A Systematic Literature Review on Job Performance in Diverse Organizations from 2010 to 2023

Employee performance profoundly influences organizational success, posing a global challenge. This systematic literature review (SLR) investigates job performance dimensions from 2010 to 2023, adhering to PRISMA guidelines. Data were searched via Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed, and Google Books, yielding 3450 records, reduced to 942 post-deduplications. After title and abstract screening, 829 records were excluded, leaving 41 studies for the final review. The findings categorize job performance into three levels: individual, team, and organizational, further divided into process/job performance and outcome performance. Most studies focus on individual-level process/job performance, with limited attention to organizational-level outcome performance. Employee performance's critical role in organizational effectiveness underscores its relevance to researchers and practitioners. The review emphasizes the importance of fostering supportive work environments and providing resources to enhance employee performance, ultimately driving organizational success. These insights are invaluable to those aiming to optimize employee performance and bolster organizational effectiveness.


Introduction
Job performance is a critical driver of organizational success, influencing productivity, efficiency, and overall effectiveness (Colquitt et al., 2021).It encompasses employees' actions, behaviors, and outcomes, which significantly impact the achievement of organizational goals (Cameron & Quinn, 2020).In today's dynamic and competitive business landscape, optimizing job performance is essential for maintaining a competitive advantage and long-term success (Organ et al., 2019).Extensive research in organizational behavior and Vol 13, Issue 18, (2023) E-ISSN: 2222-6990 human resource management reflects the significant interest in understanding the factors influencing employee performance, measuring and evaluating it, and motivating employees for peak performance (Guest, 2017).In modern organizations, employees are a fundamental asset regardless of the industry Kanfer et al (2018), and their contributions are vital for organizational success, growth, and performance.Effective employee performance management is crucial for maintaining a competitive edge Bell et al (2021) and attracting and retaining top talent.Organizations recognize the importance of creating an environment that supports and motivates employee performance to maximize their human capital's potential Colquitt et al (2021), ultimately contributing to achieving organizational objectives and goals.
Employee performance is undeniably critical for the success of organizations.Regardless of their specific missions, employees are central to driving an organization's objectives and delivering impactful programs (Burgess, 2015).However, the current competitive job market presents challenges in attracting and retaining top talent (Schmitz, 2019).To address this, organizations must actively manage their employee relationships, as highlighted by (Jiang et al., 2019).Creating a positive work environment and fostering strong connections with employees can provide long-term advantages (Kleiner & Rothbard, 2019).A supportive, development-oriented work environment is essential for promoting employee performance, leading to higher job satisfaction, productivity, and overall performance (Shuck et al., 2011).
The presence of a performance crisis in organizations is a matter of significant concern to scholars and practitioners.This crisis arises from a substantial disparity between desired and actual employee performance levels.Forbes (2014) attributes this gap in part to insufficient support and resources provided to employees, which hinders their ability to achieve desired outcomes.This lack of support can manifest in various forms, such as inadequate training, unclear expectations, or limited access to essential resources.As a consequence of this performance crisis, organizations experience adverse effects on key business metrics.Reduced employee performance and motivation can directly impact company revenues and profitability (Forbes, 2014).Employee underperformance can impede creativity and hinder the generation of innovative ideas and solutions, resulting in stagnation and decreased competitiveness.Moreover, diminished employee engagement and motivation can negatively affect overall company performance.These as explained in theories of human motivation such as McClelland's Need for Achievement, Need for Affiliation, and Bowlby and Harlow's Need for Nurturance.
Through the creation of a conducive and growth-oriented work environment, employers can elevate employee performance across various organizational levels, be it at the individual, team, or organizational level (Guest, 2017).This comprehensive systematic literature review (SLR) endeavors to examine and analyze the intricacies of job performance from 2010 to 2023.By critically reviewing and synthesizing relevant research articles, this study aims to shed light on the strategies, practices, and outcomes associated with employee performance across diverse organizational settings (Colquitt et al., 2021).

