The Importance of Competence

Copyright The British Psychological SocietyReproduction in any form (including the internet) is prohibited without prior permission from the Society

The performance evaluation of novices:The importance of competence in specificwork activity clusters

Eric Molleman* and Gerben S. van der VegtUniversity of Groningen, The Netherlands

In this study, we examine the relationships between newcomers competence in specificwork activity clusters and the evaluation of their performance. Longitudinal data weregathered on 92 novice nurses from themselves and from the senior staff at three stages:before entering the job, 6 weeks after entry and 18 months after entry. Results showedthat, after entry, a newcomers competence in the cluster of care activities contributedmore to a positive performance evaluation than competence in the cluster of non-careactivities. Competence in the non-care cluster was only found to contribute to apositive performance evaluation, if the newcomer also showed competence in the carecluster. Moreover, novices showed a greater improvement in their care competencethan their non-care competence during the first 18 months of socialization. Finally, wefound that after 18 months competence in the non-care cluster contributes more to apositive performance evaluation than competence in the care cluster.

Over recent decades, an extensive body of research has been published documenting

the factors that affect the performance of newcomers. These factors include, for

example, recruitment practices, mentoring programmes, newcomer values, demo-graphic characteristics and personality traits (for overviews, see Bauer, Morrison, &

Callister, 1998; Fisher, 1986; Moreland & Levine, 2001; Saks & Ashforth, 1997; Wanous,

Poland, Premack, & Davis, 1992). A factor that plays an important role in the evaluation

of the overall performance of newcomers is their competence (see, for example, Blau,

1999; Haueter, Macan, & Winter, 2003). This is perhaps not surprising given that most

studies that consider the functioning of newcomers involve some discussion on the

extent to which individuals have learned the tasks that are part of the job (Dubinsky,

Howell, Ingram, & Bellenger, 1986; Feldman, 1976; Fisher, 1986; Louis, 1980; VanMaanen, 1976; Van Maanen & Schein, 1979).

Competence refers to an individuals knowledge, skills and abilities with respect to

the work activities that have to be conducted in the full range of situations associated

with their position (Campion, Mumford, Morgeson, & Nahrgang, 2005; Cunningham,

* Correspondence should be addressed to Professor Eric Molleman, Faculty of Management and Organization, PO, Box 800,9700 AV Groningen, The Netherlands (e-mail: [email protected]).

TheBritishPsychologicalSociety

459

Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology (2007), 80, 459478

q 2007 The British Psychological Society

www.bpsjournals.co.uk

DOI:10.1348/096317906X154469


1996). Depending on the occupational group under consideration, these work activities

are usually grouped into clusters (Campion et al., 2005). Work activity clusters provide a

unit of analysis that can precisely describe the prerequisites for high performance in a

specific job, while remaining manageable in terms of the total number of units necessary

to describe them. For example, for an academic, competence in the teaching work

activity cluster might include didactic skills, the ability to provide feedback andknowledge of ones own field, while competence in the research work activity cluster

will include knowledge of research methodology, and statistical and writing skills.

To date, most studies in the literature on newcomers have examined the effects of

overall or general competence on such outcomes as stress, job satisfaction,

organizational commitment and performance (see, for example, Blau, 1999; Haueter

et al., 2003). Few studies have examined whether and how a newcomers competence

in more specific work activity clusters is related to the evaluation of their overall job

performance. Indeed, past research has ignored the fact that most jobs requirecompetence in a mixture of different work activity clusters, and that competence in

certain clusters may be more important in receiving a positive overall performance

evaluation than competence in others.

Moreover, most previous studies have not done justice to the complexity and the

dynamics of the relationship between newcomers competence in specific work activity

clusters and the evaluation of their overall performance. That is, most studies have

overlooked the possibility that the importance or relevance of some of these clusters for

positive overall job performance evaluations may depend on how newcomers, theirpeers, and their supervisors define the novices roles immediately after entry (Morgeson,

Delaney-Klinger, & Hemingway, 2005; Morrison, 1994; Salancik & Pfeffer, 1978; Tepper,

Lockhart, & Hoobler, 2001; Wrzesniewski, Dutton, & Debebe, 2003). In addition, many

studies have ignored the fact that, over time, employees roles may develop and

therefore the importance of competence in certain work activity clusters may also

change (Barrett, Caldwell, & Alexander, 1989; Feij, Whitely, Peiro, & Taris, 1995). For

example, it is likely that for graduates starting out on a research career, knowledge and

mastery of research methodology is very important, while in a later stage of theiracademic careers the ability to acquire grants or to develop a research programme may

become more important competences.

The goal of this study is to contribute to the performance appraisal literature by

developing a more detailed view of how newcomers competence in specific work

activity clusters explains how their overall performance is rated, and how this

relationship may change over time. Following Saks and Ashforths (1997) suggestion,

we do this by examining the role of two clearly distinguishable work activity clusters

in a specific occupational group, namely hospital nurses. By focusing on two workactivity clusters appropriate to novice nurses we are able to gain a more precise

insight into how competence in these clusters relates to the evaluation of their

performance and to obtain more accurate assessments of how their competence in

these clusters develops over time. This may not only increase our understanding of

the relationships between competence and the evaluation of a novices overall job

performance over time, but also provide important inputs that can be used in the

development of professional training programmes for hospital nurses and support

managerial interventions to improve the functioning and development of newcomers.Further, it may also provide additional insights into how newcomers may improve the

socialization process themselves.

460 Eric Molleman and Gerben S. van der Vegt


Theory and hypotheses

The importance of competence in specific work activity clustersAlthough it might seem obvious that, in general, a newcomers competence will berelated positively to their performance, past research has shown that this relationship is

in fact quite complex. Other factors such as motivation, personality, expectations, work

design characteristics, mentoring systems, social support, norms, values and attitudes

may mediate or moderate the competenceperformance relationship or directly affect

performance (see, for example, Decker, 1985; Elbright, Urden, Patterson, &

Chalko, 2004; Fisher, 1985; Forgas & George, 2001; Hancock, Campbell, Ramprogus,

& Kilgour, 2005; Wanous et al., 1992; While, 1994). Thus, even if newcomers have the

knowledge, skills and abilities to potentially perform well, this does not necessarilymean that they will actually perform at high levels. Therefore, examining the

relationship between novices competences in specific activity clusters and overall job

performance is not as trivial as it first might sound. Moreover, while logical work activity

clusters can be identified for most jobs and positions, competence in all of these clusters

is not necessarily important for obtaining positive overall performance evaluations.

Depending on ones specific role within a work-group or organization, competence in

some clusters may be considered more important or relevant than in others (Kammeyer-

Mueller & Wanberg, 2003). This is implicitly acknowledged in several studies that havetried to identify and evaluate core clusters for a number of professions. Zaccaro and

Banks (2004), for example, emphasized leader visioning and adaptability as the most

important activity clusters for managers during a change in the project. Van Leuven

(1999) identified several work activity clusters that were seen as the most important for

entry-level practitioners in the public relations profession.

