Human Resource Management In The Context Of Self-Concept .

1y ago
23 Views
0 Downloads
208.72 KB
32 Pages
Last View : 4d ago
Last Download : n/a
Upload by : Gia Hauser
Transcription

Ng, Joseph Angelou Ilagan. “Management in the Context of Self-Concept and its Impact on the Job Performance ofCollege Full-Time Faculty Members at De La Salle Lipa.” AXIS: Journal of Lasallian Higher Education 5, no. 3(Institute for Lasallian Studies at Saint Mary’s University of Minnesota: 2014). Joseph Angelou Ilagan Ng, R.N., M.B.A. Readers of this article have the copyright owner’s permission toreproduce it for educational, not-for-profit purposes, if the author and publisher are acknowledged in the copy.Human Resource Management in the Context of Self-Concept and Its Impacton the Job Performance of College Full-Time Faculty Members of De La SalleLipaJoseph Angelou Ilagan Ng, R.N., M.B.A.1IntroductionHuman resource management (HRM) refers to the field of management that is concerned withthe “effective use of an organization’s human resources to improve its performance.”2 In theprocess of recruiting, selecting, maintaining and evaluating employees, HRM includes theimplementation of strategies to support their emotional and physical well-being.3 The well-beingof employees may relate to the extent to which the organization recognizes them as people whohave different personalities, and at the same time as individuals who work for the common aimof attaining organizational goals and objectives. When people are in an organization, their workquality is affected by personality, convictions and attitudes toward life. Consciously orotherwise, job performance reflects an individual’s strengths, weaknesses, and beliefs about heror his own skills and capabilities. These factors may be summed up in the term self-conceptwhich, according to Filipino psychologist Myrna M. Pasao, is the positive or negative view ofthe self. Self-concept also relates to a person’s personal adjustment and is therefore influential inmuch of an individual’s behavior and work performance.4The Pasao Self-Concept Rating Scale was used in this study to measure the self-concept ofcollege teachers. Filipino Lasallian educators are viewed as service-oriented professionals whoattend to the needs of their learners by employing their uniqueness and who seek to build goodrelationships to promote total human formation.5 Perception of one’s uniqueness and intent tobuild good relationships can be considered components of self–concept. Educators need goodself-concept to perform the tasks of being role models and building good character amongstudents.6 Retaining the best people is crucial to any organization, especially to an academicinstitution like De La Salle Lipa (DLSL).7 Because this institution considers its employees itsmost important asset, it continuously relies on the efficiency and contributions of all employeesto meet its vision and mission.8Theoretical FrameworkThis study utilized Myrna Pasao’s Theory of Self-Concept (1979) and Carl Rogers’ Theory ofPersonality (1951). The task of defining Filipino self-concept is difficult. Self-concept is a verycomplex psychological construct. The problem of defining or measuring it is magnified in thiscase by the question of “how the word Filipino is defined.”9 Pasao intended to create the theoryof the Filipino self-concept not for the purpose of expounding on the identity of Filipinos, but “toconceptualize self-concept in the Philippine context.”10 Filipino self-concept is composed of tenequally significant factors.

Figure 1. Pasao Model of Filipino Self-ConceptGoal DirectednessEmotionalityAccepting AttitudesNot Me FactorFamily RelationsFILIPINOSELF‐CONCEPTPeer RelationsSelf‐ConfidencePersonal WorthIdentity FactorSelf‐FeelingTable 1. Dimensions of Filipino Self Reflected in Pasao’s Model of Self-ConceptFactor 1: Not Me FactorFactor 2: EmotionalityFactor 3: Goal-directednessFactor 4: Accepting AttitudesFactor 5: Family RelationsFactor 6: Peer RelationsFactor 7: Identity FactorFactor 8: Self-feelingFactor 9: Personal WorthFactor 10: Self-confidenceThe dimension of Filipino self expressed in the statement, “what I am not.”The dimension of Filipino self reflected in the familiar expression balatsibuyas – being a sensitive person, or more literally, onion-skin.The dimension of Filipino self related to achievement, and perceived asimportant for success in school and at work.The dimension of Filipino self expressed in a realistic view of oneselfaccepting inadequacies and leading to an optimistic approach to life.The dimension of Filipino self related to perception of self in reference toone’s most immediate circle of associates.The dimension of Filipino self expressed as peer acceptance, which is alsoa dimension of concern for interpersonal relationship.The dimension of Filipino self reflected in the “what I am” perspective.The dimension of Filipino self involving perception of one’s own behavioror functioning.The dimension of Filipino self expressed as positive valuing of the self;corresponds to the Rogerian term self-esteem.The dimension of Filipino self expressed as the person’s belief in hisabilities with consideration to put the welfare of others before his own.Carl Rogers developed a theory of personality which explained self-concept. According toRogers, the theory isbasically phenomenological in character, and relies heavily upon the concept ofthe self as an explanatory construct. It pictured the end-point of personalitydevelopment as being a basic congruence between the phenomenal field ofexperience and the conceptual structure of the self – a situation which, if achievedwould represent freedom from internal strain and anxiety, and freedom frompotential strain.11