Method
The systematic literature review on job performance from 2010 to 2023 followed the guidelines provided by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement (Moher et al., 2009;Krijgsheld, et al., 2022).This widely recognized reporting guideline ensures a rigorous and transparent approach to conducting systematic reviews, enhancing the credibility and replicability of the review process.The initial step involved conducting a comprehensive literature search to identify eligible studies.Four reputable databases were utilized for the search: Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed, and Google Books.These databases are known for their extensive coverage of scholarly literature, including peer-reviewed articles, conference papers, books, and other relevant sources, ensuring a comprehensive search of the available literature.

Search Strategy
The search strategy is a critical aspect of a systematic literature review, enabling the identification of relevant literature from various sources.To conduct a comprehensive search on the topic of job performance, the author employed academic databases such as Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar, which offer extensive collections of scholarly articles as indicated by (Booth et al., 2016;Khan et al., 2011).These databases cover a broad range of disciplines and provide access to peer-reviewed journals and conference proceedings, ensuring a comprehensive search of the existing literature.Constructing an effective search strategy entails the careful selection of appropriate keywords.The search strategy employed specific keywords and Boolean operators to refine the search results (Booth et al., 2016;Petticrew & Roberts, 2006).The keywords used included terms such as "job," "work," "employee," "personnel," "staff," "professionals," and "performance," combined with other relevant keywords related to different organizational levels, such as "organization," "public sector," "service sector," "individual," "team," and "organizational."To further narrow down the search results, the strategy included terms related to different dimensions of job performance, such as "process/job performance," "task performance," "contextual performance," "outcome performance," and "non-financial performance."These terms were included in the title, abstract, and keyword fields (TITLE-ABS-KEY) to ensure comprehensive coverage of the literature.
After conducting the search on Scopus and other databases, a total of 3,450 articles were identified.These articles were then screened using specific inclusion criteria to select those that were most relevant to the research question.The inclusion criteria likely focused on studies published between 2010 and 2023, and articles related to job performance in several organizations.Over this period (2010-2023), there may have been significant trends or changes in the way organizations approach diversity and evaluate job performance.Thus.Understanding these developments is essential for drawing meaningful conclusions from the literature.Besides, the more extended timeframe allows for a more comprehensive overview of the literature, which can help identify patterns, gaps, and areas that require further investigation.This can contribute to a more robust and holistic understanding of the topic.Hence, selecting a timeframe from 2010 to 2023 is a strategic choice to ensure that the review captures the most recent and relevant research findings while considering changes in the job performance context since the last decade.
Following the screening process, 41 articles were included in the systematic review.These articles met the predetermined criteria and provided valuable insights into the relationship between employee engagement and job performance in various organizational settings.The search strategy used is shown in Figure 1.

Eligibility Criteria
In this systematic literature review (SLR) on job performance spanning from 2010 to 2023, meticulous eligibility criteria were devised to guide the selection of pertinent studies.The key criteria embraced in this SLR encompassed critical facets.Firstly, studies considered for inclusion had to directly pertain to job performance, ensuring a targeted exploration of performance-related factors.Secondly, the review encompassed studies examining job performance at various organizational levels, including individual, team, and organizational, to capture the multifaceted nature of performance dynamics.Thirdly, it sought to include studies exploring both process/job performance and outcome performance dimensions, fostering a comprehensive understanding of tasks and actual results.Fourthly, the review focused on studies published between 2010 and December 2023, incorporating recent research developments to enhance relevance.Additionally, English-language studies were considered to facilitate broad accessibility and dissemination, given its prevalence in academic discourse.Finally, only peer-reviewed articles were included to ensure research credibility and reliability.These rigorous eligibility criteria were meticulously established to facilitate a systematic selection process, enabling the review to offer valuable insights into the complexities of job performance across diverse organizational settings and dimensions.

