasks. Challenging rather than threatening appraisals would lead to higher levels of self-efficacy, and thus benefit individuals' adaptive performance.

Stress coping

, as a form of response to stressors, describes how individuals handle stressful events. It is very close to one dimension of adaptive performance by definition, and coping has been suggested to be another form of adaptation. However, they are still different constructions.
Stress coping could be divided into several styles and strategies based on several theories. One general idea is to divide coping as active coping and avoidant coping. Active coping means to proactively address and resolve stressful events, like quitting a stressful job and changing into a less overwhelming one. Avoidant coping means to reduce stress by ignoring it, like involving in problematic drinking. Another set of coping strategy types includes problem-focused coping and emotion-focused coping. Problem-focused coping involves using skills and knowledge to deal with the cause of their problems. Emotion-focused coping involves releasing negative emotions by ways like distracting or disclaiming.
Adaptive performance involves a mixture of different coping strategies. Because adaptive performance concerns positive aspects of behaviors, it is more closely related to coping strategies that have positive effects, such as active coping and problem-focused coping. Therefore, adaptive performance is more likely to contain such behaviors in stressful situations.

Team adaptive performance

In addition to individual adaptive performance, psychologists are also interested in adaptive performance at team level. Team adaptive performance is defined as an emergent phenomenon that compiles over time from the unfolding of a recursive cycle whereby one or more team members use their resources to functionally change current cognitive or behavioral goal-directed action or structures to meet expected or unexpected demands. It is a multilevel phenomenon that emanates as team members and teams recursively display behavioral processes and draw on and update emergent cognitive states to engage in change. Team adaptive performance is considered as the core and proximal temporal antecedents to team adaptation, which could be seen as a change in team performance in response to a salient cue or cue stream that leads to a functional outcome for the entire team.
Along with the definition of team adaptive performance, researchers came up with a four-stage model to describe the process of team adaptive performance. The four core constructs characterizing this adaptive cycle include: situation assessment; plan formulation; plan execution, via adaptive interaction processes; and team learning, as well as emergent cognitive states, which serve as both proximal outcomes and inputs to this cycle.
Team adaptive performance differs from individual adaptive performance from several aspects. Team adaptive performance reflects the extent to which the team meets its objectives during a transfer performance episode, whereas individual adaptive performance reflects the extent to which each member effectively executes his or her role in the team during the transfer episode. Team adaptive performance also has different antecedents compared with individual adaptive performance.

Predictors

People have identified several dispositional and contextual factors that would affect team adaptive performance. The most obvious and natural predictor of team adaptive performance is characteristics of team members, or team composition. Team composition with respect to members' cognitive ability is positively associated with team adaptive performance, with a moderation effect of team goals. Teams with difficult goals and staffed with high-performance orientation members are especially unlikely to adapt. Teams with difficult goals and staffed with high-learning orientation members are especially likely to adapt. Moreover, team members' self-leadership, conscientiousness, and attitudes could also influence team adaptive performance.
Other factors are more related to interactions between team members and team environment, like team learning climate. Among them coordination of team members has been proved to be a most influential factor. Teams' ability to adapt their coordination activities to changing situational demands is crucial to team performance. A stronger increase in the teams' adaptive coordination was found to be related to better performance. Researchers have posited that the maintenance of coordinated effort and activities is necessary for high team adaptive performance. This is because even with well-adapted individual performance, workflow at the team level often becomes disrupted, "overflowing" in particular directions. Overflow may create excessive work demands for some team members, while encouraging social loafing among those who are in the ebb of the workflow. This suggests that, although team members may have their own task boundaries, and individual adaptive performance may depend on each member's individual capabilities, however to the team, each employee's adaptive performance may result in successful completion of the team task only if all activities are coordinated and synchronized in a holistic fashion. Team learning climate also displays a significant, positive relationship with team adaptive performance.