Competence in specific work activity clusters for novice nursesWithin the nursing literature, several work activity clusters are distinguished, including

clinical care, managerial tasks and communication skills (see, for example, Clinton,Murrells, & Robinson, 2005; Fitzpatrick, While, & Roberts, 1997; Norman, Watson,

Murrells, Calman, & Redfern, 2002; Redfern, Norman, Calman, Watson, & Murrells,

2002; Tzeng & Ketefian, 2003; Wandelt & Stewart, 1975; Watson, Stimpson, Topping, &

Porock, 2002; Zhang, Luk, Arthur, & Wong, 2001). Competence in such work activity

clusters is acquired through training and education in nursing schools, and is included as

a major learning objective in most curricula (see, for example, Clinton et al., 2005;

Gardner, Gardner, & Proctor, 2004; Lee-Hsieh, Kao, Kuo, & Tseng, 2003). However, it is

unlikely that competence in all of the suggested clusters is necessary for a positiveoverall performance evaluation of nurses entering their first job. Given that the primary

task of novice nurses is to provide high-quality care to patients, competence in

providing patient care will generally be considered as more important for achieving a

high performance evaluation than competence in other clusters (Clinton et al., 2005;

Ramritu & Barnard, 2001; Woods, 1999). Therefore, we argue that competence in the

patient care work activity cluster will be of greatest importance in achieving a high

performance rating. This cluster encompasses patient-related care activities, such as

changing an infusion, bandaging a patient, supporting a patients self-care, helping apatient cope with the consequences of illness or informing a patient about a threatening

medical examination that will come (see, for example, Fitzpatrick et al., 1997; Tzeng &

Ketefian, 2003; Wandelt & Stewart, 1975). In the remainder of this article, we refer to a

novices mastery of such activities as their care competence.

Performance of novices 461


For the purposes of this study, and based on nursing literature, we also distinguish a

second work activity cluster for the nursing profession that is only weakly related to care

activities. This cluster includes activities such as contributing to the health care quality

system, being able to define new working roles, providing guidance to other nurses and

being able to come up with innovative working methods (see Fitzpatrick et al., 1997;

Norman et al., 2002; Tzeng & Ketefian, 2003; Wandelt & Stewart, 1975). In theremainder of this article, we will refer to a novices mastery of such activities as their

non-care competence. We admit that by using this simple classification, we do not

include all the work activity clusters that could possibly be identified for the nursing

profession. Nevertheless, this general distinction is appropriate for the purposes of our

study since we wish to examine the relationship between novices competence in

specific but differentially important activity clusters and their overall performance

evaluations over time.

Importance of work activity clusters on novice performanceThat work activity clusters differ in their importance for high job performance has

implications for the relationship between novices competence in these clusters and theevaluation of their overall job performance (Watson et al., 2002). Since the objective of a

nursing ward is first and foremost to provide high-quality patient care, we assume that

when novice nurses indicate to have a high care competence, then their contribution

to the performance of the ward is greater. Therefore, we would expect their care

competence just after entry to be more strongly and positively related to their overall

performance evaluation than their non-care competence. Moreover, there may be

indirect ways in which care competence contributes to a higher overall performance

rating. It is likely that those who contribute most to good quality patient care, due totheir care competence, will receive the greatest support from their peers and

supervisors. Receiving such social support will, in-turn, help novices to improve their

performance still further (Cable & Parsons, 2001; Chen & Klimoski, 2003; Haueter et al.,

2003; Moreland, 1985; Moreland & Levine, 1980; Moreland & Levine, 2001). If during

the first period after entry, the care competence of novices is indeed more important for

their higher overall job performance than their non-care competence, then care

competence should be a stronger predictor of how their overall performance is

evaluated than their non-care competence.

Hypothesis 1: Just after entry, novices competence in the care cluster contributes more to apositive overall job performance evaluation than their competence in the non-care cluster.

The above line of reasoning does not imply that non-care competence is

unimportant for novice nurses during their first period after entry. We accept that

competence in this cluster may be also a predictor of their performance evaluations, but

expect that the strength and direction of this relationship will also depend on their care

competence. Indeed, one could argue that novice nurses who have shown competence

in care activities will be given more latitude to demonstrate and develop their other

talents and will therefore, be considered ready at an earlier stage for transfers to other

roles in which non-care competence is more critical (Berger, Rosenholtz, & Zelditch,1980; Berger, Webster, Ridgeway, & Rosenholtz, 1986; Chen & Klimoski, 2003;

Moreland & Levine, 2001). Consistent with this assertion, Feldman (1976, p. 446) found

that newcomers first have to feel on top of their jobs before they will make suggestions

about altering work-related activities. Indeed, before they are given sufficient credit



(or idiosyncrasy credits according to Hollander, 1985) to manifest their non-care

competence, novice nurses will first have to live up to expectations (Berger et al., 1980;

Feldman, 1976).

In contrast, novices who indicate to be less competent in the care cluster may not be

given opportunities to expose their hidden competence in other activity areas and,

even if they do expose them, they might be evaluated negatively. Senior nurses willgenerally disapprove, if novices start to use their non-care competences before they

have shown themselves to be sufficiently competent in the care cluster. Thus, care

competence can be considered as a threshold for the employment of competence in

other areas (Zhang et al., 2001). Any attempt to broaden ones role prior to showing

sufficient care competence is likely be viewed as untimely and inappropriate (Feij et al.,

1995). Based on these arguments, we would assume that just after entry, novices care

competence would moderate the relationship between their non-care competence and

the evaluation of their overall job performance.

Hypothesis 2: Just after entry, there will be a positive relationship between competence in thenon-care cluster and overall job performance evaluation provided a novices competence in thecare cluster is high. When competence in the care cluster is low, we expect this relationship tobe negative.

Changes in activity cluster competence over timeThe initial period after entering their first job is generally seen as a phase, during which

novices have to learn to perform their jobs effectively and to increase their task-relevant

knowledge, skills and abilities. This implies that novices competence can improve overtime. The fact that the importance for high overall job performance of the various work

activity clusters may differ, could also have consequences for what is learned by novices

and how this is achieved. Important work activity clusters, those that form a central part

of ones job, will be deployed relatively often (Gibson, 2004). This offers newcomers the

opportunity to learn the ropes by imitating their colleagues, and provides

opportunities to evaluate and compare their own competence with those of relevant

others. As a result, they will receive more accurate information about their own

performance, which can be expected to stimulate learning and effective behaviouralself-management (Saks & Ashforth, 1996). Moreover, increasing competence in

important clusters will contribute to uncertainty reduction and to self-esteem (Ramritu

& Bernard, 2001). If care competence is indeed more important for novices job

performance than their non-care competence, then one would expect to see a greater

increase over time in novices reported care competence than in their reported non-care

competence. The time frame that is most commonly used to study such developments

in a nursing context is 12 years (Carnwell & Daly, 2003; Woods, 1999), and, therefore,

we will use a time frame of 18 months.

Hypothesis 3: Initially, novices competence in the care cluster will increase more rapidly thantheir competence in the non-care cluster.

