COMPETENCIES AND SELF-REGULATORY PLANS
These are our rules for and reactions to our own performance. In the absence of external constraints and monitors, we set performance goals for ourselves. We react with self-criticism if we do not meet these standards, and self-praise or satisfaction if we do meet them, or even exceed them. Self-regulation is the process through which we influence our environment and behaviour.
Self-consciousness
Carver and Scheier (1981, 1990) developed a control theory of human functioning, which states that there are stable individual differences in the extent to which we attend to aspects of the self. Control theory uses a metaphorical thermostat system to model the ways in which people set standards for their own behaviour and how they monitor their behaviour in order to meet these standards. If we perceive ourselves to have reached too high a standard, the personality system will reduce the discrepancy between the standard and the perceived level. If we are not meeting the standard we have set for ourselves, motivation and effort will be set in motion to reduce the discrepancy. People differ in the levels and kinds of controls included in their self-regulatory system. The extent to which we attend to aspects of the self has been defined as a personality variable called self-consciousness. Fenigstein, Scheier and Buss (1975) developed a self-consciousness scale to measure what they considered to be stable individual difference in private and public self-consciousness.
Private self-consciousness is attention to our own inner feelings, desires and standards whereas public self-consciousness is attention to what others think and observe about us. The importance of self-consciousness is illustrated by a study in which participants looked at photographs or slides of people with positive or negative facial expressions (Kleinke, Peterson & Rutledge, 1998). Participants attempted to communicate these facial expressions as accurately as they could to a video camera. Some were able to view themselves in a mirror while doing this, and some were not. Participants in a control group maintained neutral facial expressions. The researchers found that participants experienced increased positive mood when they engaged in positive facial expressions and decreased positive moods with negative facial expressions. Behave in a specific situation, we have to consider their expectations Furthermore, these effects were enhanced when participants viewed themselves in a mirror – and the positive effects were stronger for participants with high private self-consciousness. Self-guides In his self-discrepancy theory, Higgins (1987, 1989) suggested that we have self-guides representing internalized standards, which may be unconsciously activated to influence behaviour. There are two particularly important self-guides:
1. The ‘ideal self ’ represents the attributes that we would like to possess (ideals that we and important others hold). It is associated with positive outcomes, and is derived from the positive affect associated with attaining standards set by important figures from childhood owards.
2. The ‘ought self’ represents the attributes that we feel we should possess (duties and responsibilities). It is associated with negative outcomes, and is derived from negative affects associated with not fulfilling duties and responsibilities. According to Higgins’ self-discrepancy theory, we are motivated to reduce two kinds of discrepancy. These are discrepancies between how we actually see ourselves and how we would like to be ideally (this is the ‘actual self-ideal self ’ (AI) discrepancy), as well as between how we actually see ourselves and how we ought to be (the ‘actual selfought self ’ (AO) discrepancy). All children learn ideal and ought self guides, but Newman, Higgins and Vookles (1992) found that first-born children are more strongly orientated toward the standards of others, and their AI and AO discrepancies are associated with more emotional distress than in the case of second and later-born children. Self-monitoring and competencies Snyder (1974) and Snyder and Gangestad (1986) developed a s ale designed to assess the degree to which individuals regulate their behaviour in order to make a particular social impression. They found that high self-monitors alter their behaviour in response to specific situational demands, and are therefore likely to display less consistency in their actions. Competencies (the ability to generate particular cognitions and behaviours) are thought to be related to intelligence and social maturity. Mischel (1990) argued that we develop competencies to create cognitions and behaviours that may be conceptualized as social intelligence (Cantor & Kihlstrom, 1987). In other words, we develop abilities to transform and use social information and knowledge actively, and to create thoughts and actions, rather than simply storing a whole load of ‘recipe’ responses. Each individual acquires the capacity actively to construct a multitude of potential behaviours with the knowledge and skills available to him. People vary enormously in the range and quality of the cognitive and behavioural patterns they can generate, and in their social problem-solving strategies.