Rogers argued that people are basically good or healthy – or at the very least, not bad or ill. Hisentire theory was built on a single “force of life” which he called the actualizing tendency,defined as the built-in motivation present in every life form to develop its potential to the fullestextent possible. Subsequent components of actualizing tendency include organismic valuing,positive regard and positive self-regard. Organismic valuing was defined this way: “asexperiences occur in the life of an individual, they are either symbolized, perceived andorganized into some relationship to the self, ignored because there is no perceived relationship tothe self-structure and denied symbolization or given a distorted symbolization because theexperience is inconsistent with the structure of the self”.12 Positive regard is an umbrella term forthings like love, affection, attention, and nurturance. Lastly, positive self-regard included selfesteem, self-worth, and a positive self-image. Out of these components, a real self develops, thatis, the self that if all goes well the individual will become.Existing alongside actualizing tendency is the society. According to Rogers, people, in the courseof actualizing their potentials, created society and culture. The present society, as he argued,leads people astray with a number of “conditionings.” First of these is conditions of worth – aterm that can best be exemplified by the love and affection people get if they “behave,” as theword connotes. Next is conditional positive regard which, in simpler terms, is positive regard on“condition.” It is the propensity of individuals to shape themselves not by their actualizingtendency, but by a society that may or may not truly have their best interests at heart. The last ofthese conditionings is conditional positive self-regard which is characterized by the tendency ofpeople to like themselves only if they meet up with the standards others have applied to them,rather than if they are truly actualizing their potentials. Because of all these conditionings and theextent by which the society is out of synch with actualizing tendency, they on the other handdevelop an ideal self – a self which Rogers suggested to be something that is not real and out-ofreach, those standards which people cannot always meet.13This gap between the real self and the ideal self, the “I am” and the “I should,” is calledincongruity. The greater the gap, the greater the incongruity, and the greater the related suffering.In fact, incongruity is essentially what Rogers meant by neurosis, referring to the state of beingout of sync with one’s own self.14Figure 2. Carl Rogers’ Theory of Personality

Conceptual FrameworkThe conceptual framework used in the study is shown in Figure 3. The independent variable is aset of four profile factors (age, sex, college affiliation and years of service as full-time facultymember). The dependent variables are self-concept and job performance. Self-concept iscomposed of the following ten factors according to Pasao: the “not me” factor, emotionality, goaldirectedness, accepting attitudes, family relations, peer relations, identity factor, self-feeling,personal worth, and self-confidence.15 Job performance is represented by the composite score orrating a respondent acquired for the first semester of academic year 2012-2013. The performanceevaluation factors include: planning and organizing, instructional presentation, professionalknowledge, use of instructional materials, communication skills, classroom management, studentengagement and achievement, evaluation of student learning, and professionalism.Figure 3. Conceptual Framework of the StudyLiterature ReviewA number of studies contribute to the analysis of the teaching profession in terms of the profilecomponents age, sex, and length of teaching experience. Self-concept is likewise well-developedin the literatures of three fields relevant to this study: psychology, organizational behavior, andhuman resource management. Lastly, literatures on job performance are included.The teaching profession in relation to profile components: Much debate occurs as to whetheryounger or older teachers perform better. Adams (2013) wrote in favor of both, noting thatyounger teachers have up-to-date training and education while older teachers possess moreexperience. Similarly, Mayer (2011) said that schools need younger teachers because they havenewer and more modern ideas, produce more “fun” experience for students, and have morepatience in dealing with students, while stressing the benefits of having older teachers whopossess more teaching experience and are better at classroom management than newer teachers.Conversely, other researchers have found that older teachers are viewed by students as resistant