The foregoing arguments also suggest that, after a certain time, most novice nurses

will attain what may be called a maintenance stage, where care competence will

become more or less self-evident (Deadrick, Bennett, & Russell, 1997). If the nurses

care competences become high and more similar, it is likely that these competences will

become less useful for senior nurses to discriminate between poor and good performing

nurses, and, thus, will be less informative for determining overall job performance



(Deadrick et al., 1997). This suggests that the relationship between care competence

and the evaluation of a novices overall job performance will weaken over time (see also

Feij et al., 1995).

At the same time, it seems likely that when novices indicate to be sufficiently

competent in providing care, they will feel more secure and self-confident. This will

stimulate them to start to broaden their roles (Bauer et al., 1998; Morgeson et al., 2005;Morrison, 1994). Such changes may occur not only because the novice actively searches

for new challenges and learning objectives, but also because the expectations of

colleagues and supervisors regarding the novices jobs and tasks may change (Gibson,

2004). Moreover, it is reasonable to assume that provided nurses demonstrate their care

competence, they will obtain more leeway to develop and expand their roles (cf. Berger

et al., 1980). This increases the likelihood that they will be given greater responsibilities,

with the result that competence in work activity clusters that were less important in the

career stages immediately after entry becomes more important in their new roles.Studies in the field of dynamic job performance do indeed indicate that, as roles develop,

new work activity clusters may become important for high performance (Barrett et al.,

1989; Deadrick et al., 1997). There is no reason why such role development processes

should not also occur in nursing. Indeed, research has shown that, over time, nurses

develop their roles from patient-related tasks to activities for which competence in the

non-care cluster is required (Carnwell & Daly, 2003; Woods, 1999). Noyes (1995) has

argued that if novice nurses get greater clinical experience, then they are better able to

place their job in a wider organizational context and, therefore, their non-carecompetence will be more significant in achieving a high overall job performance.

Novices on a nursing ward who have shown to be competent in the care activities

cluster may, for example, be given the new task of mentoring less-experienced nurses or

may be asked to participate in an organizational change project.

Hypothesis 4: After 18 months, competence in the non-care cluster contributes more to apositive overall job performance evaluation than competence in the care cluster.

Method

DesignWe set up a panel of six head nurses to advise us with respect to the design, content and

execution of the study. We used a longitudinal approach and collected data at threestages: just before entry (T0), 6 weeks after entry (T1) and 18 months after entry (T2).

Such a time-span is not unusual in socialization studies (for an overview, see Bauer et al.,

1998) and was also supported by our panel of head nurses. At T0 and T2, the novices

completed a questionnaire. The questionnaires included items that referred to the way

they perceived their own competence in the care and non-care clusters. At T1 and T2,

three senior colleagues, including the head nurse and the nurse who was assigned to

mentor the novice, were asked to evaluate the performance of the novice. We chose to

measure self-assessed competence in both clusters just before entry (T0), rather thanafter a short period (e.g. T1), because research has shown that the entry phase is quite

stressful and this can make novices feel uncertain and doubt their own competence,

which is then likely to result in biased survey responses (cf. Fisher, 1985; Moreland &

Levine, 1980; Morrison, 1994). Naturally, we could not ask senior nurses to evaluate the

performance of the novice nurses before entry. However, we wanted to make the

interval between T0 and T1 as short as possible and our panel of head nurses indicated



that 6 weeks after entry was the earliest date to make reliable performance assessments

(see also Bauer et al., 1998). At T1 and T2 the novices were interviewed as part of the

regular human resource management policy of the hospitals personnel department. We

took advantage of this by adding, to the standard interview protocol, some open-ended

questions pertaining to the mastery and use of the two identified work activity clusters

and to the social integration process in general. Transcriptions of this part of theinterview were sent to the researchers. Some of these are used as illustrative examples in

the Results section.

RespondentsThe study was conducted in the early 1990s in a university hospital in the Netherlands

with just over 1200 beds. All the novice nurses with less than 3 months work experienceafter completing their vocational training (N 97) were asked to participate in the study.These novices entered the hospital over a period of 19 months. Five novices refused to

participate in the study or did not respond to any of the questionnaires. The response rate

was 86 at T0 and 68 at T2. Consequently, depending on which time interval is included in

a specific analysis, the number of observations differs to some extent. The most common

reasons for non-response were unknown (12) having moved to another ward (8),

resignation (6) and sickness (2). Multivariate analyses of variance revealed that non-

response was not significantly related to age, gender, department (e.g. surgery, internalmedicine) or to any of the other study variables. Our response rates are not unusual for

longitudinal studies in healthcare settings. Adkins (1995) and Fisher (1985), for example,

report response rates of 74 and 71%, respectively, in the final round of their studies, some

69 months after the first. The mean age of the novices in our study was 22.8 years

(SD 2:73) and just over 85% were female. The wards where the novices started workingwere: Surgery (N 21), Internal Medicine (N 20), Gynaecology and Obstetrics(N 24), Paediatrics (N 8), Neurology (N 9) and other specialties (N 15). Wereceived assessments of 84 novices from at least one senior colleague at T1, and at T2 wereceived evaluations of 60 novices1.

Measures

Competence in specific work activity clustersThis variable was measured by asking novices to indicate to what extent they had

mastered each of the 16 activities (from 1 not at all to 5 very well) that wereidentified as relevant in a previous study in the same setting2. Since competences refer to

the potential to perform well and are generally not directly observable, we have chosen tomake use of self-report measurements. Such measurements have shown to be relatively

good proxies of true competences (Spenner, 1990). An exploratory factor analysis

revealed four unrotated factors with eigenvalues above 1 (4.93, 1.99, 1.37 and 1.20).

Cattells SCREE test gives the best indication for the number of factors to retain (Ford,

MacCallum, & Tait, 1986; Zwick & Velicer, 1982) and this suggested a two-factor solution

that explained 43.24% of the variance. The loadings after varimax rotation are presented

1More precisely, at T1 we received 1 evaluation for 1 novice, 2 evaluations for 28 novices and 3 evaluations for 55 novices,which in total sums up to 222 evaluations by senior staff (i.e., 1 1 2 28 3 55). At T2 we received 1 evaluation for 6novices, 2 evaluations for 48 novices and 3 evaluations for 6 novices, which sums up to 120 (i.e., 6 1 2 48 3 6).2 The results of this validation study are reported in Aukes, Baving, and Molleman (1987). Additional information can beobtained from the lead author.



in Table 1. The items loading on the first factor reflect the non-care activities and those

loading on the second factor pertain to care activities. Although some of the specific items

might be more relevant for some wards than for others, our panel of head nurses agreed

that these items did have a general relevance. Further, for our study, we are not interested

in investigating differences between wards. To see whether the factor structure at Time 2

replicated the structure at Time 0, we correlated the factor loadings at Time 0 with theloadings at Time 2 (see, for example, Van der Vegt & Janssen, 2003, for a more elaborate

explanation of this procedure). For the first factor (non-care) this correlation was 0.80

(N 16, p , :001) and for the second one the correlation was 0.69 (N 16, p , :01),providing evidence for the invariance of the factor structure over time. Values of

Cronbachs as for the scales measuring care competence were 0.79 at T0 and 0.68 at T2.The scale measuring non-care competence had a :82 at T0 and.63 at T2.

