Category: Self-Efficacy

Self-efficacy is about how one’s self controls or modulates his/her behavior towards on achieving goals. It is one’s beliefs about his abilities to do the task. This pertains to the confidence of an individual that he/she can succeed because of his or her motivations and self-esteem. It also deals with our ability to overcome phobias or fear. The product of our experiences, emotions, and observation is our self-efficacy. Albert Bandura originally developed that concept. (Hopper, 2019).

Academic performance is the students’ achievements measurement across various academic activities or subjects. Students achievements typically measured using grade point average (GPA), classroom performance, graduation rates and standardized tests result. (Williams, E., 2018)

Academic performance measured the students’ success, in educational institutions. It also measures how the standards set from an institution or local government are being meet. A person who possesses this sense of self-efficacy has the capability to assume that he or she can fulfill things positively despite of their failures or mistakes (Bell, 2018).

Meral, M. et. al. (2012), indicated that the students’ beliefs about the ability to specialize new skills and task academically is self-efficacy. It is said to be concerned with people’s stands about the capabilities to manage the actions and thoughts. In other words, the beliefs of an individuals in holding their abilities or outcome of their efforts influence in great ways how they will behave. It is the measure of control of one’s feelings, thoughts, or actions in a way of having a moderate or strong beliefs on their selves.

On study of Cantrell et.al., (2013), they discussed the “Patterns Of Self-efficacy Among College Students In Developmental Reading” , they examined first-year college students’ self-efficacy beliefs and its sources who’s taking developmental reading courses. This study found out that the personal and academic context of those students are lower compare to those who’s taking credit-bearing English course.

Another study from Abd-Elmotaleb and Saha (2013) entitled “The Role of Academic Self-efficacy as a Mediator Variable between Perceive Academic Climate and Academic Performance”, examines the mediating influence of academic self- efficacy on the link between academic climate and academic performance among the students of university. The perspective of which students with high sense of efficacy has the capacity to accept more challenging tasks, high ability to organize the time, increase persistence to face obstacles, show lower anxiety levels, show flexibility using various strategies of learning, and have a high ability in adapting different educational environments was understood..

On that finding, this study recommended that using counseling strategies, academic self-efficacy can be enhance. Also, using Multiple regression analysis, this shows that academic self-efficacy and the other variables has strong positive effect.

Furthermore, on the study of Huang C., (2013), entitled “Gender Differences in Academic Self-efficacy:A Meta-analysis”, found out that, females showed higher language arts self-efficacy than males. Meanwhile, males executed higher computer, mathematics and social sciences self-efficacy than females, and age also varied in the gender differences..

Another study of Honicke, T., and Broadbent, J. (2016), as they discussed the academic self-efficacy influences on academic performance of the students. It said there, that these are moderately correlated with each other. Several mediating and moderating factors were identified, including effort regulation, deep processing strategies and goal orientations. It indicates too that social cognitive theory is undoubtedly one of the most prominent theories which attempt to explain the processes of how an individual drives and regulates behavior.

The workplace is an essential setting for mental health protection, mainly stressors like tensions, worry, hassle, strain and trauma. On average the majority of employed people spend maximum of their time at the workplace. So therefore it is the employer’s obligation to hold the accountability and to provide a safe and hazard-free workplace, they should have ample opportunities to promote individual health and foster a healthy working setting. With the use of effective workplace programs and guidelines can decrease health risks factors and improve the quality of life. It will also positively impact many unintended expenditures such as absenteeism and worker efficiency. In order to improve the health of employees, companies can develop some wellness values that is employee- arranged; this will provide supportive environments where safety is ensured and health can occur. They can also engage in various health plans at the workplace. Workplace interventions are usually programs or policies implemented by an organization which aim to protect individuals from physical or psychological harm. These interventions can also be delivered in a form of training that aims to improve skills or develop new skills. These interventions may influence organizational values and culture, employee behavior or workplace environment.

Humanizing employees well-being and reducing daily stressors can have several benefits for organizations, from increasing performances, building bonds with colleagues and reducing ailments and absenteeism rates.

Stress management interventions can be defined as a course of activities that are used by organizations to improve employee’s wellbeing and to reduce stressors in their lives, mainly by lecturing about the causes of stress or by reducing the impact of stress on an individual. The aim of this essay is to discuss interventions in reducing stress at the workplace in order to facilitate growth and development. With the training to ensure the employee wellbeing and to condense levels of stress, mainly by speaking about the main contributing factors of stress or decreasing the impact of stress on an individual. In this essay our aim is to state different stress management interventions to create the effectiveness of the different types of interventions in improving their psychological aspects of well-beings. Firstly, we introduce the positives with self-efficacy in the workplace along with some stress management interventions and provide some examples of the interventions. Second we discuss the effectiveness and finally we state what works best. This is vital as we seek employee’s mental health, physical health, job attitudes and holistically the improvements in job satisfaction.

According to Albert Bandura (1977) self- efficacy is the belief we have in our abilities and competencies, a pioneer humanist of the concept of self-efficacy, defined as “people’s beliefs about their capabilities to produce designated levels of performance that exercise their influence over events that affect their lives” (Bandura, 1994). Self-efficacy governs how people think and feel about themselves. Self-efficacy also known as social cognitive theory or social learning theory in all aspects impact the cognitive processes of individuals, it controls our thoughts, actions, emotions and motivation. It plays a significant role in modelling our perception of life experiences. Bandura thought that our social skills, observational skills, social upbringings and cognitive skills are built on our perception. The self-system is the backbone of our personality and self-efficacy is an essential factor of it. (Bandura, 1977).

Contemporary mental health interventions rely essentially in endorsing wellbeing by improving self-efficacy. Since self-efficacy affects mainly the majority of lives. Our aim in this paper is to build, improve and maintain self-efficacy for a better living.

Most companies today focus on hiring people after screening them and have observed how productive or fruitful they are. When there is a high-level of self-efficacy it predicts high rates of productivity, better workplace connections and a high output level, and this is only rational for organizations to service and promote self-efficacy among their staff, and there are ways in doing so (Kanter, 2006)

Firstly, Training and development can increase employee self- efficacy, companies can implement training programs and orientations that would encourage self-efficacy. These courses are usually focused on workstation loads and provides an opportunity for employees to come closely together and build a sturdy sense of self-perception.

Second is the systematic self-management this is where supervisors and team leaders can provide assistance with members of staff to increase their self-efficacy by setting realistic goals, allowing their personal standpoints, prioritizing objectives and helping them with time-management and structural times.

Thirdly is the development of the working setting that is conducive for all members of staff. An exceedingly satisfying work environment is where people can assist and support each other, work in harmony, collaboratively building skills and acceptance of positive criticisms. This positivity will only aid in high qualities of employee worth and better performance culture.

Thirdly is ensuring appropriate job demands, a great way to enrich employee efficacy is to maintain clear and straightforward guidelines of the job criteria and functions and mainly choosing the best suited applicant who are fit for the job title. Personality testing and screening are measures that can recognize individual’s skills and competencies that is well-matched. This will avoid the probability of disappointment and underachievement. Self-efficacy enables us to development everyday despite our injustices life puts in front of us at time (Bandura). Having a positive affirmation in oneself helps us walk through life at all stages. Our trust in our potencies and capabilities helps us to sustain motivation and to become more resilient in bearing stress and harsh conditions.

Self-efficacy has three extents: magnitude, the level of a difficult task a person can achieve; strength, the conviction regarding magnitude as strong or weak; and generality, the extent to which the expectation is generalized across given situations. An employee’s intelligence of capability influences his perception, performances and motivation (Bandura 1997). We hardly try to perform a task when we expect to be unproductive. It is common knowledge that people undertake tasks that they will be able to complete successfully.

