LITERATURE REVIEW: CONCEPTS
2.3 Self-Efficacy
behavior at work. Else Ouweneel et al. (2009) presented that job demand is one of job characteristics that significantly influence informal learning on the job.
Taris and Kompier (2005) found that the main effects on learning were found for both job control and job demands. Taris and Feij (2004) compared that employee are likely to learn when they receive greater demand and higher control, on the other hand, employee experiences the absence of demands and small level of control, employee are unlikely to learn because they have no opportunities to cope with the challenges of the task. Else Ouweneel et. al. (2009) presented that job control is one of the main effects that are predictive of informal learning. The Job-Demand-Control model emphasize that active learning is shown when employees receive both greater level of job control and higher level of job demands. Employees can learn from challenging situation that force employee to try difference methods to solve, and employee is required to have sufficient knowledge to deal with such demands (Karasek and Theorell, 1990; Taris and Schreurs, 2009). Informal learning is highly dependent on work environment. Individual will learn from the job and interaction with colleagues, and this can cause informal learning at work (Marsick and Volpe, 1999). Social support from supervisors and co-workers can support employee to learn through encouraging the employee to talk about problems of work, and share knowledge and ideas to support members in a team (Taris and Schreurs, 2009; Else Ouweneel et al., 2009). Raemdonck et al. (2014) stressed that the most favorable impact on workplace learning is that employees should receive greater social support.
Karasek and Theorell (1990) argued that by receiving support from social aspects, employees are encouraged to acquire new knowledge.
an individuals’ sense of their capability to control and influence their environments to meet the desired attainment. Individuals who can intrinsically motivate themselves to pursue their goals, possibly achieving higher performance outcomes (Luthans and Youssef, 2007; Bakker et al., 2014). When an employee believes in their self-efficacy, they will challenge the work they pursue and will spend effort and persevere to face any obstacles that come to their life (Bandura, 1989).
Bandura (2001) suggested that efficacy beliefs are a major role in coping with stress and in enhancing psychological well-being. Bandura (2001), proposed that a person’s confidence in his efficacy could influence, and persuade environments or social. The concept of self-efficacy was originally proposed American psychologist Albert Bandura (1977). The theory of self-efficacy refers to the cognitive judgment and beliefs of the behavior and the ability desired by the successful completion of a specific task. Highly self-efficacious employees will be more confident in their work, and thus will more likely make extraordinary achievements in their posts (Xanthopoulou, Bakker, Dollard, Demerouti, Schaufeli, Taris, and Schreurs, 2007).
According to Bandura who wrote many papers about self-efficacy, it can lead people to adopt control over situations; they become master of specific domains in order to reach specific outcomes. They are different from others in the way they feel, and act, as they are actively shape the meaning of situations (Bandura, 1986; 2001).
Self-efficacy proactively requires a cognitive perspective to the situation and adjusts for a better fit with individual’s expectation and psychological need. Self-efficacy increases the perception of situational opportunities and decreases the perception of situational threats (Mohammed and Billings, 2002). Consiglio, Borgogni, Alessandri, and Schaufeli (2013) found that self-efficacy is associated with positive perception of work environment and social aspects. Judge, Bono, and Locke (2000) found that an individual with self-efficacy has a chance to increase positive perception of job characteristics. Since they try to exert control over their job, view and proactively search for job resources that benefit to them. An optimistic employee has greater mastery to deal more effectively with demanding situations. An employee with a less optimistic attitude is likely to have high level of mental stress than a highly optimistic employee (Pierce and Gardner, 2004). Judge, Locke, and Durham (1997) suggested that self-efficacy is the antecedent or influence of job demands and resources, as well
as, its consequence. An employee who has self-efficacy will look for more opportunities than threats, and employee is likely to emphasize more on job resources rather than job demands. Therefore, employee experience higher level of work engagement and lower level of exhaustion (Xanthopoulou et al, 2007).
Table 2.4 Definitions of Self-efficacy
In this study, Self-efficacy refers to an individual’s belief in one’s capabilities to execute a specific task across a variety of different situations and achievement and to look for more opportunities to optimize the resources to pursue his goals.
Authors Definitions
Cox (1976: 23)
“Persistence of motive and effort” and “confidence in their abilities”
Staikovic and Luthans (1979: 130)
“Individual's belief (confidence) about his or her capabilities to execute a specific task within a given context. Self-efficacy determines whether an employee's work behavior will be initiated, how much effort will be expended, and how long that effort will be sustained, especially in light of disconfirming evidence”
Bandura (1997: 3)
“Beliefs in one’s capabilities to organize and execute courses of action required to produce given attainments”
Bandura (1997) “Self-efficacy is a judgment of one’s capability to organize and execute given types of performances, whereas an outcome expectation is a judgment of the likely consequence such performances will produce” (p. 21)
Judge, Erez, and Bono (1998: 170)
“One’s belief in one’s overall competence to effect requisite performances across a wide variety of achievement situations” or as “individuals’ perception of their ability to perform across a variety of different situations”
2.3.1 Self-Efficacy and Burnout
Characteristic of an employee with self-efficacy, feels more capable to cope with challenging situations or tasks, and is less likely to suffer from anxiety (Saks, 1994). Research has shown that an efficacy belief is a pivotal role in managing stress and in enhancing psychological well-being. Different scholars, using cross-sectional designs, have shown that self-efficacy at work relates to burnout (Cherniss, 1993), and work engagement (Llorens-Gumbau, and Salanova, 2014). Schwarzer and Hallum (2008) demonstrated that self-efficacy protects them from the experience of job strain and reduces the probability of experiencing burnout. Alarcon (2011) also supported that self-efficacious employee have negatively indirect effect on burnout. Wang, Qu, and Xu (2015) stated that self-efficacious employees tends to cope better with the negative situation from their work, and because they shape the environment by trying to optimize the opportunities or resource available to them.
2.3.2 Self-Efficacy and Informal Learning
Lohman’s (2005) demonstrated that initiative, job self-efficacy, enthusiasm for learning, were the factors enhancing informal learning. It was found that four factors affecting informal learning were personal factor, interpersonal factor, environmental factor and job situational factor. From the personal factors were explained by a learner’s confident attitude, ability to lead confidently, is related to job self-efficacy (Yi, 2009; Cho and Kim, 2016). Learning behavior of an employee was shaped by the emotions of workers’ different responses, at that time, emotions affect not only the attitude but also behavior changes (Knowles, Holton, and Swanson, 1998).