Test of Motowidlo et al.'s (1997) Theory of Individual Differences in Task and Contextual Performance

Although much attention has been given to noncognitive predictors of job performance, few theories have addressed why assessments of noncognitive abilities and orientations are predictive. Drawing on the work of Motowidlo, Borman, and Schmit (1997) Borman, W. C. and Motowidlo, S. J. 1997. Task performance and contextual performance: The meaning for personnel selection research. Human Performance, 10: 99–109. [Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar], a framework is tested to explain the proposed relationships among noncognitive abilities, cognitive abilities, and procedural knowledge. In this framework, procedural knowledge, or understanding of the social and psychological context in which core business processes are embedded, is proposed as a direct antecedent of contextual performance (Borman & Motowidlo, 1993 Borman, W. C. and Brush, D. H. 1993. More progress toward a taxonomy of managerial performance requirements. Human Performance, 6: 1–21. [Taylor & Francis Online] , [Google Scholar], 1997 Borman, W. C. and Motowidlo, S. J. 1997. Task performance and contextual performance: The meaning for personnel selection research. Human Performance, 10: 99–109. [Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]). Further, both cognitive and noncognitive individual differences are proposed as antecedents of both procedural knowledge and contextual performance. Two studies, which provide initial empirical support for this framework, are presented.