Process Management Self-Efficacy: Scale Development and Validation

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 r...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inJournal of business and psychology Vol. 37; no. 2; pp. 339 - 352
Main Authors Jawahar, I. M., Mohammed, Zach J.
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published New York Springer US 01.04.2022
Springer Nature B.V
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary: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.
ISSN:0889-3268
1573-353X
DOI:10.1007/s10869-021-09749-0