Moh , Monique; Die z, Ca olin
A icle — Published Ve sion
I ’s go o be pe ec ? Di e en ia ing he unique daily ela ionships o
pe ec ionism and excellencism wi h employee e o , pe o mance and
a igue
Jou nal o Occupa ional and O ganiza ional Psychology
P o ided in Coope a ion wi h:
John Wiley & Sons
Sugges ed Ci a ion: Moh , Monique; Die z, Ca olin (2025) : I ’s go o be pe ec ? Di e en ia ing he
unique daily ela ionships o pe ec ionism and excellencism wi h employee e o , pe o mance
and a igue, Jou nal o Occupa ional and O ganiza ional Psychology, ISSN 2044-8325, Wiley,
Hoboken, NJ, Vol. 98, Iss. 2,
h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/joop.70034
This Ve sion is a ailable a :
h ps://hdl.handle.ne /10419/323770
S anda d-Nu zungsbedingungen:
Die Dokumen e au EconS o dü en zu eigenen wissenscha lichen
Zwecken und zum P i a geb auch gespeiche und kopie we den.
Sie dü en die Dokumen e nich ü ö en liche ode komme zielle
Zwecke e iel äl igen, ö en lich auss ellen, ö en lich zugänglich
machen, e eiben ode ande wei ig nu zen.
So e n die Ve asse die Dokumen e un e Open-Con en -Lizenzen
(insbesonde e CC-Lizenzen) zu Ve ügung ges ell haben soll en,
gel en abweichend on diesen Nu zungsbedingungen die in de do
genann en Lizenz gewäh en Nu zungs ech e.
Te ms o use:
Documen s in EconS o may be sa ed and copied o you pe sonal
and schola ly pu poses.
You a e no o copy documen s o public o comme cial pu poses, o
exhibi he documen s publicly, o make hem publicly a ailable on he
in e ne , o o dis ibu e o o he wise use he documen s in public.
I he documen s ha e been made a ailable unde an Open Con en
Licence (especially C ea i e Commons Licences), you may exe cise
u he usage igh s as speci ied in he indica ed licence.
h p://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by/4.0/
J Occup O gan Psychol. 2025;98:e70034.
|
1 o 20
h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/joop.70034
wileyonlinelib a y.com/jou nal/joop
Recei ed: 2 Sep embe 2024
|
Accep ed: 27 May 2025
DOI: 10.1111/joop.70034
RESEARCH ARTICLE
I ’s go o be pe ec ? Di e en ia ing he unique
daily ela ionships o pe ec ionism and excellencism
wi h employee e o , pe o mance and a igue
Monique Moh | Ca olin Die z
This is an open access a icle unde he e ms o he C ea i e Commons A ibu ion License, which pe mi s use, dis ibu ion and ep oduc ion
in any medium, p o ided he o iginal wo k is p ope ly ci ed.
© 2025 The Au ho (s). Jou nal o Occupa ional and O ganiza ional Psycholog y published by John Wiley & Sons L d on behal o The B i ish
Psychological Socie y.
Chemni z Uni e si y o Technology, Chemni z,
Ge many
Co espondence
Monique Moh , Facul y o Beha iou al and
Social Sciences, Chemni z Uni e si y o
Technology, Wilhelm- Raabe- S aße 43, 4/206A,
09120 Chemni z, Ge many.
Email: monique.moh @psychologie. u-chemni z.de
Abs ac
Employees a e inc easingly s i ing o pe ec ion a wo k.
Commonly deemed o be associa ed wi h mo e ad an ages
han disad an ages o employees and o ganiza ions, his
pe ec ionism is o en imes socie ally and o ganiza ionally
demanded, app ecia ed o ewa ded. To da e, howe e , e-
sea ch indings on his opic a e inconclusi e. Taking new
heo e ical de elopmen s in pe ec ionism esea ch in o ac-
coun , we p opose ha he cu en iew ha pe ec ionism
is an adap i e pu sui a wo k is p obably dis o ed. Building
on he ecen ly de eloped Model o Excellencism and Pe ec ionism
and using a daily dia y design (N = 127 pa icipan s p o id-
ing n = 1018 days o da a), we examined how excellencism
and pe ec ionism ela e o employee e o , pe o mance
and well- being in daily wo k. As expec ed, esul s o mul i-
le el pa h modelling showed ha daily excellencism ela es
posi i ely o bo h e o in ensi y and pe sis ence and, ia e -
o , o in- ole pe o mance. Unexpec edly, e o and, hus,
excellencism, we e un ela ed o a igue. Daily pe ec ion-
ism did no show unique ela ionships o e and abo e he
espec i e ela ionships o daily excellencism. Acco dingly,
con as ed wi h excellencism, pe ec ionism seems o be an
unneeded pu sui a wo k. As we discuss, he indings o
ou s udy a e o bo h heo e ical and p ac ical c i icali y.
