For this study, the dependent variable will be work performance of employees. Based on the author’s view, performance known as the level of perfection and success made by employees to the task that provided by an organization. In the context of organization, Byars et al. (2008) have mentioned that performance defined as the extent to which the employees in organization contributes to the success of organizational goals (Jafri, Sua, ; Ahmad, 2015). Performance is determined based on the outcome of the work done by the employees. Performance affects the workers to accomplish the task and complete it as quickly as possible. So, numerous studies have been conducted on work performance. Furthermore, Kocak (2006), defined performance as all the activities included in order to accomplish their obligation towards achieving organizational goal and objectives (Al Zefeiti, 2017). Work performance has become one of the most important dependent variable and has been researched for several decades which related to the success of an organization (Jankingthong and Rurkkhum, 2012). A wide range of interpretations of work performance has been discussed by researchers. Moreover, work performance also one of the most important indicators to express on both the goals and means of an organization to achieve efficiency or exceed the essential level of performance (Abdel Razek, 2011).
According to Koopmans (2011), the field of management have been explained on the ways to make an employee to be productive as possible, the field of occupational has emphasized on the ways to prevent productivity loss due to certain disease or health issues (Beaton D ; Schultz AB ,2009). Work and organizational psychologist interested to analyse on the elements such as satisfaction, work engagement, personality and on individual work performance (Koopmans L, 2011) Work performance is an abstract and latent construct which unable to point out or measure directly. It is made up of multiple components and dimensions. According to Viswesvaran (2002), these dimensions are known as indicators which can measure directly. Whereas the dimensions may generalize across the jobs, the exact indicator can be differ between jobs (Koopmans, Bernaards, Hildebrandt, Schaufeli, de Vet, van der Beek, 2011).
According to Campbell (1990), work performance defined as behaviour or action of individual which correlated to the goals of organization. Three concept explained this definition: (1) work definition should be defined in the aspect of behaviour rather than results, (2) work performance includes only those behaviors that related to the organizational goals, and (3) work performance known as multidimensional ( Koopmans, et.al, 2011). Other authors sum up with their definition of work performance. For instance, Viswesvaran and Ones (2000) stated that work performance is an accessible actions, behaviour and outcomes that employees engage in and brings out the contribution to organization goals (Bernaards, et.al, 2011). Furthermore, another definition of work performance by Khalid (2012), stated as a measure of the ability of individual to accomplish specific task or the level of efforts that the individual make in order to fulfil the objective of organization (Al Kindy, Shah ; Jusoh, 2016). In addition, according to Shah et.al (2016), work performance also based on employee behaviours that including their engagement towards work place.
Job performance become a proxy of work performance in many articles and has been clarified by past researchers. Job performance have been defined as work performance in the terms of quality and quality expected from each of the employees in workplace (Khan et al, 2009). However, Chowdry and Sharma (2012) argued that job performance as a behaviour that executed align with the objectives of organization. This shows that there is a similarity between job performance and work performance. Some of the journals explained the term of employee performance and job performance which is interchangeable. For instance, the literature review part in journal of “Effects of motivation on job performance of Local Government workers in Ghana” emphasized more into assessing employee performance rather than discussing about job performance (Kusi, 2014). There is differences between assessing employee performance and job performance. Based on the view point by Seidenfeld (2007), stated that assessing employee performance is providing feedback to employees which is an important management function. Employee needs frequent feedback on regular basis for their performance. Furthermore, work performance should be differentiate from work productivity which these two concepts often used interchangeably in the literature. According to Kemppila ; Lonnqvist (2003), work productivity defined as input divided by output. . Hence, work productivity is a narrower concept compared to work performance. It is also important to know the differences between causal variables and indicators of work performance. According to Fayers ; Hand (2002), causal variable is determine or predict the degree of work performance of an individual whereas indicators are replications of work performance ( Koopmans et.al, 2011) For instance, job satisfaction is known as determination of work performance (Judge, Bono Thoreson ; Patton, 2001) whereas work quality is an indicator of work performance ( Campbell, 1990). Thus until now there is no clear agreement exists on what exactly establishes individual work performance ( Koopmans, et.al, 2011).
Work attitude and performance of adult workers influences by their wishes, needs and goals in their life (Lim et.al, 2012). Based on the author’s viewpoint, it is essential to understand factors influences work performance in order to accomplish the organization’s needs with the intention to lead employees to meet minimum standard to achieve their personal goal. According to Griffin (2004), work performance is the overall objective accomplished by certain employees. Based on the viewpoint by Hughes et.al (2008), work performance includes individual behaviour which is related to the production of services and goods. So, employees work performance is an important indicator because it creates the overall organization performance. This performance result extracted from the ability of employees and their efforts towards accomplishing organization’s target. Researchers such as Schermerhorn (2000), expressed that work performance is contributed by employees in order to accomplish the organization goals. The author also argued that when the quality and productivity increases so this will leads to the overall efficiency of organizational performance improvement as well. Waldman(1994) pointed out that organization management preferences is to utilize work performance as an indicator of subordinate performance due to the differences of personality and individual ability. It is further argue that those subordinates who work with the organization that are willing to provide them with development activities may feel the obligation to contribute back towards their organization through high work performance (Lee and Bruvold, 2003).
Viswesvaran (1993) developed 10 dimensions of individual work performance based on the conceptual grouping of 486 measures of work performance found in the literature . According to the overall job performance, he differentiated the dimensions of productivity, quality of work, job knowledge, communication competence, effort, leadership, administrative competence, interpersonal competence, and compliance with/acceptance of authority. For this study, the research utilized four out of ten dimensions of Viswesvaran which are productivity, quality, communication competence and job knowledge because these dimensions are the key factors that contributes to employees’ work performance issues in Malaysian banks.