Overall performance evaluationSince no adequate performance evaluation measure was available for this specific group

of nurses, a new scale had to be developed. Evaluating overall performance by using more

of a distal measure than specific performance items is recommended by several authors

and, further, helps to distinguish our rather specific competence predictors from our

performance evaluation measure (see, for example, Bauer & Green, 1998; Sturman,

2003). In co-operation with our panel of head nurses, we established an inventory of

criteria that define high-standard nurse performance. Then, in a series of extensive

discussions with these same head nurses, a scale with six overall performance evaluationitems was created. The items referred to dedication, communication, self-reliance,

demonstrating accountability, administrative work and planning of work. Overall

performance evaluation was measured by asking up to three senior colleagues (including

the novices mentor and the head nurse) to indicate how satisfied they were with the

novices performance in terms of these six global performance items (from 1 very

Table 1. Factor analysis: items that had a high loading (shown italics) on the same factor were assigned

to the same scale

Item Non-care Care

Inform a patient about a coming unpleasant medical examination 0.04 0.74Change an infusion 0.13 0.71Care for a patient with a pressure sore 0.05 0.62Help a patient to cope with anxiety 0.24 0.61Talk with a patient about the consequences of illness and treatment 0.23 0.58Monitor heart rhythm and blood pressure 0.14 0.58Inform a patients family about a patients condition 0.27 0.56Update a patients file 0.03 0.52Motivate colleagues to participate in a ward change project 0.71 0.14Contribute to the design and organization of the ward 0.73 0.11Discuss professional developments with colleagues 0.69 20.06Comment on a colleagues behaviour towards a patient 0.68 0.10Contribute to the introduction of innovative work methods 0.62 0.35Contribute to a study on optimizing patient admissions 0.61 0.18Contribute to the development of healthcare quality policies 0.57 0.16Express a view on the functioning of the ward 0.49 0.35



dissatisfied to 5 very satisfied). For T1, the inter-rater reliability (rWG, see James,Demaree, & Wolf, 1984) for the set of six parallel items varied from 0.87 to 1.00

(M 0:99, SD 0:01) and for T2, the range was 0.971.00 (M 0:99, SD 0:01),indicating that the scores of the individual raters could be combined. Next, for every

novice the evaluation scores were averaged for each of the six items, separately for T1 and

T2. After that we conducted an exploratory factor analysis on the six averaged items. Theeigenvalues of the first two unrotated factors were 4.45 and 0.65 for T1, and 4.59 and 0.52

for T2, clearly supporting a one-dimensional solution. The values of Cronbachs a for theoverall performance evaluation scale were 0.93 at T1 and 0.94 at T2.

Results

Descriptive statistics and correlationsTable 2 presents the means, standard deviations and Pearson zero-order correlations

among the variables in this study. This shows that the competences in the care and non-

care clusters, measured at both T0 and T2 were only moderately related to each other

(Pearsons r between the two clusters was .43 at T0 and .35 at T2). Moreover,

the autocorrelations between the competence clusters were 0.53 for care and 0.26 for

non-care. Off-diagonal correlations were 0.14 and 0.22, thereby showing discriminantvalidity.

Testing the hypothesesHypothesis 1 states that novices care competence is a stronger predictor of their overall

job performance evaluation than their non-care competence. We carried out hierarchicallinear regression analyses using novice performance rated by senior staff 6 weeks after

entry as the dependent variable, and self-evaluated competence in the two-work activity

clusters just before entry as the predictor variables. Column 2 in Table 3 shows that care

competence was significantly related to the performance rated by senior staff, whereas

non-care competence was not. Moreover, the difference between the two regression

weights was significant (t 3:94, df 68, p , :001). The beta weight for carecompetence indicates that the higher the claimed competence in this cluster, the more

positively their performance was evaluated by senior colleagues. This supports

Table 2. Means, standard deviations and intercorrelations of the study variables

M SD (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)

(1) Gender 1.86 0.35(2) Age 22.81 2.73 0.03(3) Care competence T0 4.22 0.53 20.03 20.05(4) Non-care competence T0 3.46 0.61 20.01 0.02 0.43***(5) Care competence T2 4.51 0.33 0.11 20.11 0.53*** 0.22(6) Non-care competence T2 3.49 0.48 0.10 20.13 0.14 0.26* 0.35**(7) Performance rating T1 3.91 0.51 0.01 20.05 0.35** 0.13 0.32* 0.09(8) Performance rating T2 4.12 0.58 0.14 20.09 0.02 20.07 20.06 0.19 0.39**

Notes. For gender, male was coded as 1 and female as 2.T0 pre-entry; T1 6 weeks after entry; T2 18 months after entry.*p , :05; **p , :01; ***p , :001.



Hypothesis 1. During the interviews 6 weeks after entry, the novices also stressed the

importance of care competence, which is illustrated by the following quotes:

Patient care is such a central issue and valued so much by colleagues that I first want to

meet their expectations in this field. Other sides of the profession are completely secondary

at this moment.

Possessing practical caring skills is what primarily counts when the head nurse evaluates

my performance.

The best way to become a full team member is to show your team mates that you make a

good contribution to patient care.

Practical experience is what really counts in my job.

Hypothesis 2 states that there will be a positive relationship between non-care

competence and overall job performance evaluation if a novices care competence is

high. Conversely, if a novices competence in the care cluster is low, then we expect this

relationship to be negative. To test this interaction effect we followed the procedure

recommended by Aiken and West (1991): (1) standardize the predictors to reducemulticollinearity between these variables and their interaction term, (2) multiply the

two variables to calculate their interaction term and (3) include the main effect in the

model to prevent a biased estimate of the interaction effect. The third column in Table 3

shows that, after including the main effects in the regression model, the interaction

between care and non-care competence is significant.

To interpret the pattern of the interaction effect, we plotted the relationship between

non-care competence and performance rated by senior staff for individuals with low (1 SD

below the mean) and high (1 SD above the mean) levels of competence in the care cluster,following the procedures outlined by Aiken and West (1991). Figure 1 shows that for

those novices who score high on competence in the care cluster, higher scores on non-

care competence are associated with more favourable performance evaluations. For

novices with a low score on competence in the care cluster, non-care competence is

negatively related to performance evaluations. Thus, these results support Hypothesis 2.

