employees performance orientation

Abstract

The Employees Performance Orientation questionnaire is a psychological instrument designed to measure individual performance-related attitudes and behavioral symptoms in a professional context, primarily through self-reflection. Developed by Hippler and Krüger (1982), the scale consists of 26 items distributed across three distinct dimensions of Performance Orientation: Career Orientation, Performance and Success-Enhancing Work Attitudes, and Fear of Failure. The items are formulated to capture the performance-related characteristics and behavioral symptoms an interviewee perceives in themselves. The instrument is validated and primarily used in German-speaking contexts to assess individuals transitioning into new roles or analyzing motivational structures in the workplace.

Keywords

Performance orientation, Career orientation, Work attitude, Fear of failure, Achievement motivation, Occupational psychology, Criterion validity, Job performance, Leistungsorientierung.

Authors

Hippler, H. J. and Krüger, H.

Purpose

The primary purpose of the Employees Performance Orientation questionnaire is to systematically assess the individual disposition towards achievement and performance within a professional environment. The instrument focuses on capturing self-perceived behavioral and attitudinal symptoms rather than underlying motivational tendencies, reflecting how individuals experience, anticipate, or recall performance-themed situations.

The scale was developed specifically for research concerning the integration of employees into new occupational fields, such as following a job change or upon completion of vocational training. By segmenting performance orientation into three measurable components, the questionnaire provides a nuanced view of how employees approach professional challenges, long-term career planning, and reactions to potential setbacks or failure, thereby contributing to organizational and career development research.

Construct

The core construct measured is Performance Orientation (Leistungsorientierung), defined by the authors as the aggregate of individual attitudes, stances, or inclinations related to one’s own performance behavior. This concept is rooted in motivational theoretical approaches (e.g., Heckhausen, Johnson & Stinson), which propose that personality traits significantly influence individual behavior in performance-related contexts, explaining differing levels of persistence, reaction to stress, and aspiration levels among individuals under comparable work conditions.

The construct is operationalized through three theoretically distinct sub-dimensions:

• I. Career Orientation: This dimension captures primarily extrinsic orientations toward professional success. It includes behavioral symptoms that favor career advancement, such as long-term future planning, resilience, assertiveness, social competitiveness, and high aspiration levels. This factor aligns with the stereotype of a highly driven, successful manager.
• II. Performance and Success-Enhancing Work Attitudes: This dimension focuses on intrinsic, task-related performance orientations. Key aspects include persistence (Beharrlichkeit), adherence to professional standards and quality (Anspruchsniveau) in task completion, and determination in pursuing an established course of action.
• III. Fear of Failure (Furcht vor Misserfolg): This dimension encompasses aspects of success orientation and persistence but is characterized by a negative emotional or cognitive connotation. It measures anxieties related to performance, including worrying before important events, fear of embarrassment, anxiety about damage to one’s reputation, and a preference for tasks with predictable, short-term outcomes. This factor explicitly corresponds to the Fear of Failure dimension within Heckhausen’s achievement motivation framework.

Validity

Evidence for the scale’s Criterion Validity was established by examining correlations with relevant organizational and individual outcomes:

1. Perceived Role Conflicts: Significant mean differences were observed in perceived sender conflicts and feedback deficits depending on the level of Performance and Success-Enhancing Work Attitudes. This confirms the theoretical assumption that individual performance orientation influences the perception of stressful job characteristics, such as role conflicts. Furthermore, results indicated that highly career-oriented employees possess the capacity to absorb operational uncertainty and capitalize on perceived deficiencies in managerial quality.
2. Organizational Commitment: Significant mean differences were found regarding organizational commitment based on Career Orientation scores. This finding challenges earlier theories (e.g., Naase, 1978) suggesting limited loyalty and high mobility among career-oriented individuals who view organizational affiliation merely as a means to higher professional goals. The results support a revision of the thesis concerning the greater mobility of career-oriented professionals.
3. Gender Differences: Significant mean differences were detected in Career Orientation between female and male participants. Women exhibited a lower expression of Career Orientation but a higher level of Fear of Failure compared to their male counterparts.
4. Professional Experience: Significant differences were observed in Performance and Success-Enhancing Work Attitudes, where early-career employees reported lower scores than those with established professional experience.

