Coping resources, coping responses, and employees' contextual performance in a merger context

The current study supplemented previous research on organizational change by examining individual-level variables that could predict employees' performance in a continuously changing work environment. Specifically, I examined the relationship of coping resources (in the form of locus of control and change self-efficacy) and coping responses (categorized as problem-focused, emotion-focused, and avoidant strategies) to discretionary employee performance, also known as contextual performance.; Participants were 90 employees at a private university that underwent a merger two years prior to the study and has experienced continuing change since. The study's variables, assessed via a self-report survey, included coping resources (locus of control, tolerance for ambiguity, and change self-efficacy), coping responses, contextual performance, change appraisals, organizational commitment, and job satisfaction.; It was predicted that employees with stronger coping resources would report more contextual performance. Additionally, problem- and emotion-focused coping was postulated to be positively associated with contextual performance, while avoidant coping was posited to be negatively associated with contextual performance. Finally, based on Lazarus and Folkman's (1984) cognitive theory of stress and coping and Gates's (2001) model of workplace stress and coping, the use of problem-focused and avoidant coping strategies was predicted to partially mediate the relationship between coping resources and contextual performance.; The results showed that locus of control and change self-efficacy did not predict variance in employees' contextual performance beyond that accounted for by organizational commitment and change appraisal (F(2, 84) = 1.80, p = .17). On the other hand, the types of coping responses that employees chose did predict contextual performance such that the use of problem- and emotion-focused coping responses was associated with more contextual performance (R2 change = .31, F(2, 85) = 23.03, p < .01). Also, when controlling for these responses, avoidant coping was negatively associated with contextual performance (beta = -.39, p < .01). The results suggested that a direct effects model best fit the data (R2 = .51, F(4, 85) = 22.41, p < .01). Coping resources and coping responses independently contributed to explaining variance in employees' discretionary performance. Implications for research on coping with organizational change and interventions facilitating change self-efficacy and use of adaptive coping strategies are discussed.