Social intelligence
Cantor (1990) outlines the cognitive competencies we use to solve everyday life tasks within a theory of social intelligence. She describes the representation of goals, plans for achieving goals, representations of the self and possible selves, the development of coping mechanisms and self-regulation. She uses three concepts to examine the processes that guide social behaviour:
schemas that channel perception and memory in specific settings;
life tasks that individuals construct as goals; and
strategies that are used to pursue the goals.
Cantor describes a series of studies that have examined life tasks and cognitive strategies during major life transitions (e.g. from school to university, and from university to work). This research has identified types of life tasks that are common amongst young people during these transitions, as well as strategies that are used to tackle them. In identifying strategies used in academic contexts, Norem (1989, Norem & Cantor, 1986) identified a distinction between ‘optimists’ and ‘defensive pessimists’. Optimists feel little anxiety about achievement tasks, work hard and keep their performance expectations high. Defensive pessimists set low expectations and ruminate over the worst potential outcomes. And yet, despite differing strategies, research shows that the two types of student do not differ significantly in terms of actual academic performance. Both strategies are adaptive in different ways: optimists avoid considering what might go wrong, and defensive pessimists play out worst case scenarios in order to deal with anxiety and focus on the task.
Attributional style as a personality factor in insurance sales performance - A research issue Seligman (1991) summarizes different dimensions of attributional style as forming ‘optimistic’ and ‘pessimistic’ explanatory styles for favourable (success) and unfavourable (failure) events. In this study, attributional style, for both positive and negative events, was measured using a questionnaire. According to the reformulated learned helplessness model of depression, individuals with an optimistic explanatory style are more resilient when faced with unfavourable events (e.g. failure in an exam, loss of a job) compared to individuals with a pessimistic explanatory style. One occupation in which employees experience frequent success and failure is the selling of financial services. In the USA, Seligman and Schulman (1986) showed that pessimistic style for negative events is negatively related to sales performance, and that an optimistic style for both positive and negative events predicts survival persistence in t e job and sales achievement. More general research in the UK suggests that an optimistic style for positive events is more predictive of high performance than an optimistic style for negative events (e.g. Brewin & Shapiro, 1984; Furnham et al., 1992). The aim of this study (Corr & Gray, 1996) was to examine the relationship between attributional style and sales in financial services salespeople. It was hypothesized that if attributional style is an important personality variable, then individual difference in attributional style should be related to differences in sales performance. Design and procedure:- Participants were 130 senior salespeople in a UK insurance company, all male. Measures were recorded using the Seligman Attributional Style Questionnaire (SASQ; Peterson et al., 1982). This presents respondents with 12 hypothetical situations (e.g. ‘You do a project that is highly praised’). Six of these situations were ‘negative’ and six ‘positive’. Within each of these categories, three situations were re ated to interpersonal events and three to achievement events. Composite scores were calculated for positive and negative events. Sales outcomes were measured by the number of policies sold x average value of the policy, and also by company ranking of performance, from 1 (best salesman) to n (worst salesman). Attributional style was measured by questionnaire completion in groups during the training sessions. Sales performance was measured over a six-month period. Results and implications: - Positive attributional style was positively correlated with sales, showing that salespeople scoring higher in positive attributional style were more successful than their lower scoring colleagues. Positive attributional style for achievement-related situations was the best predictor of performance ranking. The results of this study do not tell us about the direction of causation. Being successful may lead to high levels of optimism, or being optimistic may lead to high levels of success. But prospective studies have shown t at differing aspects of attributional style between individuals can predict future performance in sales (Corr & Gray, 1996) and academic achievement (Houston, 1994).
Corr, P.J., & Gray, J.A., 1996, ‘Attributional style as a personality factor in insurance sales performance in the UK’, Journal of Occupational and Organisational Psychology, 69, 83–7.