Self-efficacy influences the goals and aims employees choose for themselves. Employee will low levels of self-efficacy tend to set low goals for themselves while employees with high level of self-efficacy set high personal goals. Employees with high self-efficacy will usually work hard to learn how to try new task and will therefore be confident that their efforts will be successful. Employees with little self-efficacy may exert less interest when learning and performing intricate tasks, because they are not sure if their efforts will lead to success. Albert Bandura and Edwin Locke (2003) concluded that self-efficacy is a powerful determinant of job performance. Bandura (1997) has identified four prime causes of self-efficacy which include past performances, vicarious experience, verbal persuasion and emotional cues.

According to Bandura, the most important source of self-efficacy is past performances. This is where employees who have succeeded in their job are likely to be more confident to undergo similar task in the future due to their high levels of self-efficacy. People on duty at the job like the superiors within the company can boost self-efficacy through professional development, coaching and supportive leadership and rewards for improvements.

A second source of self-efficacy is through vicarious experience. Observing a co-worker succeeded in a particular task may lift self-efficacy. For example, if an employee starts eating healthy and started exercising this can inspire you to practice similar to the person you are modeling.

The third source of self-efficacy is through verbal persuasion. Basically this involves convincing people that they have the ability to fulfil and succeed at a specific duty. The best way for a leader to use verbal persuasion is through the Pygmalion effect. The Pygmalion e4ffect is a form of self-fulfilling prophecy in which believing something to be true and can make it true. Rosenthal and Jacobson’s (1968) classic study is a good example of the Pygmalion effect. An example of this can be one telling a person the opposite of the true when in really they believe and achieve. The influence of persuasion or encouragement would be liable on the leader’s integrity, previous relationship with employees and the leader’s influence in the organization.

Finally, Bandura argues that emotional cues dictates self-efficacy. A person who experiences challenges during a task and discovers it is too tough is likely to experience certain physiological symptom like sweaty palms, headaches and a racing heart. The symptoms can vary from person to person, however if this persist the mare fact of experiencing anxieties can result in poor performance. Self-efficacy has been related to other motivation theories. Edwin Locke and Gary Latham suggest that goal-setting theory and self-efficacy theory complement each other. For instance, when a leader set challenging aims for employees, this will result in employees having a high level of self-efficacy and they will set higher goals for their own performance benefit. Employer will predict this as assertion of capability in doing the task and it will only boost the worker talent. This sets in the foundation and gesture in a psychological process in which you are more confident in yourself and thus creating higher personal goals that would allow them to perform better within the organization.

According to Bandura (2009), self-efficacy refers to the cognitive perception of competency and effectiveness in carrying out occupational duties and goals. The expectations of self-efficacy determine whether an individual are able to exhibit coping behavior and how long effort will be sustained when facing of obstacles. Individuals who have high self-efficacy will exert effort, then well executed, and leads to successful outcomes. While individual who have low self-efficacy are likely to give up early and fail. People’s self-efficacy beliefs in determine their level of motivation, as reflected in how much effort they will exert in an endeavour and how long they will persevere in the face of obstacles (Bandura, 1989).

In the wake of many corporate scandals, involve accounting firms, whistleblowing has become an important in monitoring mechanism. According to Holtzhausen (2007), whistleblowing is understood as the act of disclosing information on malpractices that need to be corrected or terminated in order to protect public interest. Whistleblowing usually focused on potentially illegal, unethical or improper acts. Whistleblowing can be communication or information sharing that is unauthorized by the target organization; communication to an empowered entity. It is also the potential or desired to corrective the outcome or consequence. There have a lot of countries has legality of whistleblowing that create mechanisms for reporting wrongdoing and provide legal protections to whistle blowers. Countries such as Australia, Canada, European Union, India, United Kingdom, United States and etc.

In an audit context, whistleblowing is such of conflict for auditors. The auditor needed to maintain confidentiality and loyalty to the client. However, the auditor may be required to report sensitive information that could harm the client and they will be perceived as being disloyal. In the Enron case, it has been observed that none of the audit staff of Arthur Andersen, Enron’s auditors, blew the whistle when the partner-in-charge of the audit advised the audit managers to shred the documents (Toffler & Reingold, 2003). Sometimes, the audit staff do not want to reluctant to whistle-blow on colleagues because this might effect to their future interpersonal relationships.

Based on the journal we found, there have the relation between both self-efficacy and whistleblowing, they can be impact for each other, such as effects of Self-efficacy on Whistle-blowing in Public Procurement. Before action, an individual will assess their skills and capabilities, then transform those skills into actions. The stronger the confidence, may serve stronger effort, then greater perseverance and resiliency in the face of adversity of whistleblowing. According to Kumar and Lal (2006), a low sense of self-efficacy is associated with stress, depression, anxiety, and helplessness in terms of feeling.

Furthermore, there are also some of the relevant information that can be impact to self-efficacy and whistleblowing, attitudes toward whistle-blowing and whistle-blowing intentions. Attitudes toward the behaviour are the sum of the individual’s beliefs of the behavioural consequences and evaluation of the consequences. Individual’s attitudes will have direct effect on whistleblowing intentions, they will assessing how favourable or unfavourable be to whistleblowing.

The second relevant information that can be impact to self-efficacy and whistleblowing is perceived behavioural control and whistle-blowing intentions. According to Ajzen (1991), the greater the individual’s perceived behavioural control, the more possibility for his or her intention to perform the behaviour that based on the theory of planned behaviour. Ajzen (1991) also argued that perceived behavioural control is closely related to Bandura’s (1977) concept of self-efficacy and Bandura (1997) argued that self-efficacy is a person’s expectancy about whether he or she can successfully perform the behaviour in question.

Personal responsibility for reporting and whistle-blowing intentions can also be the relevant information that can be impact to self-efficacy and whistleblowing. According to Curtis (2006, p. 193), it argues that responsibility for reporting can be “influenced by feelings of social responsibility to colleagues and employer, attitudes towards profession, the number of other observers and personal ethical values.” This is because individual will normally feel that they have obligation to report questionable acts by their moral value of right and wrong or role responsibility to their jobs and organisation. Curtis (2006) further argued that when there is many individuals observe the wrongdoing and remain silent, the diffusion of personal responsibility may occur, thus reducing personal responsibility to prevent harm to the organisation or society, this is called the bystander effect. However, Miceli et al. (1991) found that internal auditors were more likely to whistle-blow, when it was perceived as part of their role responsibility.

We have also found the research about self-efficacy and whistleblowing which is an investigation of students’ willingness to report threats of violence in campus communities. Based on their research, it was almost seventy percent (69%) of students endorsed being “at least somewhat willing” to report a threatening peer. Self-efficacy toward service is not sufficient by itself to facilitate threat reporting. The important thing is the college need to let the students to trust in the college support system and campus connectedness in order to have a positive impact.

A teacher belief in his/her ability to achieve goals is called teacher self-efficacy. Teachers’ self-efficacy model was developed based on a widespread review of the literature by Tschannen-Moran et al. (1998). Four major sources that have major influences on efficacy beliefs are included and each contribute to both the investigation of the teaching task and to self-perceptions of teaching competence.

Mastery Experiences, one of the most powerful sources, can be occurred when people challenge to do something and are successful. People believe more that they will be able to do something new if it is similar to something they have already done well. So, they are the most efficient way to increase self-efficacy. The second factor influencing self-efficacy is Modeling and Vicarious Experiences. Observation of the successes and failures of other people who are like to one’s self affects self-perceptions of efficacy through two processes. First, it gives knowledge. Second, people partly evaluate their proficiencies using social comparisons. We often talk people into believing that they have the capacity to achieve what they want to accomplish. It is Verbal Persuasion. It may involve a pep talk or detailed performance comment from a supervisor or a colleague (Bandura, 1994). Physiological and Emotional Cues: The degree of emotional and physiological arousal that a person experiences in a teaching situation (either of anxiety or excitement) adds to self-perceptions of teaching competences. Self-efficacy is self-perception of competence. It is not actual level of competence (Bandura, 1977, cited in Tschannen-Moran et al., 1998).