Results
This paper provides an informative overview of the distribution of the examined studies, including publication years, journals, and classifications of developed or developing countries.This temporal and geographical analysis offers valuable context for understanding the evolution of job performance research and the diversity of research outlets contributing to the field.Furthermore, the assessment of the methodological quality of the studies ensures the reliability and validity of the findings, enhancing the credibility and applicability of the  18 USA 1. (Siegel, et al., 2022) ✓ Included studies were meticulously categorized to comprehensively explore the relationship between employee engagement and performance, drawing upon Petticrew and Roberts (2006) for guidance on structuring study outcomes.Six main categories were developed, encompassing process and outcome performance at individual, team, and organizational levels, in line with Campbell et al.'s (1993) broad concept of performance.This systematic categorization enabled a structured analysis of performance dimensions, highlighting their interconnectedness and the multifaceted nature of employee engagement, as also noted by (Roe, 1999).Notably, some studies were relevant to multiple categories, emphasizing the complexity of performance evaluation.This categorization process provided a clearer understanding of how performance and employee engagement were examined across various perspectives and levels in the reviewed literature.
Among the 41 studies reviewed, 20 (48.78%) focused on individual-level performance, underscoring the scholarly interest in understanding the intricate relationship between employee engagement and individual job-related outcomes.Researchers have shown particular interest in exploring micro-level factors like motivation, job satisfaction, and workrelated attitudes, as these significantly influence employee behavior and overall productivity.
The prevalence of studies at this level underscores the quest for a deeper understanding of the drivers of employee engagement, providing critical insights for organizations aiming to enhance workforce performance and well-being.The review also revealed that 9 articles (21.95%) delved into team-level performance, shedding light on the dynamics within organizational teams and their impact on productivity, reflecting the growing recognition of teamwork's importance across various industries.Furthermore, 11 articles (26.83%) were dedicated to exploring organizational-level performance, offering a macro-level view of how employee engagement influences organizational effectiveness and success.Those studied at the organizational level informed strategic decision-making and underscored the need for cultivating an engaged and productive workforce to achieve broader organizational goals and missions.An exceptional article authored by Goetz and Wald (2022) distinguished itself by concurrently exploring individual and organizational levels of performance in connection with employee engagement.This distinctive dual-level approach constitutes 2.44% of the total articles and provides a comprehensive and unique perspective.Moving to the team level, Task performance is studied by Alnajem et al (2014); Basu et al (2017); Shin et al (2023), focusing on collective tasks and activities performed by teams and their influence on team effectiveness.Contextual performance at the team level is investigated by Jayaweera (2015); Rylková & Bernatík (2015), analyzing team members' extrarole contributions to team functioning and cohesion.Notably, outcome performance at the team level differentiates between financial performance, explored by Trivellas et al. (2016), which investigates financial outcomes achieved by teams, including revenue generation and cost-effectiveness, and non-financial performance, represented by Aziz et al (2022); Thura et al (2019), examining non-monetary or intangible outcomes such as customer satisfaction, service quality, innovation, employee well-being, job satisfaction, and team cohesion.

Categorization of Reviewed Studies based on the Type of Performance at Different Levels
At the organizational level, Process/job performance is examined by Alashab & Mohamad (2020); Almarakshi et al (2019); Sinha & Laghate ( 2023), delving into organizational processes, practices, and systems impacting overall productivity and effectiveness.Contextual performance at the organizational level is explored by Arshad et al (2015); Saltson (2015); Dekoulou & Trivellas (2015), investigating employees' extra-role contributions enhancing organizational culture and climate.Finally, Outcome performance at the organizational level is subdivided into Financial performance, studied by Kalkavan & Katrinli (2015), and Nonfinancial performance, explored by Benitez et al (2022); Lin et al (2015); Medina-Garrido et al ( 2017), offering insights into financial and non-financial outcomes influenced by employee engagement and organizational performance.