These are our rules for and reactions to our own performance. In the absence of external constraints and monitors, we set performance goals for ourselves. We react with self-criticism if we do not meet these standards, and self-praise or satisfaction if we do meet them, or even exceed them. Self-regulation is the process through which we influence our environment and behaviour.
Self-consciousness
Carver and Scheier (1981, 1990) developed a control theory of human functioning, which states that there are stable individual differences in the extent to which we attend to aspects of the self. Control theory uses a metaphorical thermostat system to model the ways in which people set standards for their own behaviour and how they monitor their behaviour in order to meet these standards. If we perceive ourselves to have reached too high a standard, the personality system will reduce the discrepancy between the standard and the perceived level. If we are not meeting the standard we have set for ourselves, motivation and effort will be set in motion to reduce the discrepancy. People differ in the levels and kinds of controls included in their self-regulatory system. The extent to which we attend to aspects of the self has been defined as a personality variable called self-consciousness. Fenigstein, Scheier and Buss (1975) developed a self-consciousness scale to measure what they considered to be stable individual difference in private and public self-consciousness.
Private self-consciousness is attention to our own inner feelings, desires and standards whereas public self-consciousness is attention to what others think and observe about us. The importance of self-consciousness is illustrated by a study in which participants looked at photographs or slides of people with positive or negative facial expressions (Kleinke, Peterson & Rutledge, 1998). Participants attempted to communicate these facial expressions as accurately as they could to a video camera. Some were able to view themselves in a mirror while doing this, and some were not. Participants in a control group maintained neutral facial expressions. The researchers found that participants experienced increased positive mood when they engaged in positive facial expressions and decreased positive moods with negative facial expressions. Behave in a specific situation, we have to consider their expectations Furthermore, these effects were enhanced when participants viewed themselves in a mirror – and the positive effects were stronger for participants with high private self-consciousness. Self-guides In his self-discrepancy theory, Higgins (1987, 1989) suggested that we have self-guides representing internalized standards, which may be unconsciously activated to influence behaviour. There are two particularly important self-guides:
1. The ‘ideal self ’ represents the attributes that we would like to possess (ideals that we and important others hold). It is associated with positive outcomes, and is derived from the positive affect associated with attaining standards set by important figures from childhood owards.
2. The ‘ought self’ represents the attributes that we feel we should possess (duties and responsibilities). It is associated with negative outcomes, and is derived from negative affects associated with not fulfilling duties and responsibilities. According to Higgins’ self-discrepancy theory, we are motivated to reduce two kinds of discrepancy. These are discrepancies between how we actually see ourselves and how we would like to be ideally (this is the ‘actual self-ideal self ’ (AI) discrepancy), as well as between how we actually see ourselves and how we ought to be (the ‘actual selfought self ’ (AO) discrepancy). All children learn ideal and ought self guides, but Newman, Higgins and Vookles (1992) found that first-born children are more strongly orientated toward the standards of others, and their AI and AO discrepancies are associated with more emotional distress than in the case of second and later-born children. Self-monitoring and competencies Snyder (1974) and Snyder and Gangestad (1986) developed a s ale designed to assess the degree to which individuals regulate their behaviour in order to make a particular social impression. They found that high self-monitors alter their behaviour in response to specific situational demands, and are therefore likely to display less consistency in their actions. Competencies (the ability to generate particular cognitions and behaviours) are thought to be related to intelligence and social maturity. Mischel (1990) argued that we develop competencies to create cognitions and behaviours that may be conceptualized as social intelligence (Cantor & Kihlstrom, 1987). In other words, we develop abilities to transform and use social information and knowledge actively, and to create thoughts and actions, rather than simply storing a whole load of ‘recipe’ responses. Each individual acquires the capacity actively to construct a multitude of potential behaviours with the knowledge and skills available to him. People vary enormously in the range and quality of the cognitive and behavioural patterns they can generate, and in their social problem-solving strategies.