KEYWORDS
e o , excellencism, goals, pe ec ionism
2 o 20
|
MOHR and DIETZ
Pu suing pe ec ion is no only an obliga ion o ou communi y and cons i uen s, i is also an obliga-
ion o us. … The mindse s o p ide and pe ec ion should in luence ou day- o- day and pe haps e en
momen - o- momen ac i i ies.
(Bae & Shaw, 2017, p. 1215)
A ound he wo ld, people s i e o pe ec ion (Fle & Hewi , 2020). O e he las decades, he
pu sui o pe ec ion has linea ly inc eased (Cu an & Hill, 2019), a end ha is likely o con inue.
Especially a wo k, pe ec ion is a widesp ead goal (S oebe & Damian, 2016; S oebe & S oebe , 2009)
and s i ing o pe ec ion is o en imes socie ally and o ganiza ionally demanded, app ecia ed o e-
wa ded because i is commonly deemed o be associa ed wi h mo e ad an ages han disad an ages o
employees and o ganiza ions (Bae & Shaw, 2017; Bu ns, 1980; Ha a i e al., 2018). Resea ch indings
o da e, howe e , a e inconclusi e ega ding he desi abili y o pe ec ionism a wo k. Tha is, Ha a i
e al. (2018) concluded in hei me a- analysis ha ‘in o al, pe ec ionism is likely no cons uc i e a
wo k’ (p. 1137). In con as , Ocampo e al. (2020) ag eed wi h Bae and Shaw (2017) and highligh ed
bene icial e ec s o pe ec ionism a wo k in hei la e e iew.
Gi en he p e alence and impac o pe ec ionism a wo k, his lack o a cohe en unde s anding
and he disc epancy be ween commonly held assump ions and esea ch indings on his opic is un o -
una e. In ou s udy, we he e o e examined whe he his lack o cohe ence can be esol ed by aking
ecen heo e ical de elopmen s in pe ec ionism esea ch in o accoun and applying hem o o ganiza-
ional esea ch. To da e, esea ch on pe ec ionism a wo k has been la gely based on he wo- ac o model
o pe ec ionism (F os e al., 1993; S oebe , 2018a; S oebe & O o, 2006). In his model, wo pe ec ion-
ism dimensions a e dis inguished, mos ly labelled as pe ec ionis ic s i ings (i.e., s i ing o lawlessness
and ha ing exceedingly high pe o mance s anda ds) and pe ec ionis ic conce ns (i.e., eeling ha one alls
sho o hese s anda ds). While he e is la ge consensus ega ding he maladap i e na u e o pe ec-
ionis ic conce ns, he (mal- )adap i eness o pe ec ionis ic s i ings a wo k and in o he li e domains
is s ill deba ed (S oebe , 2018b).
Acco ding o he ecen ly de eloped Model o Excellencism and Pe ec ionism (MEP; Gaud eau, 2019;
Gaud eau e al., 2022), he inconsis en indings o pe ec ionis ic s i ings migh a ise due o he
missing sepa a ion o he s i ing o pe ec ion (i.e., “idealized, lawless, and excessi ely high s an-
da ds”) om he s i ing o excellence (i.e., ‘ e y high ye a ainable s anda ds’; Gaud eau, 2019, p.
200). Fo ins ance, excellencism could d i e ela ionships o pe ec ionism1 wi h desi able ou comes
a wo k o ela ionships o pe ec ionism o undesi able ou comes a wo k could be masked. Fo ha
eason, ou s udy aimed o p o ide a e ined unde s anding o pe ec ionism a wo k by answe ing
he ques ion i i is eally pe ec ion ha employees should s i e o in hei day- o- day ac i i ies a
wo k (Bae & Shaw, 2017). Co espondingly, based on he MEP (Gaud eau, 2019; Gaud eau
e al., 2022), we in es iga ed how pe ec ionism and excellencism ela e o employee pe o mance
(i.e., in- ole pe o mance) and well- being (i.e., a igue) in hei daily wo k. D awing on goal se ing
heo y (Locke & La ham, 2002), we examined in es ed e o a wo k as a c ucial media ing a iable
1Pe ec ionism as concep ualized in he MEP is equi alen o pe ec ionis ic s i ings as concep ualized in he wo- ac o model o
pe ec ionism. Because ou s udy is based on he MEP, we use he e m “pe ec ionism” h oughou he manusc ip .
P ac i ione poin s
• Pe ec ionism a wo k is less adap i e han commonly assumed: supposed bene icial e ec s
a e likely d i en by excellencism.
• When con as ed wi h excellencism, pe ec ionism is unneeded o employee e o and in-
ole pe o mance in e e yday wo k.
|
3 o 20
PERFECTIONISM AND EXCELLENCISM AT WORK
in hese ela ionships (see Figu e 1 o he esea ch model). In ou s udy, we did no in es iga e gen-
e al (i.e., domain- unspeci ic) bu wo k- ela ed (i.e., domain- speci ic) pe ec ionism (see S oebe &
S oebe , 2009) and excellencism. We also ook a a he new, dynamic app oach o wo k- ela ed pe -
ec ionism (see Moh e al., 2022, 2023) and excellencism ha ocuses on hei daily ela ionships
wi h e o , in- ole pe o mance, and a igue.
