Managerial Self‐efficacy and Managerial Performance
| Author | Ivan T. Robertson,Golnaz Sadri |
| Date | 01 March 1993 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8551.1993.tb00160.x |
| Published date | 01 March 1993 |
British Journal
of
Management,
Vol.
4,3745
(1993)
Managerial Self-efficacy and Managerial
Performance
Ivan
T.
Robertson* and Golnaz Sadri-t.
*
Manchester School of Management, University of Manchester Institute of Science and Technology,
Manchester,
UK
t
Department
of
Management, California State University, Fullerton, California, USA
SUMMARY
Some of the main features of Bandura’s self-efficacy concept are presented. The import-
ance of the concept to the work organization and to individual performance is discussed.
A
field study is described. The first part of the study involved the development of
parallel versions of a scale to assess managerial self-efficacy. Data concerning the
psychometric properties of the parallel version of the scale show that they are reliable
and independent of social desirability. The second part of the study provided evidence
of the relationships between scores
on
the managerial self-efficacy scale and supervisors’
ratings of managers’ performance. The results indicate that managerial self-efficacy
correlates with
work
performance ratings.
This article is concerned with the concept of self-
efficacy and the link between individual self-effi-
cacy and managerial work performance. Self-effi-
cacy has been found to be an important concept
in the explanation of human behaviour and beha-
vioural change. More recently, organizational psy-
chologists have shown an interest in the concept
(e.g., Gist, 1987) and how it can be utilized to
explain and improve work behaviours. Bandura
et
al.,
(1977, p.126) defines self-efficacy as:
‘the conviction that one can successfully execute
the behaviour required to produce the outcomes.
’
Self-efficacy expectations can be differentiated from
outcome expectations. Outcome expectations are
estimations regarding whether or not certain
behaviours will lead to particular outcomes. Effi-
cacy and outcome expectations can be differen-
tiated because individuals can believe that a certain
course of action will produce certain outcomes, but
they may have serious doubts about whether or
not they can perform the relevant activities. If indi-
viduals do entertain such doubts (i.e., they have
low efficacy expectations), their outcome expec-
tations will fail to influence their behaviour. The
relative explanatory power of efficacy and outcome
expectations in the determination of behaviour has
been examined by
a
number of authors (Lee, 1984a;
Lee, 19843; Godding and Glasgow, 1985; Barling
and Abel, 1983; Manning and Wright, 1983). In
general, these studies offer support for the proposal
that efficacy expectations account for more per-
formance variance than do outcome expectations.
A
number of studies have found relationships
between self-efficacy expectations and work behav-
iour: Barling and Beattie (1983) (sales perform-
ance), Taylor
et
al.,
(1984) (research productivity
of academics), Frayne and Latham (1987) (job
attendance), Herriot and Winter (1988) (success of
army recruits in basic training) and Schoen and
Winocur (1988) (rank and gender
of
academics).
Wood and Bandura (1989) found
a
relationship
between self-efficacy and managerial decision mak-
ing in
a
simulation study, but
so
far no one has
studied managerial self-efficacy in
a
field setting;
also, with the exception of Herriot and Winter
(1988), no previous study has been conducted in
the United Kingdom
(UK).
According to self-efficacy theory (Bandura, 1977,
1982, 1986), efficacy expectations are not merely
associated with performance accomplishments but
1045-3 172/93/01003749$09.50
@
1993
by John Wiley
&
Sons,
Ltd.
Received 24
July
I991
Revised
I1
December
1991
To continue reading
Request your trial