Tuuli, M M and Rowlinson, S (2009) Performance consequences of psychological empowerment. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 135(12), pp. 1334-1347. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
The relationship between psychological empowerment and job performance, and whether three intermediate performance determinants; motivation, ability, and opportunity to perform hold the key to unlocking the empowerment-performance relationship dilemma are addressed. Using hierarchical linear modeling to analyze responses from 380 project management-level staff, the results show that psychological empowerment not only has direct and positive performance consequences, but also indirect effects, mediated by intrinsic motivation, opportunity to perform and ability to perform. The findings provide preliminary evidence in support of a comprehensive model of work performance that takes into consideration not only motivation and ability but opportunity to perform. Indeed, opportunity to perform actually emerged as a stronger mediator in the psychological empowerment-contextual performance behaviors relationship than ability to perform. The findings of both direct and indirect relationships however demonstrate that the relationship between empowerment and performance is more complex than previously thought. Yet, by demonstrating that empowered employees exhibit positive performance behaviors, psychological empowerment clearly emerges as a valuable path for organizations to pursue in their search for performance improvement in project settings.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | motivation; performance characteristics; personnel management |
| Index terms: | empowerment, personnel, motivation, indirect effect, evidence, mediator, performance improvement, project management, work performance, determinant, modelling |
| Subjects: | project management theory and practice, management, performance measurement, analytical methods, operations management, psychology, dispute resolution, evaluation and assessment methods, risk assessment |
| Topics: | Human Resources, Quality Management, Legal Issues, Risk Management, Engineering Principles, Project Management, Research Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here