The model has two dimensions (analyzing the teaching task and its context, and self-perceptions of teaching competence) that are consistent with two factors of general teaching efficacy (GTE) and personal teaching efficacy (PTE). Teacher efficacy is context-specific. The factors such as; the assessment of students’ abilities, instructional strategies, resources provided by school, and physical condition of teaching environment are included in the analyzing of teaching task. Principal support, collegial support, and school climate are contextual factors. In addition, Bandura’s (1994) four sources affect these two dimensions.

Classroom Management Styles

The teachers’ ability to cooperatively manage time, space, resources, students’ roles and behaviors to provides a climate that encourages learning is classroom management (Alberto and Troutman, 1986). There are a large number of management styles that teachers reveal. In this study, the classroom management style was based on three types of noninterventionist, interactionist and interventionist by Wolfgang and Glickman (1980).

Wolfgang and Glickman (1980) took various psychological interpretations of child development and categorized them into three basic beliefs:

1. An inner unfolding of potential make the child develop
2. A result of external conditions make the child develop
3. The interaction of inner and outer forces make the child develop.

According to Wolfgang and Glickman (1980), the first one points out that the child has an inner potential that need to look for its appearance in real world to develop. Any such inner potential is rejected to admit by the second one. It just emphasizes the development of the human organisms as the cause of the outer environment in its unusual way. Third item highlights that the interaction of inner potential of an individual and external forces of the environment shapes the child.

Using these descriptions of social learning, three schools of psychological thought (the Noninterventionist, the Interventionist, and the Interactionist) were defined by Wolfgang and Glickman (1980). The Noninterventionist classroom management model is commonly referred to as humanistic or student-centered and it is based on a philosophical and psychological belief system. The Interactionalist models of classroom management are based on both behavior and feelings. The Interventionist systems of classroom management are based on the basic tenets of behavioral psychology (Levin and Nolan, 1991).

Teacher Self-Efficacy

Teacher self-efficacy is the teacher’s belief in his or her ability to bring about desired outcomes in students. Teacher self-efficacy consists of two concepts: personal teaching efficacy and general teaching efficacy. Personal teaching efficacy is defined as self-evaluation of one’s ability to successfully bring about positive changes in students’ behaviour in the classroom. General teaching efficacy is defined as teacher’s belief in his or her ability to manage the classroom and to create teaching-learning process effectively regardless of external factors such as home environment and family background. In this study, it will be determined by the mean values of teachers’ response to self-efficacy items in the questionnaire.

Classroom management Style

Classroom management style is defined as the styles that the teachers use to effectively support and facilitate academic, behavioural, social-emotional, and motivational outcomes of students. In this study, the most common type of teachers’ classroom management style will be determined by the mean values of the selected teacher responses to the items of classroom management style (noninterventionist, interactionist and interventionist).

Self-esteem has been defined differentially in the literature, but the central component in all the definitions is that it refers to an individual’s general sense of self-worth or value in oneself. The concept of self-efficacy, on the other hand, has been defined as an individual’s belief in his or her capacity to succeed in specific situations, or an individual’s conviction that he or she can successfully execute the behavior required to generate desired outcomes (Judge, 2009).

In explaining the dynamics of how self-esteem affects self-efficacy, it is important to note that low sense of self-worth will incapacitate the ability of an employee to succeed in specific situations due to lack of a motivating force. It can be argued that the general sense of self-worth acts as the fulcrum upon which the employee can mold specific behaviors and motivations that can encourage or discourage the achievement of self-efficacy (Judge, 2009). In job-related contexts, mentoring and rewarding employees can help in enhancing their sense of self-worth, which in turn increases belief in their capacity to succeed by maintaining high performance and productivity levels (Baack, 2012).

A major dynamic in the self-esteem concept relates to employee growth need strength, which implies that employees with a high sense of self-worth will demonstrate high growth need strength within the organization. This relates to the concept of self-efficacy in terms of employees demonstrating the capacity to succeed through a high level of internal motivation, craving to avail high-quality work, as well as satisfaction with the job (Baack, 2012; Judge, 2009). As an example, organizational change is one of the internal forces that impact my self-efficacy as an administrative supervisor, especially in terms of exhibiting a negative perception that I may be unable to perform well in change contexts.

Communication and Team Building

Because norms are the rules governing behaviors in a team, it is of critical importance to identify them as they enhance team cohesiveness through ensuring that members share a common set of expectations about behaviors and contribution to the team (Baack, 2012). As postulated by this author, norms not only summarize group influence processes including the rule for recruitment and maintenance of membership but also avail important organizational functions when they clarify the team’s key values and convey a sense of identity.

The importance of clear and open communication during the initial team development phases cannot be understated, especially upon recognition of the fact that recognizing and defining good communication is often considered as the first step in developing a team. Clear communication is essential during team development as it provides an enabling framework for arising disputes to be handled quickly and constructively, cuts down on time lost to misinterpretation, facilitates team cohesiveness, instills confidence in members to provide the needed input, and facilitates understanding among members (McComb, Schroeder, Kennedy, & Vozdolska, 2012). It is important to underscore the fact that work teams can only achieve their set goals and objectives through clear and open communication.

Lastly, at a personal level, I was once in a team that had been created with the objective of identifying why the department/unit was experiencing low morale levels among the servicemen/marines. However, the team leader relied on the Internet to communicate with members, thereby effectively incapacitating any form of face-to-face communication among team members. The team failed to achieve its mandate due to the ineffective Internet-based communication technique.

References

Baack, D. (2012). Organizational Behavior. San Diego, CA: Brdgepoint Education.

Judge, T.A. (2009). Core self-evaluations and work success. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18(1), 58-62.

McComb, S., Schroeder, A., Kennedy, D., & Vozdolska, R. (2012). The five Ws of team communication. Industrial Management, 54(5), 10-13.

Abstract

Albert Bandura’s social cognitive theory presents an analysis human self – development, adaptation and change from a human action perspective and presents the notion that individuals have an ability to exercise some measure of control over their thought processes, motivations, affects and actions through the workings of their personal agency. Self – efficacy, which can be translated somewhat loosely into a layman’s language as being confidence has an influence on the ability of individuals to achieve even prior to the time when individuals commence their struggle to achieve a desirable goal. This laboratory report presents an examination of Bandura’s views on self – efficacy through the analysis of a data set related to the levels of self – efficacy and performance discrepancy amongst 131 students who are studying statistics at the college level. Results indicate that the analysis of the data set broadly supports Albert Bandura’s theories on self – efficacy.

Declaration

I hereby certify that, except where cited in the text, this laboratory report is the result of the research carried out by the author of this report. The main content of the laboratory report which has been presented contains original data that was collected by the author.

_____________________________________________

(Name and Signature of Author)

This laboratory report is submitted in fulfilment for the requirements related to practical data collection and analysis associated with self efficacy amongst students studying statistics.

