Attachment at work and performance

Abstract

This paper examines the relations between self-reported attachment orientation at work and personality, self-esteem, trait emotional intelligence (aka emotional self-efficacy), and independently assessed career potential and job performance. Self-report data were collected from 211 managers in an international business in the hospitality industry; independent assessments of these managers' job performance and career potential were separately obtained from the organization. A self-report measure of romantic attachment was adapted for application in the work context; a two-factor solution was found for this measure. Secure/autonomous attachment orientation at work was positively related to self-esteem, trait emotional intelligence, extraversion, agreeableness, and conscientiousness, and also to job performance. Not only was secure/autonomous attachment orientation at work statistically predictive of job performance, but the new measure also made a distinct contribution, beyond conscientiousness, to this prediction.

Keywords:

• adult attachment
• job performance
• personality
• emotional intelligence
• work relations

Notes

1. Further information about this new measure may be obtained from this paper's first author.

2. Subsequently, other researchers have suggested that two of these reflect two aspects of the underlying dimension of attachment avoidance, specifically, discomfort with closeness and with dependency (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2007). We were not aware of this when, given the novelty of our measure, we decided to continue to test structure and construct validity of the AAW throughout our series of studies.

3. As a more robust means of assessing the AAW inventory, CFA was applied to the overall data set from our series of studies. The correlation between the shorter forms of the SAAW and IAW was r =−.19, p < .01. This correlation accounts for error of measurement and is based on N = 904. This result supports our view of SAAW and IAW as two distinct factors, rather than two opposite extremes of the same underlying dimension (a correlation of r =−.19 suggests an overlap of less than 4% of the variance between SAAW and IAW). The Cronbach α's for SAAW and IAW were .71 and .77, respectively. There was no significant correlation between gender and either SAAW (r =−.05, p > .05) or IAW (r = .01, p > .05), and age was significantly correlated with SAAW (r = .17, p < .01), but not with IAW (r = .01, p > .05). Thus, in an overall sample that was 53% female and 47% male, with mean age 44, SD = 11, older people tended to be more secure, at least in terms of their attachment orientation at work.

4. Several studies on attachment and leader–follower relationships point to secure attachment as a factor in leadership selection, in leadership effectiveness, and in positive outcomes for followers (Mayseless, 2010). That said, as Ein-Dor et al. (2010) remind us, insecure attachment strategies may also have adaptive advantages for group performance.