The following quotes from the interviews 6 weeks after entry reflect the above-

mentioned findings:

I have to improve my clinical knowledge and skills to make my colleagues value my work. It

makes no sense to interfere in other matters if the quality of the care you provide is

Table 3. Regression of performance by senior staff (T1, 6 weeks after entry) on care and non-care

competence and their interaction term (T0, just before entry)

Predictors (T0) Step 1 (df 4, 68) Step 2 (df 5, 67)

Gender 20.02 20.07Age 0.04 0.04Care competence 0.38** 0.43**Non-care competence 20.05 0.02Care Non-care competence 0.22*F 2.37* 2.49*Model R2 0.12* 0.16**R2 Change 0.12* 0.04*

Note. Beta weights are presented; *p , :05; **p , :01 (one-tailed tests).



insufficient. Most patients we care for have very serious physical problems and you wont

be taken seriously if, for example, you do not know how to deal with all types of drains and

infusions.If you cannot fulfil the patients basic care needs you are missing the essence of working

here. Once you can adequately take care of the patients, there is leeway to explore and

develop other sides of the work.Last week I made suggestions how to improve teamwork. My peers didnt appreciate that at

all. They simply sent me back to work.Deep inside, I have many ideas about how to improve our work setting. However, I find it

risky to suggest them now.

Hypothesis 3 states that, initially, novices care competence increases more rapidly than

their non-care competence. A multivariate analysis of variance with competence in both

activity clusters (two levels: care and non-care) and time (two levels: just before entry

and after 18 months) as factors showed a significant main effect for work activity

clusters (F1; 61 250:32, p , :001), a significant main effect for time(F1; 61 9:65, p , :01) and a significant work activity cluster time interactioneffect (F1; 61 11:96, p , :001). The main effect of work activity clusters reflectedthat, regardless of the measurement time, novices reported possessing more care

competence (M 4:35) than non-care competence (M 3:47). The main effect of timewas that novices assessed their overall competence level more favourably at T2 (4.03)

than at T0 (3.84), indicating an overall learning effect. Finally, the time work activitycluster interaction effect indicates that the competences in the two specific activity

clusters change at different rates over time. Paired t tests showed that novices perceived

their care competence to have increased substantially over time (t 5:48, df 61,p , :001), whereas their perceived non-care competence did not change significantlyover the 18 months (t 0:70, df 61, ns). These results support Hypothesis 3. Thefollowing quotes illustrate how novices expressed themselves on this point during the

interviews, 18 months after entry (T2):

The first months were extremely exhausting. I had just left my parents house, and my

family and friends were far away. Everything was new and at the end of each day I was

completely exhausted. To make me feel secure during this first period, I only focused on

mastering direct patient care activities. At that time I had no other concerns. Now I have

mastered all the regular patient care activities relevant to the ward.

Figure 1. Relationship between non-care competence and performance evaluations for novices who

score low and high on care competence.



If I look back, I really started as a greenhorn. I am glad I concentrated on clinical practice.

What nursing school had taught me in that field was really rudimentary. I have learned a

lot and I think that patients see that I am now a competent nurse.

School gave me a thoroughly professional attitude. In order to survive in actual practice

however, I set most of these ideas aside and focused upon patient care.

In Hypothesis 4 we stated that 18 months after entry, competence in the non-carecluster contributes more to a positive overall job performance than competence in the

care cluster. To test this hypothesis we carried out hierarchical linear regression analyses

using novice performance rated by senior staff 18 months after entry as the dependent

variable, self-evaluated competence in the two work activity clusters at that time as the

predictor variables, and gender and age as control variables. The weight for non-care

competence was .23 and for care competence it was 2 .13. These weights differsignificantly (t 2:60, df 55, p , :05). This supports Hypothesis 4. The followingquotations illustrate our findings relating to Hypotheses 4:

In my first year I found it difficult to give feedback to colleagues. Now I feel much more

confident in doing so.

I dont feel like a novice anymore. What really counts now is to be a reliable and trusted

colleague who contributes to all issues that are relevant for our ward.

During the first months I was completely focused on myself. My main concern was to do

my job properly. When colleagues assisted me I experienced it as a personal failure. Now I

value that I can help team mates and that they help me. There is mutuality and I have

become a respected team player who is allowed to come up with good ideas to improve our

work.

Recently I have organized a meeting to discuss our team functioning. A year ago that would

have been completely out of order

Exploratory analysesPlaying the role of the devils advocate, one could argue that the above findings were

influenced by our decision to apply Cattels SCREE test to determine the appropriatenumber of factors and to extract only two factors. The use of alternative criteria (e.g. the

Kaiser criterion; see, for example, Zwich & Velicer, 1982) might have favoured a

solution with three or four factors and could have resulted in different findings. In order

to address this possibility, we explored the relevance of the three- and four-factor

solutions, and the possible consequences for our results and conclusions.

When we tried a three-factor solution, the non-care factor remained the same (i.e.

the first factor in Table 1), whereas the care items split into two factors with four items

in each. The first of these two factors included the items related to communicationissues (e.g. Inform a patient about a forthcoming unpleasant medical examination) and

the second factor covered the items related to technical competences (e.g. Change an

infusion). The reliabilities of these two scales were 0.74 and 0.67, respectively. If we

opted for a four-factor structure, then the non-care and communication factors

remained unchanged, while the four technical items split further into two factors.

However, the fourth factor included only one item (Update a patients file). Given this

result, we concluded that it was only sensible to test the hypotheses using the scales

resulting from the three-factor solution.When testing our hypotheses using the technical competence and communication

competence scales instead of the original care competence scale, the results for

Hypotheses 1, 3 and 4 remained essentially the same or became somewhat stronger.

That is, in all of the regression analyses, the beta weights for the communication and



technical competences scales were very close to those of the original care competence

scale. For Hypothesis 2, however, the findings were somewhat different: the beta

weights for the interaction of non-care competence with technical competences and

with communication competences were 0.33 (p , :05) and 0.18 (p , :10),respectively, compared with 0.22 (p , :05) for the original care competence scale.Overall, however, given the small differences between these and our original findings,we have concluded that our decision to apply Cattels SCREE test has not substantially

influenced our conclusions, and that the two-factor solution, resulting in the most

parsimonious set of results, was valid.

Discussion

The goal of this study was to examine the relationships between novices competence in

specific work activity clusters, learning and the evaluation of their overall performance.

We found that, 6 weeks after entry, novices care competence contributed more to apositive performance evaluation by the senior staff than their non-care competence.

Being able to contribute substantially to the care of patients may make a novice feel

confident and valued. Moreover, it may instantly ease the workload of colleagues and

add to team performance, which is likely to be highly appreciated by ones team mates.

Additionally, we found that, 6 weeks after entry, the effect of non-care competence

on a novices performance evaluation was linked to their care competence. Our results

show that for novices whose care competence is relatively low, there is a negative

relationship between non-care competence and performance evaluation, whereas thisrelationship is positive if they have high levels of care competence. Since making use of

non-care competence entails the expression of ideas, opinions and criticism, it is

possible that colleagues will not appreciate such behaviour shortly after entry if the

novice lacks competence in the field of patient care, because it challenges the status

quo that is deeply anchored in the norms and value systems of the ward. It seems that as

long as one is unable to help patients adequately, giving feedback to colleagues or

bringing up ideas or suggestions regarding working methods will be negatively valued.

Consistent with our expectations, our findings also revealed that the importance ofcompetence in the specific work activity clusters changed over time. First of all, we

found that novices reported a greater increase in their care, than in their non-care

competence. It seems that novices focus on learning care activities because gaining

competence in this cluster of activities most reduces uncertainty and enhances feelings

of self-confidence. Moreover, it is especially care competences that contribute directly

to ward performance with respect to the primary task, i.e. patient care.