Introduction

According to Albert Bandura, the pioneering psychologist who researched the topic, self – efficacy can be defined as “the belief in one’s capabilities to organize and execute the courses of action required to manage prospective situations (McKeena, 2007, Part 2). The concept of self – efficacy is an important component of Albert Bandura’s social cognitive theory (Wikipedia, 2007, “Social Cognitive Theory”). It has been asserted by Bandura that the personal beliefs which an individual has about self – efficacy for some task or goal influences their action, effort, perseverance, resiliency to adversity and the realisation of goals that are associated with the efforts that they put into the accomplishing a task or achieving a goal. This means that the beliefs that an individual has about their capability have an impact on any outcomes before any action for the achievement of a goal or the performance of a task has occurred. Although Bandura accepts that the influences of the environment, interpersonal factors and behaviours do influence the manner in which a human functions, an increase in perceived self – efficacy can influence the likelihood of success in the accomplishment of a task or the achievement of a goal. Some of the factors that do influence the sense of self – efficacy which an individual has about their ability in something is often influenced by performance accomplishments, verbal persuasion, emotional arousal and experiences that an individual develops as a result of sharing with others. This means that encouragement, learning from others and positive experiences associated with efforts that have been directed towards the achievement of a goal or in the accomplishment of a task are likely to enhance the self – efficacy of an individual and will probably lead to a higher probability of success. Self – efficacy and differences in gender have been a subject of research and in general it has been discovered that male men and adolescents tend to be more confident then girls and women when it comes to having confidence in their ability to achieve success in a complicated and difficult undertaking (Schunk, 2000, Pp. 10).

Studying mathematics or statistics has been considered as being an academically challenging task and in view of this, the academic achievement of students in mathematics or statistics courses should be able to be used to examine the validity of Bandura’s views about the notion of self – efficacy. Many researchers have previously attempted to examine the validity of Bandura’s views related to self – efficacy through an examination of student performance in academically challenging tasks, such as dissertation writing (Lane, 2003, Pp. 1 – 8).

This laboratory report presents the results of an analysis of student performance and self – efficacy data for 131 students who were studying statistics at the college level. The sample was not balanced across gender lines and a total of 20 male students were included, against a total of 111 female students. Statistics related to age, sex, self – efficacy measure for likely success in the statistics course at the commencement of a semester and at its end as well as the difference between actual and expected grade in statistics for a semester and the self – efficacy related to success in statistics at the commencement of the next semester were recorded and the results were statistically analysed to see if they fitted in with the notion of self – efficacy presented by Bandura.

Methodology

Raw data which was collected for the 131 students has been presented in Appendix A, after coding into SPSS worksheet. The task of this laboratory study is to determine if the statistical analysis of the data which has been collected will support Albert Bandura’s views about self – efficacy.

It is possible to carry out statistical analysis for the data which has been collected by using a number of statistical techniques in order to make sense of the data which has been gathered. Descriptive statistics can be used to enhance an understanding of the nature of self – efficacy and performance results that have been presented by respondents and to determine characteristics associated with age and gender for the sample that is under consideration. Correlations between statistical variables are likely to deliver useful insights into thinking about what influences self – efficacy has on actual academic performance and how encouragement or setback arising out of examination performance can have an impact on self – efficacy ate the beginning of the second term.

Pearson’s Correlation Coefficient is the most often used statistical parameter that is used for determining correlations between statistical variables. When performing correlation analysis between statistical variables, the following sets of ranges for the Pearson’s Correlation Coefficient indicate weak to strong relationships between variables (Bryman, 2005, Chapter 8):

– r = 0.01 to 0.20 indicates weak relationship

– r = 0.21 to 0.50 indicates moderate relationship

– r= 0.51 to 0.80 indicates a strong relationship

– r= 0.81 to 1 indicates a very strong relationship

It is possible to check for the level of correlations between various statistical variables of interest and the researcher can choose what investigations they may want to carry in regard to the level of correlation between various statistical variables from the survey instrument.

Partial correlation using the Pearson r coefficient is also possible with SPSS. This statistical technique is often used in social sciences and the technique makes it possible for researchers to determine the correlation between two variables while holding one or more variables constant (Bryman, 2005, Pp. 295 – 300). Using the Pearson coefficient analysis, it should be possible to investigate the correlation between self – efficacy at the beginning of a term and the discrepancy between in results, or the relationship between discrepancy in examination results and the self- efficacy at the end of a term. It should also be possible to explore the relationship between discrepancy in examination results, self – efficacy at the end of a term and self – efficacy at the beginning of the next term. Thus, it should be possible to test if the views about self – efficacy that have been presented by Albert Bandura are reflected in the measurements for self – efficacy and examination results which were collected for the sample.

K – Means cluster analysis can be used to examine those statistical variables that are capable of being grouped, or classified, into clusters of somewhat distinct, but relatively homogeneous data sets (Norušis, 2006, Chapter 16). The researcher can then select the statistical variables that should be investigated using cluster analysis and what clustering phenomenon needs to be investigated. As an example, it may be possible to see if respondents with the same level of self – efficacy performed according to their expectations in the term examinations. It may also be possible to explore several other perspectives by using cluster analysis and other statistical techniques such as the comparison of means of distributions using the t – tests. However, it should be adequate to rely on descriptive statistics, Pearson’s Correlation Coefficient analysis and K – Means cluster analysis to say something sensible about the data that has been collected and the agreement of observation with Bandura’s views on self – efficacy.

If Albert Bandura’s notions about self – efficacy are observable in the data that was collected for the sample, then the relationships between self – efficacy at the beginning of a term should indicate a negative correlation with discrepancy in examination results, because those who have high self – efficacy should have performed well in the examinations according to expectations and will have a low level of discrepancy in examinations. Also, discrepancy in examination results will have made an impact on self – efficacy at the end of a term and self – efficacy as well as discrepancy in examination results will have a correlation with self – efficacy at the beginning on the next term. Unfortunately, because the sample is heavily biased in favour of female students, it will not be possible to try and examine relationships between self – efficacy and gender.

Data analysis for the sample has been presented and discussed in the next section.

Data Analysis

Frequency analysis of the data set which has been presented in table 1 indicates that only 20 of the 131, or 15.3 % students, were males and 111 students were females. Because of the fact that a disproportionately large number of students were females, it is not possible to use the data set that is available for the examination of relationships between self – efficacy and gender.

Descriptive analysis of the data set which has been presented in table 2, which has been presented below, indicates that the average age of the sample was 23.5 years, with the maximum age being 65 years. The average self – efficacy at the beginning of term 1 was 39.89 and on the average students had a 50 % discrepancy in expected and actual examination results, considering that the maximum discrepancy in examination results was scored as 2. The average level of self – efficacy at the beginning of term 2 declined somewhat to 39.17, as students were, on the average, slightly disheartened.

A correlation matrix which indicated the Pearson’s Correlation Coefficients (not the Pearson’s r Partial Coefficients) was prepared in order to investigate the correlations between various statistical variables in the data set and this is presented in table 3 which has been presented below. From the correlation matrix, it can be seen that self – efficacy at the beginning of term 1 is negatively correlated with age and gender and this indicates that females were less confident and younger students indicated higher levels of confidence. Self – efficacy at the beginning of term 1 was slightly negatively correlated with discrepancy in examination results and this indicated that those who were confident of success had a tendency to perform in accordance with their expectations in examinations. Self – efficacy at the end of term 1 was very strongly correlated with self – efficacy at the beginning of term 1 and very slightly negatively correlated with discrepancy in examination results. This indicated that a tendency for self – efficacy continued over time, but was very slightly modified as a consequence of performance results in examinations. Thus, those with self – confidence continued with this confidence, but performance results had a slight influence on self – efficacy.

A Pearson r partial correlation matrix was prepared with age and gender being controlled variables, whose effect was desired to be nullified and this matrix is presented in table 4 which has been presented below.