Discussion
The reviewed articles encompass a wide array of professions spanning various sectors of the economy, indicating the broad applicability of their findings across diverse work settings.
Notably, 44% of these articles investigated multiple professional groups, underlining the researchers' intent to examine job performance across various job roles and organizations (e.g., Hamdany, 2022;Ližbetinová et al., 2017;Cetinkaya et al., 2019;Danish et al., 2015;Newman et al., 2015;Andjarwati et al., 2019;Aziz et al., 2022;Thura et al., 2019;Ye et al., 2020;Trivellas et al., 2016).The majority of the studies primarily explored Process/job performance at the individual level, constituting 48.78% of the total articles.Task performance, involving specific job-related tasks and behaviors, was a predominant focus within individual-level investigations, while Contextual performance, encompassing extrarole behaviors, was also well-represented (e.g., Bhanot, 2022;Saad & Abbas, 2018;Siddiqui, 2015;Masa'deh et al., 2016;Abou-Shouk et al., 2022;Ram, 2015;Katebi et al., 2022;Pradhan & Jena, 2016;Johari et al., 2018;Soelton et al., 2021;Ye et al., 2020;Utrilla et al., 2015;Liu & Ko, 2012;Siegel et al., 2022;Aboramadan & Dahleez, 2020).This underscores the significance of individual contributions to organizational productivity and the importance of discretionary efforts in shaping the broader organizational context.At the team level (21.95% of the articles), Process/job performance, particularly Task performance, received significant attention, with an emphasis on understanding collective tasks and activities performed by teams to optimize their effectiveness (e.g., Alnajem et al., 2014;Basu et al., 2017;Shin et al., 2023).Contextual performance at the team level, although less common, provided insights into the importance of teamwork, cooperation, and mutual support among team members for overall team success (e.g., Jayaweera, 2015;Rylková & Bernatík, 2015).On the organizational level (26.83% of the articles), Process/job performance studies delved into organizational processes, practices, and systems influencing productivity, while Contextual performance studies highlighted the role of employees' extra-role contributions in enhancing organizational culture and climate (e.g., Alashab & Mohamad, 2020;Almarakshi et al., 2019;Sinha & Laghate, 2023;Arshad et al., 2015;Saltson, 2015;Dekoulou & Trivellas, 2015).In terms of Outcome performance, at the individual level (24.39% of the articles), Financial performance received substantial attention, focusing on the financial outcomes achieved by individuals and organizations, alongside studies exploring non-financial outcomes like customer satisfaction and service quality (e.g., Hamdany, 2022;Ližbetinová et al., 2017;Cetinkaya et al., 2019;Danish et al., 2015;Newman et al., 2015;Andjarwati et al., 2019).At the team level (9.76% of the articles), Outcome performance investigations were divided into Financial performance and Non-financial performance, providing a comprehensive view of teams' impact on organizational effectiveness (e.g., Aziz et al., 2022;Thura et al., 2019;Trivellas et al., 2016).The systematic categorization and analysis of these articles offer valuable insights for organizations aiming to enhance employee performance, optimize team dynamics, and foster a positive work environment.Additionally, they highlight research gaps and areas warranting further exploration, paving the way for future studies to advance our understanding of the complex relationship between employee engagement and job performance in diverse work settings (e.g., Ye et al., 2020;Trivellas et al., 2016).

Knowledge Gap, Future Research Directions
The systematic review reveals several knowledge gaps and suggests future research directions in the field of employee job performance.Notably, there is an overemphasis on individual-level Process/job performance (48.78% of reviewed articles), potentially neglecting other performance dimensions at team and organizational levels.Future research should strive for a more balanced exploration of performance dynamics across different levels of analysis.Additionally, Outcome performance is relatively underexplored (26.83% of articles), warranting further investigation into Financial and Non-financial performance outcomes.
Non-profit organizations remain understudied, requiring focused research to understand performance dynamics within these unique contexts.Longitudinal studies are needed to explore the lasting effects of employee engagement on job performance.Cross-cultural research can shed light on cultural influences in this relationship.Addressing these gaps and conducting longitudinal, cross-cultural, and non-profit-focused studies will enhance our understanding of the intricate link between employee engagement and job performance, benefiting organizations seeking to optimize productivity and effectiveness.