We predicted and indeed found that the relative contribution of competence in

specific activity clusters to performance evaluations changes over time. Our resultsshowed that while 6 weeks after entry care competences contribute more to a positive

performance evaluation than non-care competences, 18 months after entry we found

the opposite, i.e. competence in the non-care cluster contributes more to a positive

performance evaluation than competence in the care cluster. Eighteen months after

entry, competence in the care activity cluster may have become self-evident and,

therefore, may be no longer predictive of overall performance.

Practical implicationsOur findings may have several practical implications. Our study makes clear that

acquiring knowledge, skills and abilities in the area of patient care during the initial



vocational training of nurses is critical. Once novices have shown competence in this

area, they will get leeway to demonstrate competence in other work activity clusters, or

to move to other occupational roles in which other work activity clusters are more

important. Although patient care activities might be the major concern of nursing

schools, we would not want the reader to infer from our findings that other areas are

unimportant. Other activities, such as managerial and professional development, forman integral part of the nursing profession. Adequate basic knowledge and skills in these

areas may be necessary in later stages of nurses careers. Care competences are

immediately relevant, but are also likely to be rather context-specific so that it is nearly

impossible to learn all possible care competences for all possible health care settings

during initial vocational training. On-the-job learning of several of the care competences

seems inevitable and to some extent such additional on-the-job training might be

required again if nurses move to another ward or health care setting in a later stage of

their careers. The value of competence in non-care areas is less context-dependent andcan be more easily transferred to other role settings (Cunningham, 1996; Tschan & Von

Cranach, 1996). Therefore, learning about and mastering activities in other areas than

patient care during initial vocational training remains useful.

Nevertheless, it seems important to develop realistic expectations about a nurses

first job (see, for example, Dean & Wanous, 1984; Meglino & DeNisi, 1988) and to clarify

during the initial training of nurses that, when they do start work, it is wise to focus

primarily on patient care and to set aside their competences in other areas for use at a

later stage. If they approach work in this tactical way, novices might move moresmoothly through the initial stages of working life, and the amount of time required from

their supervisors and mentors for successful socialization might decrease, thereby

enhancing both performance and satisfaction. This might also reduce the number of

novices leaving the profession and so save time and money.

Theoretical implicationsThe results of this study contribute to knowledge in the field of organizational and

occupational psychology in several ways. First, our study contributes to the

performance evaluation literature by showing that the interrelationship between

competence and the evaluation of a novices performance is complex. Most previous

performance evaluation studies have not considered the role of specific knowledge,

skills and abilities, nor have they examined the changing importance of particular work

activity clusters over time (Chao, Olearykelly, Wolf, Klein, & Gardner, 1994; Saks &

Ashforth, 1997). Our study shows that competences in different work activity areas mayjointly affect the evaluation of a novices performance. Moreover, our findings suggest

that, possibly due to learning effects, the predictive power of some activity clusters

changes over time and that, as a result, the relationship between competence in specific

activity clusters and performance evaluation is not constant.

Second, our results have implications for the socialization literature. Although there

are many factors that affect the socialization of newcomers, it is clear that one of the

factors that plays an important role is the mastery of job-relevant competences (for

overviews, see Bauer et al., 1998; Saks & Ashforth, 1997). For example, Fisher (1986)posited learning to perform the required work task is obviously a critical part of

socialization (p. 107). Haueter et al. (2003) have shown the importance of task

socialization, which they define as acquiring task knowledge, learning how to perform

relevant task behaviours and learning how to interact with others in the course of



performing specific tasks (p. 24). Our study shows that it is important for newcomers to

realize that in the first period after entrance, some competences might be more

important than others and contribute more directly to their overall performance. So,

being aware which competences are most important during different socialization

phases seems to be very important for newcomers. Also from a managerial perspective,

our insights may help to develop interventions directed to the socialization ofnewcomers such as training programmes and mentorship policies.

Third, our results are important for theory and research dealing with extra-role

behaviour in organizations (e.g. Miles, Borman, Spector, & Fox, 2002). Extra-role

activities are generally considered to be positive and desirable for organizational

effectiveness. However, it has been indicated that such activities are sometimes also

perceived as counterproductive (Miles et al., 2002; Sackett, 2002; Staw & Boettger,

1990; Wrzesniewski & Dutton, 2001). Consistent with this evidence, our study suggests

that extra-role activities of nurses in terms of non-care competences will be valued onlyif their care activities are positively evaluated. Newcomers will have to acquire credit by

showing high-quality in-role activities before extra-role efforts are appreciated (see also

Werner, 1994).

Finally, authors who have used a social information-processing approach to role

theory have indicated that there is no clear boundary between in- and extra-role activities

and that roles are socially constructed phenomena that may change over time (Morrison,

1994; Tepper et al., 2001; Wrzesniewski et al., 2003). Role development entails that roles

are redefined and that activities that were considered to be extra-role or evencounterproductive before, become in-role and valued (Morrison, 1994). The findings

from our study support such a dynamic view on role development. It is likely that when

novices have learned to master the in-role activities adequately, they will feel more secure

and less uncertain, which may enhance perceptions of self-efficacy and self-esteem (e.g.

Ramritu & Barnard, 2001). Our findings suggest that this makes them eager to start to

broaden their roles (Bauer et al., 1998; Morgeson et al., 2005; Morrison, 1994).

Strengths and limitationsWe would argue that our study has several strengths. First, we used self-reporting to

assess competence and ratings by senior staff to measure performance, thereby

reducing the likelihood of mono-method bias. Further, using both qualitative and

quantitative information contributed to our understanding of the role of competence in

specific work activity clusters and the evaluation of overall job performance. Moreover,

the longitudinal design of our study helped in gaining a better insight into the dynamicnature of the relationship between competence in specific work activity clusters and

the evaluation of performance. And finally, our focus on one particular occupational

group enabled us to examine the role of novices competence in a more specific way

than it is possible in a more general study. As Saks and Ashforth (1997, p. 270) stated

most past socialization research has lumped together different occupational groups

and according to them, targeting specific occupations will contribute to the elaboration

of the socialization literature.

Apart from these strengths, our study inevitably has a few limitations. First, the careand non-care competences of novices were only measured using self-reporting

instruments. It would have been better if we had used more-objective measures of their

competence in specific work activity clusters. The addition of assessments by peers or

supervisors, for example, might help to improve the measurement of competences.



Second, with respect to the outcome variables, we included only one measure: the

overall performance evaluation of a novice. In future research, it might be useful to

include other outcome variables, such as job satisfaction, acceptance by the group and

intention to stay or leave. Third, the number of respondents in this study was rather

small. However, obtaining large samples of one particular and highly specific

occupational group is difficult. Fourth, although the main purpose of the interviewswas to support the novices in becoming full and respected members of the organization,

it is possible that some novices felt constrained by the HR-mandated nature of the

interview. Since we have used the qualitative data only for illustrative purposes, this

might be less critical. Finally, although we found that competence can develop over

time, we did not investigate the possible underlying mechanisms. It might, for example,

well be that changes in role content or changes in performance expectations affect the

development of certain competences and might also explain the dynamic relationship

between a specific competence and performance evaluation. Such underlyingmechanisms would be an interesting subject for future research.