Social intelligence
Cantor (1990) outlines the cognitive competencies we use to solve everyday life tasks within a theory of social intelligence. She describes the representation of goals, plans for achieving goals, representations of the self and possible selves, the development of coping mechanisms and self-regulation. She uses three concepts to examine the processes that guide social behaviour:
schemas that channel perception and memory in specific settings;
life tasks that individuals construct as goals; and
strategies that are used to pursue the goals.
Cantor describes a series of studies that have examined life tasks and cognitive strategies during major life transitions (e.g. from school to university, and from university to work). This research has identified types of life tasks that are common amongst young people during these transitions, as well as strategies that are used to tackle them. In identifying strategies used in academic contexts, Norem (1989, Norem & Cantor, 1986) identified a distinction between ‘optimists’ and ‘defensive pessimists’. Optimists feel little anxiety about achievement tasks, work hard and keep their performance expectations high. Defensive pessimists set low expectations and ruminate over the worst potential outcomes. And yet, despite differing strategies, research shows that the two types of student do not differ significantly in terms of actual academic performance. Both strategies are adaptive in different ways: optimists avoid considering what might go wrong, and defensive pessimists play out worst case scenarios in order to deal with anxiety and focus on the task.
Attributional style as a personality factor in insurance sales performance - A research issue Seligman (1991) summarizes different dimensions of attributional style as forming ‘optimistic’ and ‘pessimistic’ explanatory styles for favourable (success) and unfavourable (failure) events. In this study, attributional style, for both positive and negative events, was measured using a questionnaire. According to the reformulated learned helplessness model of depression, individuals with an optimistic explanatory style are more resilient when faced with unfavourable events (e.g. failure in an exam, loss of a job) compared to individuals with a pessimistic explanatory style. One occupation in which employees experience frequent success and failure is the selling of financial services. In the USA, Seligman and Schulman (1986) showed that pessimistic style for negative events is negatively related to sales performance, and that an optimistic style for both positive and negative events predicts survival persistence in t e job and sales achievement. More general research in the UK suggests that an optimistic style for positive events is more predictive of high performance than an optimistic style for negative events (e.g. Brewin & Shapiro, 1984; Furnham et al., 1992). The aim of this study (Corr & Gray, 1996) was to examine the relationship between attributional style and sales in financial services salespeople. It was hypothesized that if attributional style is an important personality variable, then individual difference in attributional style should be related to differences in sales performance. Design and procedure:- Participants were 130 senior salespeople in a UK insurance company, all male. Measures were recorded using the Seligman Attributional Style Questionnaire (SASQ; Peterson et al., 1982). This presents respondents with 12 hypothetical situations (e.g. ‘You do a project that is highly praised’). Six of these situations were ‘negative’ and six ‘positive’. Within each of these categories, three situations were re ated to interpersonal events and three to achievement events. Composite scores were calculated for positive and negative events. Sales outcomes were measured by the number of policies sold x average value of the policy, and also by company ranking of performance, from 1 (best salesman) to n (worst salesman). Attributional style was measured by questionnaire completion in groups during the training sessions. Sales performance was measured over a six-month period. Results and implications: - Positive attributional style was positively correlated with sales, showing that salespeople scoring higher in positive attributional style were more successful than their lower scoring colleagues. Positive attributional style for achievement-related situations was the best predictor of performance ranking. The results of this study do not tell us about the direction of causation. Being successful may lead to high levels of optimism, or being optimistic may lead to high levels of success. But prospective studies have shown t at differing aspects of attributional style between individuals can predict future performance in sales (Corr & Gray, 1996) and academic achievement (Houston, 1994).
Corr, P.J., & Gray, J.A., 1996, ‘Attributional style as a personality factor in insurance sales performance in the UK’, Journal of Occupational and Organisational Psychology, 69, 83–7.
No comments:
Post a Comment