to change, unwilling to accept new ideas and less motivated to learn (Chen and Wang, 2012) andrecover from work stress less effectively than their younger counterparts (Ritvanen, et al., 2006).Teaching has been a female-intensive occupation since the late 1950’s. More women majored ineducation, English and literature (Francis, 2007). Throughout a century of educational reforms,the scarcity of male teachers was not a new issue, as teaching was viewed to be “women’s work”(Johnson, 2008). In the Philippines, Tan (2011) wrote that male teachers are more unusual thanfemales and the more serious problem than recruitment is getting male teachers to stay not onlyin local schools, but also in the country.In terms of the length of teaching experience, Senechal (2010) argued that teachers with moreexperience provide added insights to students despite teaching repetition, and are more creativein presenting the same topics. Additionally, experienced teachers provide the school withstability and assist the new ones in adapting to work (GreatSchools.org, n.d.). Clotfeler, Laddand Vigdor (2006) add that teaching experience is positively associated with studentachievement, with more than half of the gain occurring in the first two years of experience. Thefindings of Chingos and Peterson (2011) provide an example of the mixed evidence about thevalue of teaching experience, in their finding that teachers became more effective with a fewyears of teaching experience but as the years progressed, they became less effective.The nature and meaning of self-concept: Self-concept refers to “the awareness of the person’sidentity as a person.”16 It is the image that man thinks about himself in terms of the status andvalue which other people and society bestow upon him. Ariola (2012) found that men andwomen differ in their personality in terms of the potency of self-concept: men’s self-concept isoften tied to greater feelings of personal efficacy, while women’s self-concept is often tied tonurturance and consideration of others.Many studies of self-concept are rooted in Rogerian theory. Operationalizing self-concept as “theindividual’s overall perceptions of his or her abilities, behavior and personality,” Gazzingan, et.al., affirmed that people with poor concepts of the self are likely to think, feel and act negatively.Those with high self-concept do otherwise.17 Similarly, King (2011) conceptualized self-conceptas the conscious representation of who one is and what ambitions he has. She added that selfconcept serves as a reflection of a person’s genuine innate desires and is affected by conditionsof worth. McLeod (2008) studied the three key dimensions of the Rogerian self-concept – selfimage, self-esteem and the ideal self – which in order refer to perceptions of the self with regardto appearance, lovability and self-worth, the kind of self that an individual strives to become.Coon and Mitterer (2013) address both a definition of self-concept (“all the ideas, perceptions,stories and feelings about who one is”) and how self-concept is acquired, proposing that selfconcept is “built out of daily experiences and is revised by acquiring new experiences.”18According to the same authors, self-concept, with its various dimensions, is a way to understandone’s total personality. Their definition is similar to the one made by Teh and Macapagal (2007),who referred to self-concept as a human dimension that is a product of social interactions. Theseday-to-day interactions could be by means of comparing one’s abilities with others, or by meansof accepting what others – such as parents, siblings, coworkers friends, and teachers – might besaying about him or her.19,20