The indings o ou s udy a e o bo h heo e ical and p ac ical c i icali y. Mos impo an ly, inding
ha ela ionships be ween pe ec ionism and ele an ou comes a wo k a e con ounded by excellen-
cism would cons i u e a c i ical s ep owa ds a mo e ho ough unde s anding o pe ec ionism and i s
implica ions a wo k. As he in oduc o y quo e illus a es, he iew ha pe ec ionism's posi i e aspec s
ou weigh i s nega i e aspec s a wo k is no only widesp ead among employees bu also among p ac i-
ione s and o ganiza ional schola s as well (Bae & Shaw, 2017; Ha a i e al., 2018). Finding ha pe ec-
ionism is unneeded o e en ha m ul a wo k conside ing excellencism could undamen ally change he
answe o he ques ion o pe ec ionism's (mal- )adap i eness a wo k. In he u u e, i migh be excel-
lencism and no pe ec ionism ha should be o ganiza ionally and socie ally encou aged and p omo ed
(Gaud eau e al., 2022). Mo eo e , up o now, he MEP (Gaud eau, 2019; Gaud eau e al., 2022) has
only been es ed in se ings ou side he wo k con ex (e.g., uni e si y, spo s). Because pe ec ionism is
domain- speci ic and especially p e alen a wo k (S oebe & Damian, 2016; S oebe & S oebe , 2009),
es ing he model among employees wi h espec o wo k- ele an ou comes is c ucial. Finally, we en ich
he li e a u e on wo k e o by b oadening he scope o pe son- ocused an eceden s (i.e., pe ec ionism
and excellencism) o e o expendi u e a wo k (Van Iddekinge e al., 2023).
Di e en ia ing pe ec ionism om excellencism
Acco ding o he MEP (Gaud eau, 2019; Gaud eau e al., 2022), pe ec ion and excellence a e wo
ela ed bu dis inc goals ha can be desc ibed and di e en ia ed in e ms o goal se ing (i.e., o m-
ing a goal) and goal s i ing (i.e., ying o each his goal by egula ing a ec , a en ion, e o and
beha iou ; see Kan e e al., 2017). Rega ding goal se ing, pe ec ion e e s o goals ha a e ideal-
ized, excessi ely high, igid and en ail lawlessness, whe eas excellence e e s o goals ha a e e y
high bu lexible and a ainable. Rega ding goal s i ing, people who s i e owa ds pe ec ion do so
in a elen less manne , whe eas people who s i e owa ds excellence do so in an e o ul, engaged
and de e mined bu also a lexible manne (Gaud eau, 2019; Gaud eau e al., 2022). Thus, he goals
o pe ec ion and excellence di e wi h espec o bo h hei di icul y and na u e and wi h espec o
FIGURE 1 Concep ual model. Solid lines indica e hypo hesized pa hs. Do ed lines indica e pa hs e e ing o esea ch
ques ions. Dashed lines indica e addi ional pa hs speci ied in he model. This igu e does no include mo ning a igue and he
espec i e au o eg essi e pa h.
4 o 20
|
MOHR and DIETZ
he in ensi y and way hey a e pu sued. As men ioned, he goals o pe ec ion and excellence a e no
independen om each o he . Mo e p ecisely, excellence can be iewed as an unplanned ‘s opo e ’ on
he way o pe ec ion. Tha is, people who aim a excellence (i.e., excellence s i e s) will be sa is ied
and end hei jou ney when eaching hei goal (i.e., excellence), whe eas people who aim a pe ec-
ion (i.e., pe ec ion s i e s) will ine i ably each excellence du ing hei jou ney (e en i no di ec ly
in ended) bu con inue hei ques owa ds pe ec ion, a des ina ion hey migh ne e each. The e o e,
al hough excellence is a ainable wi hou a aining pe ec ion, pe ec ion is no a ainable wi hou a -
aining excellence (Gaud eau, 2019).
Acco dingly, he e ec s o pe ec ionism can only be in e p e ed in ela ion o he e ec s o excellen-
cism. Di e en scena ios can occu when con as ing he e ec s o pe ec ionism wi h he e ec s o ex-
cellencism. Fo ins ance, when in es iga ing a desi able ou come, such as job sa is ac ion, pe ec ionism
could show a posi i e, non- signi ican o nega i e ela ionship wi h job sa is ac ion o e and abo e he
espec i e ela ionship o excellencism. Assuming ha excellencism ela es posi i ely o job sa is ac ion,
pe ec ionism would consequen ly be bene icial (i.e., unique posi i e ela ionship), unneeded (i.e., no
unique ela ionship) o ha m ul (i.e., unique nega i e ela ionship). When in es iga ing an undesi able
ou come such as bu nou , pe ec ionism could again show a posi i e, non- signi ican o nega i e ela-
ionship wi h bu nou o e and abo e he espec i e ela ionship o excellencism. Howe e , assuming
ha excellencism ela es nega i ely o bu nou , pe ec ionism would in ha case be ha m ul i i shows
a unique posi i e ela ionship, unneeded i i shows no unique ela ionship wi h bu nou (as in he
p e ious example), o bene icial i i shows a unique nega i e ela ionship (Gaud eau, 2019; Gaud eau
e al., 2022).