From this table it can be seen that a tendency to have self – efficacy at the beginning of term 1 was likely to result in students performing according to their expectations and a negative correlation existed between self – efficacy and discrepancy between actual and expected grade. Those who had levels of self – efficacy tended to maintain them throughout and the discrepancy in expected and actual examination results only had a sleight influence on the levels of self – efficacy. A low level of discrepancy in actual and expected examination performance had a tendency for maintaining or slightly encouraging the levels of self – efficacy.

A Pearson r partial correlation matrix was also prepared with age, gender and self – efficacy at the beginning of term 1 as controlled variables, which had the effect of eliminating the effects of these variables. This Pearson r Correlation matrix is presented in table 5, which has been presented below.

From this matrix it can be seen that self – efficacy at the beginning of term 2 is slightly POSITIVELY correlated with discrepancy in expected and actual examination performance results and this indicates that students with high levels of self – efficacy had a tendency to recover from lower then expected examination performance and were looking forward to attacking term 2 with renewed vigour. Self – efficacy at the end of term 1 was well correlated with self – efficacy at the beginning of term 2 and this implied that those who had confidence of success in statistics continued with this tendency.

K – Mean cluster analysis was used in an attempt to classify students according to their levels of self – efficacy at the beginning of term 1. A total of four clusters were utilised in the hope that the discrimination that will be provided for classification will be adequate in four clusters. The results are presented in table 6 which has been presented below.

An examination of the clusters indicates that cluster 2, with the highest number of students in a cluster numbered 57 and these students had on the average the highest level of self – efficacy of all cluster groups. Students in cluster 2 had somewhat lower then average discrepancy in actual and expected examination performance and they performed according to expectation. Their level of self – efficacy was slightly reduced as a result of examination performance at the end of term 1, but they had the highest levels of self – efficacy at the beginning of term 2 and forged ahead with attacking statistics with renewed vigour.

Students in cluster 1, consisting of 55 students had modest levels of self – efficacy at the beginning of term 1 and they had somewhat higher then average levels of discrepancy in expected and actual examination performance. These students were somewhat younger then the others. However, as a result of higher then average levels of examination discrepancy, they felt slightly frustrated and had decreased self – efficacy at the beginning of term 2.

Students in cluster 3 were the oldies who wanted to learn statistics, but had left the matter rather late in their lives. They were willing to try, but lacked self – efficacy, performing according to their expectations and lost even more confidence at the beginning of term 2. Cluster 4 students were similar to cluster 3 students, except for the fact that they were somewhat younger and had higher levels of self – efficacy.

Discussion

The results for the data analysis which have been presented in the previous section broadly support Albert Bandura’ s theories about self – efficacy being a character trait which continues despite slight knocks from reality. Those who had high levels of self – efficacy continued and performed somewhat in accordance with their expectations in examinations and their level of self – efficacy was either enhanced, if the performed in accordance to their expectations, or this was somewhat reduced if they had relatively high levels of discrepancy in their actual and expected performance.

Those who did not have high levels of self – efficacy performed poorly according to their expectations and this further reduced their self – efficacy as they received the hard knocks from performing poorly in examinations.

Thus, it pays to have positive feelings and expectations and to hurl oneself at a task with vigour. This is likely to get a difficult task done and to help with the achievement of goals.

Conclusion

From the results of the previous discussion it can be concluded that the data set that was considered broadly supported Albert Bandura’s theories about self – efficacy.

Appendix A – Raw Data for Self Efficacy in Students Studying Statistics

Raw data which was collected from 131 students who were studying statistics at college is presented below. The students presented their gender, age, discrepancy between the actual and expected grade at the end of semester examination for statistics, self – efficacy at the beginning of a semester, self – efficacy at the end of the semester and self – efficacy at the commencement of the next semester. Responses have been converted to numeric values for coding into the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) software. Thus, a gender value of ‘0’ refers to a male student and a gender value of ‘1’ refers to a female student. Self – efficacy was measured through a survey instrument and the responses have been converted into numeric values on a scale and the higher the numeric value of self – efficacy that is indicated, the more confidant a student feels about their performance in statistics. Raw data was processed and the results are presented in the analysis section of the main report.

Bibliography / References

1. Bandura, Albert. (1997). Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control. Worth Publishers, Incorporated.
2. Bryman, Alan and Cramer, Duncan. (2005). Quantitative Data Analysis with SPSS 12 and 13: A Guide for Social Scientists. Routledge.
3. Lane, Andrew M et al. (2003). Self-efficacy and Dissertation Performance among Sport Students. Journal of Hospitality, Research and Tourism Education, Vol. 2, No. 2, 2003.
4. McKenna, Eugene. (2007). Business Psychology and Organisational Behaviour: A Student’s Handbook. Psychology Press.
5. Norušis, Marija. (2006). SPSS 15.0 Statistical Procedures Companion: Chapter 16 – Cluster Analysis. Prentice Hall. Web.
6. Schunk, Dale H and Pajares, Frank. (2000). The Development of Academic Self-Efficacy. Purdue University.
7. Wikipedia. (2007). Self-efficacy. Wikipedia. Web.

Theoretical Rationale

Self-efficacy often has a major effect on the success of actions that an individual takes (Niehaus, Rudasill, & Adelson, 2012). In particular, vocational self-efficacy, which can generally be understood as the belief in one’s ability to achieve success while pursuing goals related to one’s career, and includes such factors as self-awareness and self-determination, gender role awareness, disability awareness (for individuals with disabilities), and career and transition planning, has a profound effect on how successfully one is able to achieve these goals (Ali, McWhirter, & Chronister, 2005).

It is clear that vocational self-efficacy also matters when it comes to people with disabilities; in particular, it has an effect when these individuals are in the stage of transition from high school to their adult life, be it a career or further education (Lindstrom, Harwick, Poppen, & Doren, 2012). Therefore, it is important to investigate the factors which may have an effect on the vocational self-efficacy of individuals with disabilities.

Literature Review

The amount of literature related to vocational self-efficacy of high school students with disabilities and their transition to post-school life is rather limited; therefore, several studies pertaining to vocational self-efficacy in some other contexts were also included in the literature review. It has been shown that the self-determined motivation of learners, which was significantly affected by self-efficacy, and vocational self-efficacy, in particular, had a large and statistically significant effect on students’ intentions to study further or drop out of high school (Alivernini & Lucidi, 2011). Another study has demonstrated that greater job search self-efficacy was associated with better career outcomes of university students (Guan et al., 2013).

Therefore, it is clear that vocational self-efficacy should also be a factor when it comes to students of special education schools. However, it is noteworthy that such learners face additional barriers when it comes to transition to post-school life (Lindstrom, Doren, & Miesch, 2011).

Therefore, it may be beneficial to implement interventions aimed at enhancing vocational self-efficacy of children (Koen, Klehe, & Van Vianen, 2012); for example, positive effects of such interventions on some children with disabilities (more specifically, on children with autism spectrum disorders) have been documented in a number of studies, for example, in the articles by Lee and Carter (2012) and Powers et al. (2012). In order to make such interventions more effective, it should be beneficial to know what factors affect children’s vocational self-efficacy (Michael, Cinamon, & Most, 2015). This provides grounds for investigating the effects of several possible factors on vocational self-efficacy of children studying in institutions of special education.

Purpose Statement

Such factors as the type of disability of a child and their age may have an impact on vocational self-efficacy of learners studying in special education schools. Therefore, the purpose of the current study will be to investigate whether the type of disability and a student’s age could be used to predict vocational self-efficacy scores of a group of children after an intervention aimed at enhancing their vocational self-efficacy; pre-intervention scores will also be employed as a predictor.

Hypotheses

The null hypothesis for the current study will be as follows: “The age, type of disability, and pre-intervention scores cannot be used to predict post-intervention scores pertaining to vocational self-efficacy of children with disabilities.”