Luisser (2013) and Reece (2013) also define self-concept as a developing construction. Luisserdefines self-concept as “the overall attitude about oneself. It is also called self-esteem and selfimage. It includes perceptions about several aspects of oneself” developed over the years throughfeedback from others and through social comparisons. The author likewise enumerated ways tobuild a positive self-concept, which included viewing mistakes as learning experiences,accepting and bouncing back from failures, controlling negative behaviors and thoughts, andtapping into one’s spirituality. Reece defines self-concept as the “bundle of facts, opinions,beliefs and perceptions about oneself that are present in one’s life every moment of every day,”21noting that self-concept in adults is greatly influenced by time, and significant people and eventsfrom the past.If self-concept is identified to be a product of experiences, then it could be considered to beremarkably consistent. Once a person’s self-concept becomes stable, it will guide what he paysattention to, what he remembers and what he thinks about. In simpler terms, self-concept is themental picture of one’s personality (Swann, Chang-Schneider and Larsen McClarty, 2007).Inasmuch as self-concept functions to understand personality, it is also “an important tool inhuman self-actualization” (Ciccarelli and White, 2009).22 Self-concept, as Lahey (2009) wrote,might be accurate or otherwise. Inaccurate views of the self can cause problems. If a person’sself-concept is seen to be different from the way he acts, thinks and feels, an obscured view ofthe self could be formed.Self-concept in relation to organizational behavior: One field of management that includesdiscussions on the nature and meaning of self-concept is organizational behavior. Self-concept isbecoming an increasingly essential topic in organizational behavior as a cluster of theories toexplain employee attitudes and behavior. For instance, Allameh, Alinajimi and Kazemi (2012)found in a study on the relationship between self-concept and organizational behavior that apositive self-concept improved organizational behavior and helped explain leadership, teamdynamics, employee motivation, decision making, influence, and organizational commitment.This research is influencing management in the workplace, as McShane and Glinow (2012)found in a study indicating that organizational leaders recognize that support of employee selfconcept “significantly improves performance and well-being.”23Kreitner and Kinicki (2007) recognize the work of sociologist Viktor Gecas, who defined selfconcept as “the concept the individual has of himself as a physical, social and spiritual or moralbeing”24 in developing their understanding of self-concept as the recognition of oneself as aunique person. They mention that when behavioral scientists discuss self-concept, three topicsare included: self-esteem, self-efficacy and self-monitoring.To discuss the first of the three aforementioned terms, Luthans (2011) wrote that in the contextof organizational behavior, self-concept is referred to as the more recognized term self-esteem.Self-esteem, as he defined, is “the people’s self-perceived competence and self-image.”25 Aspreviously mentioned, self-esteem is considered to be the central element underlying a positiveself-concept (Greenwald, Belleza and Banaji as cited by Pollastri, Cardemil and O’Donnell,2010). A person with high self-esteem is more confident about her or his ability to perform wellin the organization and to be satisfied in his or her accomplishments (Moorhead and Griffin,2010). In a longitudinal study of the development of self-esteem across the life span, Orth,Trzesniewski and Robins (2010) found that self-esteem develops as one progresses from young

to middle adulthood, reaching a peak when one is about 60 years of age and then decliningthereafter.Nelson and Quick (2006) provided a view of self-concept in relation to organizational behaviorwhen they used the term self-efficacy, which relates to the ability of an individual to attemptdifficult tasks, to persist in overcoming obstacles, and to face less anxiety when faced withadversity while working for an organization (Bandura, 1997). One of the most difficult tasks inorganizational behavior is self-monitoring, defined as “the extent to which a person observes hisown self-expressive behavior and adapts it to the demands of the situation.”26 Efficacy in the taskof self-monitoring has notable implications in the workplace. For example, in one workplacestudy, “High self-monitors projected images to impress others, while low self-monitors were lesswilling and less able to project impressions other than what their real selves are actually like,even if they are not favorable at all.”27In the workplace, employee levels of self-concept vary in their complexity, consistency andclarity. Complexity is “the number of distinct and important roles or identities that peopleperceive about themselves.”28 Consistency refers to “the ability to perceive roles as requiringsimilar personality traits and values.”29 Lastly, clarity is “the degree to which a person has aclear, confidently defined and stable self-concept.”30Self-concept in relation to human resource management (HRM): The literature on humanresource management did not give meaning to self-concept as how it is defined in the context oforganizational behavior. Self-concept is identified in HRM through such terms as self-image,self-assessment, self-esteem and self-efficacy.As stated by Mathis and Jackson (2008), self-image is how people see themselves in relation totalents, motives and values.Self-assessment is “the use of information by employees to determine their career interests,values, aptitudes and behavioral tendencies” (Noe et. al., 2007, p. 305). According to them, thisstrategy includes the responsibility of an indiv

on the Job Performance of College Full-Time Faculty Members of De La Salle Lipa Joseph Angelou Ilagan Ng, R.N., M.B.A.1 Introduction Human resource management (HRM) refers to the field of management that is concerned with the “effective use of an organization’s human resources to improve its performance.”2 In the