Because he MEP (Gaud eau, 2019; Gaud eau e al., 2022) is compa a i ely new, empi ical s udies
examining i s p oposi ions a e jus eme ging. Up o now, he esul s o hese s udies indica ed ha
pe ec ionism is unneeded o ha m ul when con as ed wi h excellencism. Fo ins ance, pe ec ion
s i e s did no expe ience mo e bene i s in e ms o li e sa is ac ion and p og ess on pe sonal goals
o educed ha m in e ms o dep ession han excellence s i e s (Gaud eau e al., 2022). In he uni-
e si y con ex , s uden s who we e pe ec ion s i e s we e ound o pe o m wo se on c ea i e asks
han excellence s i e s (Goule - Pelle ie e al., 2022). Simila ly, s uden s who we e excellence s i e s
showed highe academic achie emen and be e men al heal h ou comes han pe ec ion s i e s
and expe ienced an upwa d spi al o academic de elopmen , whe eas pe ec ion s i e s expe ienced
a downwa d spi al (Gaud eau e al., 2022; Tape e al., 2024). S uden s who we e pe ec ion s i e s
we e also ound o expe ience wo se adjus men (e.g., highe anxie y, dep ession and s ess), sa ou ed
posi i e school e en s less and had g ea e d opou in en ions han excellence s i e s (Gaud eau
e al., 2024; Gaud eau & Schellenbe g, 2024). In his ega d, sel - compassion was ound o a enua e
he posi i e ela ionships o dis ess in pe ec ion s i e s (Wi h e al., 2024). Adolescen s who we e
pe ec ion s i e s sco ed lowe on openness, conscien iousness, ex a e sion, ag eeableness and sel -
es eem and highe on neu o icism han excellence s i e s (Bien e al., 2025). In he spo s con ex ,
pe ec ion s i e s showed highe a hle ic achie emen bu expe ienced lowe sa ou ing and enjoy-
men when missing goals han excellence s i e s (Gaud eau e al., 2024). Fu he mo e, spo ans
who we e pe ec ion s i e s had mo e posi i e a i udes owa ds chea ing han excellence s i e s
(Gaud eau & Schellenbe g, 2022).
Excellencism in daily wo k: Rela ionships wi h employee e o ,
pe o mance and well- being
Goals a e ‘in e nal ep esen a ions o desi ed s a es ha di ec a en ion, o ganize ac ion and sus ain e -
o aimed a achie ing hose s a es’ (Kan e e al., 2017, p. 343). As explained, excellence e e s o e y
high goals ha a e pu sued in an e o ul, engaged and de e mined manne (Gaud eau, 2019; Gaud eau
e al., 2022). This e o ul s i ing is in line wi h goal se ing heo y ha asc ibes high goals an ene -
gizing unc ion and, hus, pos ula es a posi i e ela ionship be ween high goals and e o in es ed in
|
5 o 20
PERFECTIONISM AND EXCELLENCISM AT WORK
pu suing hese goals (Locke & La ham, 2002). In ou s udy, we in es iga ed bo h e o in ensi y (i.e.,
how much e o employees exe ) and pe sis ence (i.e., how long employees pe se e e wi h hei e -
o ), wo cen al dimensions o wo k- ela ed e o (Van Iddekinge e al., 2023). Following Locke and
La ham (2002), we assumed ha pu suing e y high goals (i.e., excellencism) would posi i ely ela e o
bo h e o in ensi y and pe sis ence in daily wo k.
Hypo hesis 1. Daily excellencism in he mo ning a wo k ela es posi i ely o e o in ensi y and
pe sis ence in he a e noon.
By mobilizing and sus aining e o (i.e., e o in ensi y and pe sis ence), high goals a e deemed
o be posi i ely ela ed o pe o mance (Kan e e al., 2017; Locke & La ham, 2002; Van Iddekinge
e al., 2023). Acco dingly, we assumed ha an employee's excellencism on a speci ic wo kday would
posi i ely ela e o hei in- ole pe o mance ha day (i.e., comple ion o o mally equi ed and e-
wa ded asks and du ies a wo k; Williams & Ande son, 1991) ia e o in ensi y and pe sis ence.
Howe e , exe ing and sus aining e o a wo k migh no only be bene icial o employee pe o -
mance bu migh also be de imen al o employee well- being. In pa icula , when an employee exe s
mo e e o on a speci ic wo kday o pe sis s wi h hei e o , hey should eel mo e a igued a he
end o ha wo kday because, acco ding o he wo k- a igue hypo hesis (Hockey, 2013), mobilizing
and sus aining e o a wo k should be d aining. The assump ion ha exe ing e o a wo k o
accomplish asks and goals is a iguing is also a he co e o he eco e y li e a u e (Deme ou i
e al., 2009; Sonnen ag & Zijls a, 2006). We he e o e assumed ha an employee's excellencism on
a speci ic wo kday would posi i ely ela e o hei eelings o a igue a he end o ha wo kday ia
e o in ensi y and pe sis ence.