The alternative hypothesis for the current study will be as follows: “The age, type of disability, and pre-intervention scores can be used to predict post-intervention scores pertaining to vocational self-efficacy of children with disabilities.”

References

Ali, S. R., McWhirter, E. H., & Chronister, K. M. (2005). Self-efficacy and vocational outcome expectations for adolescents of lower socioeconomic status: A pilot study. Journal of Career Assessment, 13(1), 40-58.

Alivernini, F., & Lucidi, F. (2011). Relationship between social context, self-efficacy, motivation, academic achievement, and intention to drop out of high school: A longitudinal study. The Journal of Educational Research, 104(4), 241-252.

Guan, Y., Deng, H., Sun, J., Wang, Y., Cai, Z., Ye, L.,…Li, Y. (2013). Career adaptability, job search self-efficacy and outcomes: A three-wave investigation among Chinese university graduates. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 83(3), 561-570.

Koen, J., Klehe, U. C., & Van Vianen, A. E. (2012). Training career adaptability to facilitate a successful school-to-work transition. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 81(3), 395-408.

Lee, G. K., & Carter, E. W. (2012). Preparing transition‐age students with high‐functioning autism spectrum disorders for meaningful work. Psychology in the Schools, 49(10), 988-1000.

Lindstrom, L., Doren, B., & Miesch, J. (2011). Waging a living: Career development and long-term employment outcomes for young adults with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 77(4), 423-434. Web.

Lindstrom, L., Harwick, R. M., Poppen, M., & Doren, B. (2012). Gender gaps: Career development for young women with disabilities. Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals, 35(2), 108-117.

Michael, R., Cinamon, R. G., & Most, T. (2015). What shapes adolescents’ future perceptions? The effects of hearing loss, social affiliation, and career self-efficacy. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 20(4), 399-407.

Niehaus, K., Rudasill, K. M., & Adelson, J. L. (2012). Self-efficacy, intrinsic motivation, and academic outcomes among Latino middle school students participating in an after-school program. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 34(1), 118-136.

Powers, L. E., Geenen, S., Powers, J., Pommier-Satya, S., Turner, A., Dalton, L. D.,…Swank, P. (2012). My Life: Effects of a longitudinal, randomized study of self-determination enhancement on the transition outcomes of youth in foster care and special education. Children and Youth Services Review, 34(11), 2179-2187.

Managing to Stay in the Dark

In their article, Fast, Burris, and Bartel (2014) address the issue of managerial self-efficacy and its role in soliciting employee voice as an important aspect of successful management. The main idea the authors promote is that a lack of self-efficacy is a factor that reduces employee voice solicitation. To understand the construct, it is necessary to examine the definitions of the article’s key concepts. First of all, managerial self-efficacy is classically understood as the managers’ “perceived ability to perform their roles successfully” (Fast, Burris & Bartel 2014, p. 1014). Further, it is argued that the perception of noncompliance with standards promotes ego defensiveness, which is primarily expressed in the unwillingness of managers to admit their mistakes or vulnerabilities. Since employee voice may serve as a source of criticism, managers with low self-efficacy tend to avoid creating environments where employee voice is welcomed and encouraged.

The authors’ hypothesis is confirmed in two studies. In the first one, it was shown that people in managerial positions with low self-efficacy are less likely than those with high self-efficacy to solicit employee input, which creates a situation where employee voice is not heard. The second study identified that such situations feature employee voice aversion, i.e. the practice in which employees who speak up about problems are discouraged, receive poor evaluation, and their feedback is not taken into consideration by the management. Also, it was declared in the second study that the main reason for employee voice aversion was ego defensiveness of managers with low self-efficacy. Such managers perceive critical judgement from their subordinates as a threat, which makes them reluctant to encourage feedback or incorporate it into their decision-making processes.

Fast, Burris, and Bartel (2014) appeal to various theories of managerial psychology to justify their hypothesis and conduct actual studies to confirm it. This approach is scientific, as it relies on both theoretical and practical research, and it makes the results valid and reliable (Northouse 2012). To make their arguments clearer and more intelligible, the authors identify four main components of their research: low managerial self-efficacy, managerial voice aversion, improvement-oriented employee voice, and ego threat. Further, the correlations among these four components are established. Lower self-efficacy means higher voice aversion and higher ego threat. Higher voice aversion means lower employee voice. This simple explanation illustrates the authors’ argument and allows analysing what should be improved in a managerial system to ensure better evaluation and continuous development, which are promoted by improvement-oriented employee voice.

In their arguments, the authors rely on the findings of many other theorists and researchers. For example, it is stressed that speaking up in organisations can be associated with both risks and benefits for an employee (Burris 2012), which is relevant to the article because voice aversion as an instrument adopted by managers with low self-efficacy is a risk for employees who can experience oppression or even be dismissed (Morrison 2014). Also, the issue of what employees are likely to speak up is addressed, and it is shown that a stronger position in an organisation, i.e. the lack of fear to be dismissed, is a primary factor that makes employees speak up (Liang, Farh & Farh 2012). Finally, it is argued that employee voice is beneficial for organisations because it improves employee performance and reduces turnover (McClean, Detert & Burris 2013). However, Fast, Burris, and Bartel (2014) go on to argue that the number of benefits is higher, as there are various aspects of an organisation’s success that can be potentially improved by soliciting employee voice and reflecting on feedback.

Concerning practical implications, several recommendations are proposed to employees who are willing to speak up in their organisation but refrain from doing so due to their apprehension about possible risks. One of the recommendations is to talk to their managers in private instead of in front of other employees. In such a situation, ego defensiveness mechanisms in managers with low self-efficacy are weaker (Fast, Burris & Bartel 2014). Also, it is recommended to ‘wrap’ criticism in praise, i.e. talk about suggestions after a compliment and before another one, which has been proposed by many other researchers, too (Aguinis, Gottfredson & Joo 2012). One more technique is expressing gratitude to a manager in order to minimise his or her feeling of threat (Cho & Fast 2012). With such an approach, an employee is more likely to be heard by the management, which is ultimately beneficial for an organisation.

From the Editors

Van Knippenberg et al. (2015) wrote an introduction to a new issue of the Academy of Management Magazine and highlighted the main subjects covered by various authors in it. However, the authors also managed to find a common theme explored in one way or another by all the articles they introduced. This theme is the role of information in management today. The main idea expressed in the editors’ foreword is that there is an abundance of information in the modern world that decision makers have to deal with, and this constitutes a principal difference from managerial models of the past and a major challenge for managers. Previously, the lack of information was an issue, which is why managers had to rely heavily on assumptions. Today, with the spread of the Internet and a more interactive model of communications, there is too much information, which emphasises the need to select relevant information and use it properly as opposed to the need to find it.

It is argued by van Knippenberg et al. (2015, p. 649) that “a key challenge in the information age is to manage this wealth of available information and channel it to productive ends.” Based on a review of academic literature, the authors claim that managers today have access to larger amounts of information than ever before in history (George, Haas & Pentland 2014). Information was always valued because it was believed that being more informed meant being able to make better decisions (Miller & Mork 2013). However, the authors state that fundamental processes of decision-making do not seem to have changed despite the growing access to information. The challenges persist because managers today have to process large amounts of information, and for that, they spend time and resources that previously went to finding information. Moreover, the issues of sorting out relevant data and identifying applicability make the process perhaps even more challenging.

Despite the fact that the article is an introduction from editors, it refers to academic sources published previously as well as those published in the issue for which the introduction was written. Citing sources makes the content reliable. Focusing on the changing role of information as the main subject, the authors also discuss such topics as technology, organisational levels, creativity, innovation, social processes, and workplace behaviour. The vastness of the addressed issues may be overwhelming, but the authors manage to structure them into an intelligible system describing the most topical issues in the context of information and management.