Reliability

The internal consistency of the scale was measured using Cronbach’s Alpha across the total scale and its sub-dimensions. The reliability estimates demonstrate adequate to strong internal consistency for the instrument:

• Total Test Alpha: .85
• Career Orientation (Dimension I): .87
• Performance and Success-Enhancing Work Attitudes (Dimension II): .74
• Fear of Failure (Dimension III): .74

Factor Analysis

The structural integrity of the Performance Orientation dimensions was investigated through item analysis and Factor Analysis. A Principal Component Model followed by Varimax rotation was performed on the second sample (N = 87) to confirm that the data reflected the heterogeneity of the three theoretically defined components.

The factor analysis results supported the three-dimensional structure, collectively explaining 45.5% of the total variance. The explained variance for each dimension was distributed as follows:

• Career Orientation (I): 53.8%
• Performance and Success-Enhancing Work Attitudes (II): 29.1%
• Fear of Failure (III): 17.2%

Item-Total Correlations ($r_{it}$) calculated using Sample 2 ranged between .36 and .73, indicating that the individual items effectively measure the intended dimension.

Instrument

Test Type: Self-report questionnaire / Psychological scale

Format: The instrument consists of 26 items utilizing a 7-point categorical scale. Response options range from 1 = stimme überhaupt nicht zu (completely disagree) to 7 = stimme voll und ganz zu (completely agree).

Language Available: German (deutsch)

Population Group: Employed professionals and working adults.

Age Group: Not explicitly specified, but implied working age population.

Population Details: Scale development utilized three distinct samples (N=50, N=87, N=45). Participants included scientific staff at the University of Mannheim, public librarians, and employees in commercial organizations spanning managerial, technical, and commercial roles.

Test Methodology: Respondents are instructed to select the scale value that best reflects their normal behavior concerning statements about their professional activity. Scoring involves summing the unweighted item values separately for each of the three dimensions (Career Orientation, Work Attitudes, and Fear of Failure).

Keywords

Leistungsmotiv, Career Orientation, Work Performance, Job Satisfaction, Persistence, Motivational tendencies, Hippler and Krüger, Organizational behavior.

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: Not available.

Affiliation Email addresses: Not available.

Correspondence Address: Not available.

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

Test Year: 1982 (Initial publication of the development report).

Permissions/Fee: Information regarding permissions and fees is not available in the source content.

Status of Development: Validated (validiert).

Reference’s

The scale development and theoretical foundation reference the following primary works:

• Ehlers, W. (1965). Fragebogen zur Leistungsmotivation.
• Heckhausen, H. (1963). Entwicklung und Erprobung eines Fragebogens zur Messung des Leistungsmotivs. Psychologische Forschung, 26, 61-98.
• Heckhausen, H. (1989). Motivation und Handeln (2. Aufl.). Berlin: Springer.
• Herrmann, T. (1991). Die Kognitive Wende in der Psychologie.
• Hippler, H. J., & Krüger, H. (1982). Der Fragebogen zur Leistungsorientierung von Berufstätigen. Unveröffentlichter Forschungsbericht, Universität Mannheim.
• Johnson, T. W., & Stinson, J. E. (1975). Role ambiguity and role conflict: Are there differences? Academy of Management Journal, 18, 150-163.
• Naase, W. (1978). Karriereplanung und Mobilität.
• Tent, L. (1963). Fragebogen zur Erfassung des Leistungsmotivs.
• Vontobel, J. (1970). Fragebogen zur Leistungsmotivation.

Items of the employees performance orientation

IMPORTANT: The following scale items must be preserved in their original language and must not be changed in any way.

I = Karriereorientierung

II = Leistungs- und erfolgsfördernde Arbeitshaltungen

III = Furcht vor Misserfolg