Hypo hesis 2. E o in ensi y and pe sis ence in he a e noon ela e posi i ely o (a) in- ole pe o -
mance in he a e noon and (b) a igue a he end o he wo kday.
Hypo hesis 3. Daily excellencism in he mo ning a wo k shows a posi i e indi ec ela ionship wi h
(a) in- ole pe o mance in he a e noon and (b) a igue a he end o he wo kday ia e o in ensi y and
pe sis ence in he a e noon.
Pe ec ionism in daily wo k: Bene icial, unneeded o ha m ul?
As s a ed by he MEP (Gaud eau, 2019; Gaud eau e al., 2022), he ela ionships be ween pe ec ion-
ism and ou comes o in e es can only be in e p e ed in ela ion o he espec i e ela ionships o
excellencism. Al hough he model does no make speci ic p edic ions and lea es i up o empi ical
sc u iny o de e mine whe he pe ec ionism is bene icial, unneeded, o ha m ul wi h espec o spe-
ci ic ou comes, i is supposed ha excellencism is likely a bene icial pu sui , whe eas pe ec ionism
is likely an unneeded o ha m ul pu sui (Gaud eau, 2019). As ou lined abo e, his supposi ion has
ecei ed ini ial empi ical suppo (see, e.g., Gaud eau & Schellenbe g, 2022; Gaud eau e al., 2022;
Goule - Pelle ie e al., 2022).
Wi h espec o ou model, daily pe ec ionism could, i s ly, show a unique posi i e ela ionship
wi h e o o e and abo e he assumed espec i e posi i e ela ionship o daily excellencism. Tha
is, pe ec ion e e s o a highe and mo e di icul goal han excellence, and pe ec ionism is ma ked
by elen lessness (Gaud eau, 2019). The e o e, i migh be ha an employee exe s mo e e o and
also pe sis s longe wi h hei e o on wo kdays on which hey s i e o pe ec ion. Howe e , daily
pe ec ionism could, secondly, show no unique ela ionship wi h e o . Tha is, i migh be ha he
posi i e ela ionships be ween pe ec ionism and e o ound in p e ious esea ch (e.g., S oebe &
Eismann, 2007) we e d i en by excellencism and, hus, become non- signi ican when di e en ia ing
be ween pe ec ionism and excellencism. The e o e, we canno make clea p edic ions on how daily
6 o 20
|
MOHR and DIETZ
pe ec ionism ela es o e o and, hus, ia e o as a c ucial mechanism, o in- ole pe o mance and
a igue o e and abo e daily excellencism. We hence posed he ollowing wo esea ch ques ions:
Resea ch Ques ion 1. Does daily pe ec ionism a wo k show a unique ela ionship wi h e o o e and
abo e he espec i e ela ionship o daily excellencism a wo k?
Resea ch Ques ion 2. Does daily pe ec ionism a wo k show unique indi ec ela ionships wi h in- ole
pe o mance and a igue ia e o o e and abo e he espec i e ela ionships o daily excellencism
a wo k?
Fo he co ec unde s anding and in e p e a ion o ou s udy and i s esul s, i is impo an o
highligh ha we in es iga ed daily, wi hin- pe son ela ionships. As desc ibed in de ail in he Me hod
sec ion, we used a mul ile el design ha allows o examining bo h wi hin- pe son as well as be ween-
pe son ela ionships. We epo esul s a he be ween- pe son le el on an explo a o y basis in he com-
plemen a y analyses.
METHOD
P ocedu e and sample
To es ou hypo heses and in es iga e ou esea ch ques ions, we collec ed da a h ough an online
daily dia y s udy as pa o a la ge esea ch p ojec . We ec ui ed pa icipan s ia lye s dis ibu ed ia
email o in pe son, ad e isemen s on espec i e websi es (e.g., psychologie- heu e.de), mailing lis s and
social online ne wo ks (e.g., Facebook). We ad e ised ou p ojec as a esea ch p ojec on ‘Job demands
and eco e y om daily wo k’. Pa icipan s had o be o age (i.e., a leas 18 yea s old) and wo k a leas
30 h/week on a leas 4 days/week (Monday–F iday); pa icipan s mus no be sel - employed o egula ly
wo king la e o nigh shi s. We only included employees egula ly wo king du ing he day o ensu e ha
pa icipan s did no di e ega ding hei daily cou ses o wo k (e.g., being assigned wo k asks, ge ing
up in he mo ning). Pa icipan s who comple ed bo h he gene al su ey and a leas 70% o he daily
su eys could ake pa in a lo e y and win one ou o 14 ouche s om an online e aile ( wo ouche s
wo h 100 Eu os, wo ouche s wo h 50 Eu os, 10 ouche s wo h 20 Eu os). A e pa icipan s had
p o ided in o med consen and egis e ed o ou s udy, we asked hem o comple e a gene al su ey
cap u ing demog aphic and wo k- ela ed backg ound da a. We hen in i ed pa icipan s o comple e
he daily dia y su eys (i.e., mo ning su ey, accessible om 5 o 10 AM; noon su ey, accessible om
11 AM o 2 PM; end- o - wo kday su ey, accessible om 3 o 7 PM) o wo consecu i e wo king weeks
(Monday–F iday). Pa icipan s we e ins uc ed o answe he mo ning su ey be o e s a ing o wo k,
he noon su ey in he mo ning a wo k and he end- o - wo kday su ey a he end o hei wo kday.