One of the main aspects of the effect that the development of information had on the modern world is that the extended capacities to obtain, store, process, and retrieve information have been modifying the way organisations and individuals work (Pentland 2014). One of the aspects of this change is the growing attention to selecting sources of information, and organisations have demonstrated an uneven approach to this process (Piezunka & Dahlander 2015). Work-related and nonwork issues intertwine due to wider opportunities for generating content and sharing information (Becker, Butts & Boswell 2015), which complicated the work of managers who face the need to communicate with employees more effectively. Lam, Huang, and Chan (2015) argue that proper information sharing contributes to participatory leadership, which, in turn, improves employee performance.

Upon reflecting on all these findings, van Knippenberg et al. (2015) conclude that today’s decision makers do not experience a scarcity of information; instead, their main challenge is to justify their decision under the circumstances of information overload. Since the article is an introduction, it does not feature definitive practical recommendations, but the authors stress that finding practical implications of information studies is one of the relevant topics in management today (Smets et al. 2015). One of the main challenges in this area is that the information is not only abundant but also diverse, and defining what is valid and pertinent becomes a major managerial task. A better understanding of how information works today can contribute to creating better managerial models.

The Power of Organisation and the Organisation of Power

In their article, Knights and Roberts (1982) examine the managerial understanding of the concept of power. It is argued that power is often understood as something that belongs to a person or a group of people, which, according to the authors, creates a confusion that negatively affects the internal operation of organisations. By assuming that there is possession of power, one mistakes authority for power and subsequently regards power in the context of hierarchies. Throughout the article, the authors argue that power is rather something that is in the relationships among people; particularly, between management and staff. Failure to link power to relationships leads to underestimating the role of employees in an organisation.

Many scholars have addressed the issue of power relations in the managerial context, and one of the outstanding achievements of researchers is discovering various understandings of power, some of which are considerably less beneficial for organisations than other. The confusion addressed by Knights and Roberts (1982) is linked to the theory developed by Reason (1998) that differentiates the ability to directly affect events from the ability to control the framework within which events are interpreted. The latter is a more profound understanding of power, but it is also significantly more complex, as it involves more components. If a manager sees his or her function as making decisions and enforcing them, this is a limited perspective because it overlooks various considerations of an organisation’s operation that a manager may not be aware of or be able to control. It is argued by the authors that a manager should acknowledge the role and potential contribution of employees in achieving common goals instead of regarding them as mere functions and striving for controlling them. Therefore, power is something expressed and executed in the relations and interactions between management and staff as opposed to something that is held by the management and executed through imposing regulations on the staff.

To support their arguments, Knights and Roberts reflect on relevant academic literature, including classical works on organisational psychology and division of labour. For example, an influential sociological work by Durkheim (1964) was addressed to explain the nature of coercive relations in the context of labour division. On the one hand, it makes the arguments stronger and more reliable. On the other hand, a significant consideration in the analysis of this article is that it was published 35 years ago, i.e. when the technological and informational aspects of the world were remarkably different from today’s. Although the authors logically follow the presented understanding of power relations, it can be assessed that their perspective requires reconsideration in the 21st century due to the advancements in management theory. Since 1982, many organisations have adopted the model of power that does not imply concentration or possession of power, but those organisations still face difficulties, and improving their power relations is a more topical issue today than reflecting on previous understandings of power.

However, the view proposed by Knights and Roberts (1982) remains influential, as it has inspired many studies in the area of managerial power. For example, Ahonen et al. (2013) explored power in the context of diversity and managing it. Diverse systems particularly highlight that regarding power as possession fails to promote effective relations. Another example is that some scholars have turned to the issue of compassion in the context of power and discovered that emotion and compassion is an aspect of power relations that is often overlooked when analysing the causes of decisions made by managers (Simpson, Clegg & Freeder 2013). Moreover, it is argued that failure to understand power relations and distribution misguides compassion and reduces the quality of decision-making (Simpson 2014). The idea of reconsidering the concept of power has proved to be inspirational among social scientists.

Concerning practical implications of the article, it is noteworthy that the differences between organisations in the early 1980s and today are remarkable, which is why particular guidelines that might have been proposed by Knights and Roberts (1982) may not be easily employed or directly applied in the modern context. Recent studies have been focusing on discovering hidden aspects of power and the ways in which power can be executed through shaping the context (Cutlip 2013). These subjects were not profoundly addressed before, and it is still constantly stressed by researchers that the nature of power is still far from being fully understood. There are many other things that need to be studied in order to explain how power is distributed in systems that involve human interactions and how cooperation is carried out in those systems. Future research in the area is particularly important for managers because they are those people who need to understand how power works in order to ensure better decision-making, distribution and allocation of resources, and building relations in the most effective and efficient way.

Finding the Organisation in the Communication

In their article, Taylor and Robichaud (2004) address discursive approaches to management. ‘Discursive’ means related to discourse, i.e. how people talk and what they say to one another. The role of discourses in the information age has been widely acknowledged as crucial, but it can be further argued that this role is not limited to the common understanding of effective communication. By effective communication, it is normally meant that a person or a group of people manages to convey messages explaining their thoughts or intentions to another party in a way that the messages are clear, not distorted, and the opportunities for their misinterpretation are minimal (Fielding 2006). However, this perspective posits that the communicating party initially possesses thoughts and intentions, which is why communication is seen as a process of delivery. The perspective suggested by Taylor and Robichaud is different.

Following the philosophical understanding of discourse, to which a large contribution was made by Michel Foucault, the authors argue that discourse should not be seen as a process of expression solely; rather, it should be seen also as a process of creating. When people talk, they do not only exchange content but also engage in sensemaking that may change their behaviours (Fairclough 2013). This notion of discourse as action is what the authors posit in their article, which allows examining the ways in which discourse may affect organisations and the process of organising. Taylor and Robichaud (2004, p. 395) identify two ways: first, agents, i.e. people who play the implementation role, engage in various communicative activities, which is seen as “the site where organizing occurs” and agency is actually carried out. Second, there are interpretations that underlie organising and encompass purposes of operation and definitions needed to operate, and such interpretations exist in the form of texts, i.e. in a discursive form. It is also stressed that texts are generated through the agents’ conversations, but at the same time, texts create the environment where conversations occur, so the two are highly interconnected.

In their arguments, the authors rely on advanced achievements of social sciences that are not always taken into consideration by management researchers. It is particularly important to acknowledge that, when talking to each other, people are limited to the meanings of the words that they use, although they may not realise that such limitations are in place (Dreyfus & Rabinow 2014). Therefore, communication cannot be seen as a process of information exchange; instead, it should be addressed as a process of creating meanings (Dzidowski 2014). By addressing various aspects of language and organisation, including the establishment of relations, the authors manage to provide a profound and reliable view on the discursive perspective on organisations supported by many theoretical sources.

Taylor and Robichaud (2004) show that organisations are largely affected by discursive practices of their members; some researchers went further to state that organisations are in a way products of discourses (Holman & Thorpe 2003) and should be explored as such. Although the article is more theoretical, some practical implications can be proposed. A major one is that managers should acknowledge the role of their words and the role of texts that underlie the operation of their organisations. By adopting discursive approaches, managers may gain a more profound understanding of what forces and processes affect their organisations, which ultimately contributes to improvement.

Reference List

Aguinis, H, Gottfredson, RK & Joo, H 2012, ‘Delivering effective performance feedback: the strengths-based approach’, Business Horizons, vol. 55, no. 2, pp. 105-111.