Limitations
This systematic literature review (SLR) has provided valuable insights into job performance research, yet several limitations should be acknowledged.Firstly, the inclusion of Englishlanguage studies may introduce language bias, potentially excluding relevant non-English literature.Additionally, despite rigorous search strategies, some pertinent articles may have been unintentionally omitted due to database variations and terminology.Secondly, the focus on specific industries may limit generalizability to diverse organizational contexts.Moreover, the study's timeframe (2010)(2011)(2012)(2013)(2014)(2015)(2016)(2017)(2018)(2019)(2020)(2021)(2022)(2023) may exclude emerging research.The categorization of studies introduces subjectivity, affecting findings' interpretation.Lastly, reliance on existing literature and lack of primary data collection may limit understanding of contextual factors influencing job performance.Despite these limitations, this review enhances comprehension of job performance across organizational levels and dimensions, offering practical implications and directions for future research.

Conclusion
This systematic review of 41 studies from diverse countries delves into the connection between employee engagement and job performance, categorizing findings by performance type and level.While it highlights a strong focus on individual Process/job performance, it underscores the need for more research on team and organizational performance.Additionally, it identifies a gap in exploring outcome performance, emphasizing the importance of investigating both financial and non-financial outcomes.These insights offer valuable directions for further research and evidence-based strategies to enhance employee productivity and organizational effectiveness.

Figure 1 .
Figure 1.PRISMA flow chart systematic review's results.By contextualizing the research and evaluating its rigor, this comprehensive approach establishes a strong foundation for answering the research questions and contributes valuable insights to the literature on job performanceDistribution and Categorization of the StudiesThis systematic review includes 41 studies from diverse countries, offering a comprehensive analysis of job performance.The inclusion of research from various nations enhances our understanding of job performance dynamics across different cultural and contextual backgrounds.Notably, five studies from Saudi Arabia (12.2%) indicate a growing interest in improving job performance within the country, possibly driven by economic development goals.Similarly, the presence of three studies from both Jordan and Turkey (7.3% each) suggests a focus on addressing region-specific challenges.India contributes five studies (12.2%), reflecting its significance in job performance research due to its diverse and competitive workforce.Meanwhile, some countries are represented by single studies, such as Myanmar, Indonesia, South Korea, Italy, Greece, the Czech Republic, and France, offering initial insights into their unique contexts.Malaysia, with three studies (7.3%), actively explores job performance, aligning with its economic growth.European countries like Spain and Greece each provide two studies (4.9%), shedding light on management practices and work environments in Europe.Finally, a single study from the United States (2.4%) offers insights into job performance in a developed, competitive market.This diverse distribution of studies enriches our global understanding of job performance, catering to the specific needs and contexts of various regions.
Lebas and Euske (2002) (1997)s into the distribution of research efforts in analyzing job performance across various dimensions and levels.FollowingBorman and Motowidlo's (1997)framework, process performance is categorized into contextual performance, involving behaviors that enhance the organizational climate, and task performance, comprising jobspecific actions contributing directly to work-related objectives.Similarly,Lebas and Euske (2002)classify outcome performance into financial and nonfinancial dimensions.Financial performance entails measurable economic indicators, while nonfinancial performance includes non-monetary factors crucial for organizational success.Table2in the review employs these established subcategories to systematically categorize the examined research studies, facilitating a detailed comparison of themes explored in the literature within each level and distinguishing Process/job performance from Outcome performance.
encompassing prosocial actions and organizational citizenship behaviors, elucidating the impact of individual contributions on organizational climate and culture.