To be adaptive or not? Investigating when and how illegitimate tasks promote versus inhibit employee adaptive performance

Purpose Illegitimate tasks are pervasive in organizations, presenting a challenge for employees to mitigate their impact. However, despite their significance, there has been limited research on when and how employees can adapt to these tasks successfully. To address this gap, this study aimed to discover the relationship between illegitimate tasks and adaptive performance, drawing upon the job demands-resources theory. Specifically, this study aimed to examine the moderating role of general self-efficacy and the mediating roles of employee problem-focused and emotion-focused coping. Design/methodology/approach To examine our hypotheses, we conducted a time-lagged survey, comprising 3 waves and involving 313 employees from twenty enterprises situated in Guangzhou and Sichuan, China. Ordinary least squares (OLS) was adopted to examine our hypotheses. Findings Our results suggested that general self-efficacy played a crucial role in determining how employees would cope with illegitimate tasks and their subsequent adaptive performance when confronted with illegitimate tasks. Notably, employees who possess high levels of general self-efficacy utilize problem-focused coping, improving adaptive performance in handling illegitimate tasks. Conversely, employees who possess low levels of general self-efficacy rely on emotion-focused coping, leading to lower levels of adaptive performance. Originality/value This research contributes to the literature on illegitimate tasks by uncovering when and how such tasks can either promote or hinder adaptive performance. These findings offer practical insights into ways to assist employees in managing illegitimate tasks effectively.