In o al, 167 people egis e ed o ou p ojec , 141 o whom comple ed he gene al su ey. Based
on ou inclusion c i e ia ou lined abo e, we excluded ou pa icipan s indica ing hey we e in e ns o
wo king s uden s and h ee pa icipan s wo king less han 30 h/week. In addi ion, we excluded wo
pa icipan s who did no p o ide any dia y da a and i e pa icipan s who did no p o ide any da a
ega ding ou ocal s udy a iables, esul ing in a inal sample o 127 pa icipan s p o iding 1018 days
o da a. Rega ding he daily su ey da a, we ensu ed ha pa icipan s indica ed ha hey had wo ked
in he mo ning and in he a e noon be o e comple ing he espec i e su eys. Pa icipan s p o ided
da a on 953 mo ning su eys, da a on 814 noon su eys and da a on 797 end- o - wo kday su eys. We
handled missing da a by using ull in o ma ion maximum likelihood es ima ion in Mplus (Mu hén &
Mu hén, 1998–2017; Newman, 2014).
Mos pa icipan s we e emale (69.3%; wo pa icipan s could o did no wan o assign hemsel es
o he gende bina y). Pa icipan s we e on a e age 37.4 yea s old (SD = 12.1) and wo ked 39.2 h/week
(SD = 5.4). Mos pa icipan s held a mas e 's deg ee (33.9%) o had inished oca ional aining (29.1%).
Pa icipan s wo ked in a ious indus ies, such as adminis a i e occupa ions (16.5%), wo king wi h
|
7 o 20
PERFECTIONISM AND EXCELLENCISM AT WORK
child en and adolescen s (15.7%), educa ion (8.7%) and in o ma ion echnology (6.3%). To check o
selec i e a i ion, we compa ed he 14 pa icipan s who comple ed he gene al su ey bu we e no
included in ou inal sample wi h he 127 pa icipan s included he ein. We ound no di e ences wi h
espec o gende , age, a e age weekly wo king hou s o educa ional le el. We collec ed he da a o
his s udy in Ge many om mid- June 2023 o mid- Oc obe 2023. We p o ided all su eys in Ge man.
Measu es
As s a ed, we adminis e ed h ee daily su eys (i.e., mo ning su ey, noon su ey, end- o - wo kday su -
ey) o he pa icipan s. In hese daily su eys, we assessed ou ocal s udy a iables. In he mo ning
su ey, we assessed s a e a igue in he mo ning as a con ol a iable. In he noon su ey, we assessed
daily pe ec ionism and excellencism in he mo ning a wo k. In he end- o - wo kday su ey, we assessed
e o in ensi y, e o pe sis ence and in- ole pe o mance in he a e noon a wo k as well as s a e a-
igue a he end o he wo kday.
Daily pe ec ionism and excellencism (noon su ey)
We used he sho e sion o he Scale o Pe ec ionism and Excellencism (SCOPE, Gaud eau
e al., 2022; see also h ps:// os . io/ y6j 5/ ) in i s Ge man e sion (Bien e al., 2025) o assess pa ici-
pan s' daily pe ec ionism and excellencism in he mo ning a wo k. As ecommended by Gaud eau
e al. (2022), we sligh ly adap ed he ins uc ion and i ems o ma ch he wo k con ex and he daily
assessmen . Fi e i ems cap u ed pa icipan s' daily pe ec ionism (e.g., ‘This mo ning a wo k, i is my
goal o a ain pe ec ion’) and i e i ems cap u ed pa icipan s' daily excellencism (e.g., ‘This mo ning
a wo k, i is my goal o each excellence’). The esponse scale anged om 1 = no a all o 7 = comple ely.
The scale p o ed o be eliable o bo h pe ec ionism (wi hin- pe son α = .89, be ween- pe son α = .99)
and excellencism (wi hin- pe son α = .81, be ween- pe son α = .93; Geldho e al., 2014). This is he i s
s udy using a e sion o he SCOPE adap ed o he wo k con ex and he daily assessmen o pe ec ion-
ism and excellencism.
E o in ensi y and pe sis ence (end- o - wo kday su ey)
To assess how in ensely pa icipan s wo ked in he a e noon, we used i e i ems de eloped by B own
and Leigh (1996). A sample i em is ‘This a e noon a wo k, I eally exe ed mysel o he ulles ’.