Although the generalizability of our findings is, strictly speaking, limited to hospital

nurses, it is nevertheless relatively easy to imagine how similar processes might occur in

other occupational groups. For example, for mechanics entering their first job, the

ability to diagnose and repair engine defects is likely to be more relevant and critical

than possessing good communication skills or having an insight into the automotive

market. Of course, the ability to communicate to the owner of a car, the details of a

problem and the necessary repairs may become important, but these skills are rathermeaningless if one does not have the competence to diagnose the defects in the first

place. Similarly, knowledge of the automotive market might become an important

competence at a later stage of mechanics careers, if they become involved in sales

activities. To give another example, it is critical for a young academic to have writing

skills and to be able to retrieve the relevant literature. The competence to write high-

quality review reports, however, will be less relevant during the initial stage of such a

career. Such generalizations from our findings are, however, only speculative and

require further support. Therefore, future research should examine similar relationshipsto those described in this article using occupational groups from other industries.

ConclusionThe performance of relative novices and new employees without work experience is

crucial in determining organizational effectiveness. Focusing first on the competence ofnovices in the most important work activity clusters, and only later on others, will ease

their socialization and may have positive and lasting effects on learning and adjustment,

person-job fit, person-organization fit, job satisfaction and performance (Haueter et al.,

2003: 21). The findings of our study suggest that taking into account the relative

importance of specific work activity clusters, and also the changes in their importance

over time, may help novices, as well as their managers, in facilitating the process of

becoming a full and valued member of the organization.

References

Adkins, C. L. (1995). Previous work experience and organizational socialization - A longitudinal

examination. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 839862.

Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions.

Newbury Park: Sage publications.



Aukes, L. C., Baving, J. E., & Molleman, E. (1987). Het nieuwkomersonderzoek. [Study among

novices] Unpublished document, University Hospital, University of Groningen, Groningen.

Barrett, G. V., Caldwell, M. S., & Alexander, R. A. (1989). The predictive stability of ability

requirements for task performance: A critical reanalysis. Human Performance, 2, 167181.

Bauer, T. N., & Green, S. G. (1998). Testing the combined effects of newcomer information seeking

and manager behavior on socialization. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 7283.

Bauer, T. N., Morrison, E. W., & Callister, R. R. (1998). Organizational socialization: A review and

directions for future research. In G. R. Ferris (Ed.), Research in personal and human resource

management ( Vol. 16, pp. 149214). Stamford, CT: JAI.

Berger, J., Rosenholtz, S. J., & Zelditch, M. (1980). Status organizing processes. Annual Review of

Sociology, 6, 479508.

Berger, J., Webster, M., Ridgeway, C., & Rosenholtz, S. J. (1986). Status cues, expectations and

behavior. In E. J. Lawler (Ed.), Advances in group processes (Vol. 3). Greenwich, CT: Jai Press.

Blau, G. (1999). Early-career job factors influencing the professional commitment of medical

technologists. Academy of Management Journal, 42, 687695.

Cable, D. M., & Parsons, C. K. (2001). Socialization tactics and person-organization fit. Personnel

Psychology, 54, 123.

Campion, M. A., Mumford, T. V., Morgeson, F. P., & Nahrgang, J. D. (2005). Work redesign: Eight

obstacles and opportunities. Human Resource Management, 44, 367390.

Carnwell, R., & Daly, W. M. (2003). Advanced nursing practitioners in primary care settings:

An exploration of the developing roles. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 12, 630642.

Chao, G. T., Olearykelly, A. M., Wolf, S., Klein, H. J., & Gardner, P. D. (1994). Organizational

socialization - Its content and consequences. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 730743.

Chen, G., & Klimoski, R. J. (2003). The impact of expectations on newcomer performance in

teams as mediated by work characteristics, social exchanges, and empowerment. Academy of

Management Journal, 46, 591607.

Clinton, M., Murrells, T., & Robinson, S. (2005). Assessing competency in nursing: A comparison

of nurses prepared through degree and diploma programmes. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 14,

8294.

Cunningham, J. W. (1996). Generic job descriptors: A likely direction in occupational analysis.

Military Psychology, 8, 247262.

Deadrick, D. L., Bennett, N., & Russell, C. J. (1997). Using hierarchical linear modeling to examine

dynamic performance criteria over time. Journal of Management, 23, 745757.

Dean, R. A., & Wanous, J. P. (1984). Effects of realistic job previews on hiring bank tellers. Journal

of Applied Psychology, 69, 6168.

Decker, F. H. (1985). Socialization and interpersonal environment in nurses affective reactions to

work. Social Science and Medicine, 20, 499509.

Dubinsky, A. J., Howell, R. D., Ingram, T. N., & Bellenger, D. N. (1986). Salesforce socialization.

Journal of Marketing, 50, 192207.

Elbright, P. R., Urden, L., Patterson, E., & Chalko, B. (2004). Themes surrounding novice nurse-

miss and adverse-event situations. Journal of Nursing Administration, 34, 531538.

Feij, J. A., Whitely, W. T., Peiro, J. M., & Taris, T. W. (1995). The development of career-enhancing

strategies and content innovation - A longitudinal-study of new workers. Journal of Vocational

Behavior, 46, 231256.

Feldman, D. C. (1976). Contingency theory of socialization. Administrative science quarterly, 21,

433452.

Fisher, C. D. (1985). Social support and adjustment to work - A longitudinal-study. Journal of

Management, 11, 3953.

Fisher, C. D. (1986). Organizational socialization: An integrative review. In G. R. Ferris & K. M.

Rowland (Eds.), Research in personal and human resource management ( Vol. 4,

pp. 101145). Greenwich, CT: JAI.



Fitzpatrick, J. M., While, A. E., & Roberts, J. D. (1997). Measuring clinical nurse performance:

Development of the kings nurse performance scale. International Journal of Nursing

Studies, 34, 222230.

Ford, J. K., MacCallum, R. C., & Tait, M. (1986). The application of exploratory factor analysis in

applied psychology: A critical review and analysis. Personnel Psychology, 39, 291314.

Forgas, J. P., & George, J. M. (2001). Affective influences on judgments and behavior in

organizations: An information processing perspective. Organizational Behavior and Human

Decision Processes, 86, 334.

Gardner, G., Gardner, A., & Proctor, M. (2004). Nurse practitioner education: A research-based

curriculum structure. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 47, 143152.

Gibson, D. E. (2004). Role models in career development: New directions for theory and research.

Journal of Vocational Behavior, 65, 134156.

Hancock, H., Campbell, S., Ramprogus, V., & Kilgour, J. (2005). Role development in health care

assistants: The impact of education on practice. Journal of Evaluation of Clinical Practice,

11, 489498.