Ahonen, P, Tienari, J, Meriläinen, S & Pullen, A 2013, ‘Hidden contexts and invisible power relations: a Foucauldian reading of diversity research’, Human Relations, vol. 67, no. 3, pp. 263-286.

Becker, W, Butts, M & Boswell, W 2015, ‘Hot buttons and time sinks: the effects of electronic communication during nonwork time on emotions and work-nonwork conflict’, Academy of Management Journal, vol. 58, no. 1, pp. 763-788.

Burris, ER 2012, ‘The risks and rewards of speaking up: responses to voice in organizations’, Academy of Management Journal, vol. 55, no. 1, pp. 851– 875.

Cho, Y & Fast, NJ 2012, ‘Power, defensive denigration, and the assuaging effect of gratitude expression’, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, vol. 48, no. 1, pp. 778-782.

Clifton, J 2012, ‘A discursive approach to leadership: doing assessments and managing organizational meanings’, The Journal of Business Communication, vol. 49, no. 2, pp. 148-168.

Cutlip, SM 2013, The unseen power: public relations: a history, Routledge, London.

Dreyfus, HL & Rabinow, P 2014, Michel Foucault: beyond structuralism and hermeneutics, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Durkheim, E 1964, The division of labour, Free Press, New York.

Dzidowski, A 2014, ‘The map and the territory: sensemaking and sensebreaking through the organisational architecture’, Problemy Zarządzania, vol. 49, no. 4, pp. 29-44.

Fairclough, N 2013, Critical discourse analysis: the critical study of language, Routledge, London.

Fast, NJ, Burris, ER & Bartel, CA 2014, ‘Managing to stay in the dark: managerial self-efficacy, ego defensiveness, and the aversion to employee voice’, Academy of Management Journal, vol. 57, no. 4, pp. 1013-1034.

Fielding, M 2006, Effective communication in organisations, Juta and Company, Claremont.

George, G, Haas, MR & Pentland, A 2014, ‘Big data and management’, Academy of Management Journal, vol. 57, no. 1, pp. 321-326.

Holman, D & Thorpe, R (eds.) 2003, Management and language, Sage, London.

Knights, D & Roberts, J 1982, ‘The power of organization or the organization of power?’, Organization Studies, vol. 3, no. 47, pp. 47-63.

Lam, CK, Huang, X & Chan, SCH 2015, ‘The threshold effect of participative leadership and the role of leader information sharing’, Academy of Management Journal, vol. 58, no. 1, pp. 836-855.

Liang, J, Farh, C & Farh, J 2012, ‘Psychological antecedents of promotive and prohibitive voice: a two-wave examination’, Academy of Management Journal, vol. 55, no. 1, pp. 71-92.

McClean, E, Detert, JR & Burris, ER 2013, ‘When does voice lead to exit? It depends on leadership’, Academy of Management Journal, vol. 56, no. 1, pp. 525-548.

Miller, HG & Mork, P 2013, ‘From data to decisions: a value chain for big data’, IT Professional, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 57-59.

Morrison, EW 2014, ‘Employee voice and silence’, Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, vol. 1, no. 1, pp.173-197.

Northouse, PG 2012, Leadership: theory and practice, Sage, Los Angeles.

Pentland, A 2014, Social physics, Penguin, New York.

Piezunka, H & Dahlander, L 2015, ‘Distant search, narrow attention: how crowding alters organizations’ filtering of suggestions in crowdsourcing’, Academy of Management Journal, vol. 58, no. 1, pp. 856-880.

Reason, P 1998, ‘Political, epistemological, ecological and spiritual dimensions of participation’, Studies in Cultures, Organizations and Societies, vol. 4, no. 1, 147-167.

Simpson, AV 2014, ‘Augmenting the limitations of organizational compassion with wisdom and power: insights from Bhutan’, in ANZAM: proceedings of a conference, Australian and New Zealand Academy of Management, Melbourne, pp. 1-19.

Simpson, AV, Clegg, SR & Freeder, D 2013, ‘Compassion, power and organization’, Journal of Political Power, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 385-404.

Smets, M, Jarzabkowski, P, Burke, G & Spee, PA 2015, ‘Reinsurance trading in Lloyd’s of London: balancing conflicting-yet-complementary logics in practice’, Academy of Management Journal, vol. 58, no. 1, 932-970.

Taylor, JR & Robichaud, D 2004, ‘Finding the organization in the communication: discourse as action and sensemaking’, Organization, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 395-413.

Van Knippenberg, D, Dahlander, L, Haas, MR & George, G 2015, ‘From the editors: information, attention, and decision making’, Academy of Management Journal, vol. 58, no. 3, pp. 649-657.

Introduction

Self efficacy is termed as a personal belief on an individual ability to perform a task. The first writer to explain self efficacy in a social learning institution theory was Bandura, it was later termed social cognitive hypothesis. Self efficacy defines individuals in terms of their inner feelings, behavior and encourages people. The paper tries to analyze the connection between individual efficacies in cognitive development process.

Self efficacy determines an individual choice

As individuals grow, one is exposed to various people in that individuals get to learn different ways of reacting to a situation and types of reasoning. At times, a person feel stressed, dejected, anxious and helpless which portrays a low degree of a person self efficacy. Alternatively, an individual positive thinking forms a solid logic efficacy as it helps in the process of learning, performance that incorporates the element of intelligent decision making. Self efficacy determines an individual behavior, and individual preference on the selection of an activity. It helps in establishing individual’s measure of enthusiasm, as mirrored in the amount of effort they exercise in an activity and the period of time they are willing to carry on when faced with challenges.

Various sources of individual experiences

The various sources include person accomplishments in performing an act or the level of experience gained over some time, explicit experience, vocal influence and physiological conditions. Mastery experience explains the successes on performing specific tasks. Normally, failure discourages self efficacy, while success solidifies it. When a child outshines others in an activity like reading, it creates a positive feeling of self efficacy in doing that activity. Consequently, vicarious experiences cover what an individual learns from watching other people behavior that affects their self efficacy and inspiration. Nevertheless, the source is not vital as compared to mastery knowledge.

Verbal influence outlines the vocal remarks detailing an individual capability to perform a task. Such spoken information can reinforce self efficacy in a person. Individuals who get positive information have a superior degree of self efficacy compared to persons receiving negative remarks. The information derived from verbal influence has a chance of being weak in comparison to experiences gained from mastery and explicit situations. Physiological stimulation is another element that acts as a basis of information that has an effect on how an individual professes self efficacy. Physiological condition refers to bodily symptoms resembling nervousness, sweating, and quick heart rate together with susceptibility to stress. Although, it is a minimal source of getting information, it is still a considerable basis of information. Studies have revealed that anxiety can lead to exaggerated insight of ineptitude, gnaw presentation, and psychologically effect on persons suffering from learning difficulties.

Impacts of self efficacies in individuals

An individual past in life build up self efficacy thus enhancing ones performance. Children who believe in their inner abilities and are confident perform better in school than their fellow students. In a class environment, children with low levels of self efficacy recorded low grades as a result of lack of confidence in them. Children were tested on a mathematical solution using criteria that involved choosing them according to the level of confidence in them. Those who believe in themselves were quick to solve the mathematical problem. This is because positive attitude solidifies self efficacy in an individual hence dealing with one self doubt. This stresses the need self efficacy rather than individual ability of a person.

Conclusion

Self efficacy does not only deal with the different skills an individual has but relates to individual thoughts on a decision to perform an activity regardless of the circumstance. People with a high degree of self efficacy are comfortable in performance of an assignment in comparison with individuals with low level of individual efficacies. This is because low levels of efficacy encourages failure while high efficacy makes a person confident when making decisions and encourages one to deal with difficult situations.