The esponse scale anged om 1 = do no ag ee a all o 5 = comple ely ag ee. Wi hin- pe son α was .91,
be ween- pe son α was .97. To assess how pe sis en ly pa icipan s wo ked in he a e noon, we used
he h ee- i em wo k e o pe sis ence- subscale de eloped by De Cooman e al. (2009). A sample i em
is ‘This a e noon a wo k, I did no gi e up quickly when some hing did no wo k well’. The esponse
scale anged om 1 = do no ag ee a all o 5 = comple ely ag ee. Wi hin- pe son α was .70, be ween- pe son α
was .80. We ansla ed all eigh e o i ems om English in o Ge man wi h he help o a p o essional
ansla o .
In- ole pe o mance (end- o - wo kday su ey)
We assessed pa icipan s' pe cei ed in- ole pe o mance wi h ou i ems de eloped by Williams and
Ande son (1991); Ge man e sion see F i z and Sonnen ag (2005). A sample i em is ‘This a e noon a
wo k, I adequa ely comple ed assigned du ies’. The esponse scale anged om 1 = do no ag ee a all o
5 = comple ely ag ee. Wi hin- pe son α was .93, be ween- pe son α was .99.
8 o 20
|
MOHR and DIETZ
Fa igue (end- o - wo kday su ey, mo ning su ey)
To cap u e pa icipan s' s a e a igue a he end o he wo kday, we used he 7- i em (e.g., ‘ i ed’, ‘ex-
haus ed’) a igue subscale o he P o ile o Mood S a es (McNai e al., 1971) in i s Ge man sho
e sion (Albani e al., 2005). The esponse scale anged om 1 = no a all o 5 = ex emely. Wi hin-
pe son α was .93, be ween- pe son α was .99. To ule ou ha pa icipan s expe ienced mo e a igue
a he end o a wo kday on which hey al eady expe ienced mo e a igue be o e s a ing o wo k,
we con olled o s a e a igue in he mo ning (see Gab iel e al., 2019). We assessed a igue in he
mo ning as a he end o he wo kday; wi hin α was .92, be ween- pe son α was .98. Remo ing his
con ol a iable om ou analysis does no change he esul s wi h espec o he hypo heses and
esea ch ques ions.
Cons uc alidi y
We conduc ed a mul ile el con i ma o y ac o analysis using Mplus Ve sion 8.6 (Mu hén &
Mu hén, 1998–2017) o examine he cons uc alidi y o ou ocal measu es (pe ec ionism, excel-
lencism, e o in ensi y, e o pe sis ence, in- ole pe o mance, end- o - wo kday a igue). We speci-
ied homologous ac o s uc u es a he wi hin- and be ween- pe son le els. This six- ac o
measu emen model showed a easonable i o he da a, χ2(724) = 1813.16, p < .001, CFI = .93,
TLI = .92, RMSEA = .04, SRMRwi hin = .05, SRMRbe ween = .12,2 a be e i han a model subsuming
pe ec ionism and excellencism unde one ac o , χ2(734) = 2422.27, p < .001, CFI = .89, TLI = .88,
RMSEA = .05, SRMRwi hin = .05, SRMRbe ween = .14, Sa o a- Ben le Δχ2(10) = 475.99, p < .001, a be -
e i han a model subsuming bo h e o dimensions unde one ac o , χ2(734) = 1916.84, p < .001,
CFI = .92, TLI = .92, RMSEA = .04, SRMRwi hin = .05, SRMRbe ween = .12, Sa o a- Ben le
Δχ2(10) = 84.24, p < .001, and a be e i han a one- ac o model, χ2(754) = 11026.45, p < .001,
CFI = .34, TLI = .29, RMSEA = .12, SRMRwi hin = .24, SRMRbe ween = .33, Sa o a- Ben le
Δχ2(30) = 4572.09, p < .001.
