Though the two terms are often used interchangeably — even by human resources professionals and senior managers — there are subtle differences between these two concepts. What people often forget about employee performance is it is a mixture of tangible and intangible factors. We sometimes use it to describe the ability of an employee to complete his or her work to a certain standard, based on their goals or objectives. However, performance entails so much more.
The performance of an employee also includes their communication, punctuality, willingness to collaborate, and their general attitude at work. When considering employee performance, as well as efficiency, you need to consider how they treat their coworkers. Are they helpful and encouraging — or are they hostile and irritable?
The tangible and intangible factors of employee performance matter because both can have a significant impact on the overall performance and culture of your organization. As senior managers and HR executives, you set expectations and standards regarding employee performance. These expectations shape the employee experience, can affect performance, and certainly have an impact on employee productivity. Traditionally, productivity was a measure of output over time. The term originated in the nineteenth century and centered on agricultural output.
Productivity was used to describe what types of soil, plots of land, or varieties of plants produced the greatest yield. This information was tracked over time to determine what to plant where, and at what time of the year.
Importantly, productivity is related to the number of hours worked or the money invested. In this way, productivity is almost always quantitative. Ideally, companies are looking for the highest possible outcome productivity for the minimum amount of input. Many factors influence productivity.
There are also a huge amount of misconceptions concerning it. These misconceptions can be damaging to employee wellbeing, resulting in lower levels of productivity and efficiency for your organization.
Here are just a few misleading but common beliefs about productivity :. So, knowing all this and understanding the subtleties between the different terms, we need to ask — why does it matter? Why do we need to distinguish performance from productivity? Why is it a performance management concern? It is because while performance and productivity are different concepts, they are very much linked. By monitoring employee performance, it is possible to influence and improve employee productivity.
Managers — through regular performance check-ins — can get to grips with employees, their morale and engagement levels and their attitude towards certain workplace processes. Skip to main content. About this product. Pre-owned: Lowest price The lowest-priced item that has been used or worn previously. Former Library book. Shows some signs of wear, and may have some markings on the inside. Shipped to over one million happy customers. Qty 1 2. Buy It Now. Add to cart. Teacher quality and student achievement: A review of state policy evidence.
Education Policy Analysis Archives , 8 1 , 1— Teachers, what leaders can do? Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development , 60 8 , 7— Firestone, W. Teacher commitment, working conditions, and differential incentive policies. Review of Educational Research , 63 4 , — Fresko, B. Predicting teacher commitment. Teaching and Teacher Education , 13 4 , — Getzels, J. Educational administration as a social process. Hallinger, P. Culture and educational administration: A case of finding out what you don't know you don't know.
Journal of Educational Administration , 34 5 , 98— Hargreaves, A. The emotional practice of teaching. Teaching and Teacher Education , 14 , — Hofstede, G. Culture's consequences: International differences in work-related values. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Culture's consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions and organizations across nations 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Joffres, C. Elementary teachers' commitment declines: Antecedents, processes, and outcomes. The Qualitative Report , 6 1. John, M. Leadership style, school climate, and the institutional commitment of teachers. Christian Education Journal , 2 1 , 25— Keeves, J.
International handbook of educational research in the Asia-Pacific region. Dordrecht: Kluwer. Kushman, J. The organizational dynamics of teacher workplace commitment: A study of urban elementary and middle schools. Educational Administration Quarterly , 28 1 , 5— Lee, K. A meta-analytic review of occupational commitment: Relations with person- and work-related variables. Journal of Applied Psychology , 85 5 , — Leithwood, K.
Leadership for school restructuring. Educational Administration Quarterly , 30 4 , — The relative effects of principal and teacher leadership on student engagement in school. Educational Administration Quarterly , 35 , — Principal and teacher leadership effects: A replication. School Leadership and Management , 20 4 , — The effects of transformational leadership on organizational conditions and student engagement with school.
Journal of Educational Administration , 38 2 , — Changing leadership for changing timesM. Buckingham, England: Open University Press. Lodahl, T. The definition and measurement of job involvement. Journal of Applied Psychology , 49 1 , 24— Lok, P. Antecedents of organizational commitment and the mediating role of job satisfaction.
Journal of Managerial Psychology , 16 8 , — Louis, K. Effects of teacher quality of work life in secondary schools on commitment and sense of efficacy. School Effectiveness and School Improvement , 9 1 , 1— Teacher working conditions. Reyes Ed. McCracken, J. Commitment of Ohio vocational agriculture teachers to their profession. Meyer, J. Commitment in the workplace: Theory, research and applications. Commitment in a changing world of work. Canadian Psychology-Psychologie Canadienne , 39 , 83— Morrow, P.
Concept redundancy in organizational research: The case of work commitment. Academy of Management Review , 8 , —
0コメント