Haueter, J. A., Macan, T. H., & Winter, J. (2003). Measurement of newcomer socialization:

Construct validation of a multidimensional scale. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 63, 2039.

Hollander, E. P. (1985). Leadership and power. In G. Lindzey & E. Aronson (Eds.), The handbook of

social psychology. New York: Random House.

James, L. R., Demaree, R. G., & Wolf, G. (1984). Estimating within-group interrater reliability with

and without response bias. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69, 8598.

Kammeyer-Mueller, J. D., & Wanberg, C. R. (2003). Unwrapping the organizational entry process:

Disentangling multiple antecedents and their pathways to adjustment. Journal of Applied


Lee-Hsieh, J., Kao, C. H., Kuo, C. L., & Tseng, H. F. (2003). Clinical nursing competence of RN-to-

BSN students in a nursing concept-based curriculum in Taiwan. Journal of Nursing

Education, 42, 536545.

Louis, M. R. (1980). Surprise and sense making - What newcomers experience in entering

unfamiliar organizational settings. Administrative Science Quarterly, 25, 226251.

Meglino, B. M., & DeNisi, A. S. (1988). Realistic job previews: Some thoughts on their more

effective use in managing the flow of human resources. Human Resource Planning, 10,

157167.

Miles, D. E., Borman, W. E., Spector, P. E., & Fox, F. (2002). Building an integrative model of extra

role work behaviours: A comparison of counterproductive work behaviour with

organizational citizenship behaviour. International Journal of Selection and Assessment,

10, 5157.

Moreland, R. L. (1985). Social categorization and the assimilation of new group members. Journal

of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 11731190.

Moreland, R. L., & Levine, J. M. (1980). Newcomers and oldtimers in small groups. In P. B. Paulus

(Ed.), Psychology of group influence. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum Associates.

Moreland, R. L., & Levine, J. M. (2001). Socialization in organizations and work groups. In

M. Turner (Ed.), Groups at work: Theory and research. Mahwah: Erlbaum.

Morgeson, F. P., Delaney-Klinger, K., & Hemingway, M. A. (2005). The importance of job autonomy,

cognitive ability, and job-related skill for predicting role breadth and job performance. Journal

of Applied Psychology, 90, 399406.

Morrison, E. W. (1994). Role definitions and organizational citizenship behaviour: The importance

of the employees perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 37, 15431567.

Norman, I. J., Watson, R., Murrells, T., Calman, L., & Redfern, S. (2002). The validity and reliability

of methods to assess the competence to practice of pre-registration nursing and midwifery

students. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 39, 133145.

Noyes, J. (1995). An explanation of the differences between expert and novice performance in the

administration of intramuscular injection of an analgesic agent to a patient in pain. Journal of

Advanced Nursing, 22, 800807.



Ramritu, P. L., & Barnard, A. (2001). New nurse graduates understanding of competence.

International Nursing Review, 48, 4757.

Redfern, S., Norman, I., Calman, L., Watson, R., & Murrells, T. (2002). Assessing competence to

practice in nursing: A review of the literature. Research Papers in Education, 17, 5177.

Sackett, P. R. (2002). The structure of counterproductive work behaviours: Dimensionality and

relationships with facets of job performance. International Journal of Selection and

Assessment, 10, 511.

Saks, A. M., & Ashforth, B. E. (1996). Proactive socialization and behavioral self-management.

Journal of Vocational Behavior, 48, 301323.

Saks, A. M., & Ashforth, B. E. (1997). Organizational socialization: Making sense of the past and

present as a prologue for the future. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 51, 234279.

Salancik, G. R., & Pfeffer, J. (1978). A social information processing approach to job attitudes and

task design. Administrative Science Quarterly, 23, 224253.

Spenner, K. I. (1990). Skills: Meanings, methods, and measurements. Work and Occupations, 17,

399421.

Staw, B. M., & Boettger, R. D. (1990). Task revision - A neglected form of work performance.

Academy of Management Journal, 33, 534559.

Sturman, M. C. (2003). Searching for the inverted U-shaped relationship between time and

performance: Meta-analyses of the experience/performance, tenure/performance, and

age/performance relationships. Journal of Management, 29, 609640.

Tepper, B. J., Lockhart, D., & Hoobler, J. (2001). Justice, citizenship, and role definition effects.

Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 789796.

Tschan, F., & Von Cranach, M. (1996). Group task structure, processes and outcome. In M. A. West

(Ed.), Handbook of work group psychology (pp. 95121). New York: Wiley.

Tzeng, H. M., & Ketefian, S. (2003). Demand for nursing competencies: An exploratory study in

Taiwans hospital system. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 12, 509518.

Van der Vegt, G. S., & Janssen, O. (2003). Joint impact of interdependence and group diversity on

innovation. Journal of Management, 29, 729751.

Van Leuven, J. (1999). Four new course competencies for majors. Public Relations Review, 25(1),

7785.

Van Maanen, J. (1976). Breaking in: Socialization to work. In R. Dubin (Ed.), Handbook of work,

organization, and society (pp. 67130). Chicago: Rand McNally.

Van Maanen, J., & Schein, E. H. (1979). Toward a theory of organizational socialization. In B. Staw

(Ed.), Research in organizational behavior ( Vol. 1, pp. 209264). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

Wandelt, M. A., & Stewart, D. S. (1975). Slater nursing competencies rating scale. New York:

Appleton-Century Crofts.

Wanous, J. P., Poland, T. D., Premack, S. L., & Davis, K. S. (1992). The effects of met expectations

on newcomer attitudes and behaviors - A review and meta-analysis. Journal of Applied


Watson, R., Stimpson, A., Topping, A., & Porock, D. (2002). Clinical competence assessment in

nursing: A systematic review of the literature. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 39, 421431.

Werner, J. M. (1994). Dimensions that make a difference: Examining the impact of in-role and

extrarole behaviours on supervisory ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 98107.

While, A. E. (1994). Competence versus performance: Which is more important? Journal of

Advanced Nursing, 20, 525531.

Woods, L. P. (1999). The contingent nature of advanced nursing practice. Journal of Advanced

Nursing, 30, 121128.

Wrzesniewski, A., & Dutton, J. E. (2001). Crafting a job: Revisioning employees as active crafters of

their work. Academy of Management Review, 26, 179201.

Wrzesniewski, A., Dutton, J. E., & Debebe, G. (2003). Interpersonal sensemaking and the meaning

of work. Research in Organizational Behavior, 25, 93135.



Zaccaro, S. J., & Banks, D. (2004). Leader visioning and adaptability: Bridging the gap between

research and practice on developing the ability to manage change. Human Resource

Management, 43(4), 367380.

Zhang, Z. X., Luk, W., Arthur, D., & Wong, T. (2001). Nursing competencies: Personal

characteristics contributing to effective nursing performance. Journal of Advanced Nursing,

33, 467474.

Zwick, W. R., & Velicer, W. F. (1982). Factors influencing four rules for determining the number of

components to retain. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 17, 253269.

Received 15 September 2005; revised version received 31 August 2006


Documents

The Importance of Competence