Da a analysis
Because we epea edly collec ed da a om he same pa icipan s using a daily dia y design, ou da a
ha e a mul ile el s uc u e (i.e., days a e nes ed wi hin pa icipan s). We he e o e es ed ou hypo h-
eses and in es iga ed ou esea ch ques ions wi h a mul ile el pa h analy ic app oach using Mplus
Ve sion 8.6 (Mu hén & Mu hén, 1998–2017) ollowing ecommenda ions by P eache e al. (2010; 1-
1- 1 media ion model wi h andom in e cep s and ixed slopes). In ou main analyses, we ocus on he
daily, wi hin- pe son le el (i.e., Le el 1) ela ionships. We also epo esul s a he be ween- pe son
le el (i.e., Le el 2) in he complemen a y analyses. Table 1 displays means, s anda d de ia ions,
in aclass co ela ion coe icien s and in e co ela ions among he s udy a iables. We es ed all hy-
po heses and esea ch ques ions in one o e all model (model i : χ2(10) = 29.34, p = .001, CFI = .99,
TLI = .94, RMSEA = .04, SRMRwi hin = .06, SRMRbe ween = .07). To ecei e unbiased wi hin- pe son
es ima es, we sepa a ed he wi hin- and be ween- pe son a iance o he daily assessed a iables by
2As he compa a i ely high alue o he SRMRbe ween indica es, he measu emen model did no i he da a well a he be ween- pe son le el;
hus, i is likely ha he ideal measu emen model is no homologous a he wi hin- and be ween- pe son le el o analysis. To u he es
whe he he measu emen model i s he da a well a he wi hin- pe son le el, he main le el o ou analyses, we conduc ed ano he mul ile el
CFA. In his mul ile el CFA, we used he “de ine” command and “cen e ” op ion in Mplus o g oup- mean (i.e., pe son- mean) cen e (see
Ende s & To ighi, 2007) all i ems and he “wi hin” command o speci y ha all i ems a e modelled only a he wi hin- pe son le el. The ea e ,
we speci ied he measu emen model a he wi hin- pe son le el; no measu emen model was speci ied a he be ween- pe son le el. When
speci ying he measu emen model only a he wi hin- pe son le el using pe son- mean cen e ed i ems, i showed a good and sligh ly imp o ed
i o he da a, χ2(362) = 858.04, p < .001, CFI = .95, TLI = .94, RMSEA = .04, SRMRwi hin = .04. Because ou main analyses a e a he
wi hin- pe son le el, he inadequa e i a he be ween- pe son le el does no h ea en he alidi y o ou main esul s.
|
15 o 20
PERFECTIONISM AND EXCELLENCISM AT WORK
o pe ec ionism (F os e al., 1993; S oebe , 2018a; S oebe & O o, 2006) deno ed a u ning poin
ega ding he concep ualiza ion o pe ec ionism (i.e., om a one- o a mul idimensional cons uc ).
Now, he MEP (Gaud eau, 2019; Gaud eau e al., 2022) could deno e a u ning poin ega ding he
(mal- )adap i eness o pe ec ionism. P e ious esea ch on pe ec ionism a wo k has been la gely based
on he wo- ac o model. Al hough we e ain om p oposing o eplace he wo- ac o model wi h he
MEP om now on, we hink ha u u e esea ch migh bene i om an in eg a ion o bo h models ( o
a sugges ed app oach, see Gaud eau, 2021).
Finally, ou s udy also p o ides help ul insigh s o he s udy o e o a wo k. As Van Iddekinge
e al. (2023) poin ed ou , wo k e o is a cen al, ye no well unde s ood concep . Especially i s ela ion-
ships wi h o he cons uc s a wo k a e la gely unclea . We he e o e en ich esea ch on wo k e o and
con ibu e o he de elopmen o i s nomological ne wo k by examining pe ec ionism and excellencism
as pe son- ocused an eceden s o e o expendi u e a wo k. As ou esul s showed, daily excellencism
can be conside ed bo h an an eceden o e o in ensi y and pe sis ence, whe eas daily pe ec ionism
did no show a unique ela ionship wi h e o . Acco dingly, and in line wi h Locke and La ham (2002),
pu suing excellence, a e y high bu lexible and a ainable goal, seems o be bene icial o e o and,
hus, pe o mance, whe eas pu suing pe ec ion, an idealized, excessi ely high and igid goal, is no .
Mo eo e , p e ious esea ch showed ha e y high goals a wo k can be de imen al o well- being i
hey a e assigned (Welsh e al., 2020). Ou esea ch sugges s ha e y high goals a wo k a e no neces-
sa ily de imen al o well- being i hey a e oo ed in onesel .
The heo e ical implica ions o ou esea ch a e di ec ly ele an o p ac ice. Pe ec ionism is be-
coming inc easingly legi imized in oday's wo kplaces, and mo e and mo e employees a e encou aged
o s i e o pe ec ion (Ocampo e al., 2020). As s a ed in he in oduc o y quo e, many o ganiza-
ional schola s as well as p ac i ione s belie e in he posi i e aspec s o pe ec ionism a wo k (Bae &
Shaw, 2017; Ha a i e al., 2018). Howe e , his pic u e is p obably dis o ed: As ou esul s sugges , he
assumed bene icial e ec s (e.g., o employee e o and pe o mance) o pe ec ionism a wo k a e likely
d i en by excellencism. Thus, gi en ou esul s and conside ing he downsides o pe ec ionism ound
in p e ious wo k (e.g., Ha a i e al., 2018), i seems o be unneeded o s i e o pe ec ion, especially
o ‘day- o- day’ (Bae & Shaw, 2017) ac i i ies and pe o mance a wo k (see also H abluik e al., 2012).
Acco dingly, employees could bene i om lea ning how o disengage om un ealis ic goals and how o
se high bu a ainable goals in hei day- o- day wo k (H abluik e al., 2012; W osch e al., 2003).
Fu he mo e, p ac i ione s should e ain om demanding pe ec ion and om p omo ing employ-
ees' pe ec ionism. This implica ion does seem o apply mo e b oadly as well. Gi en ou esul s and
he indings o p e ious esea ch (e.g., Gaud eau e al., 2022; Gaud eau & Schellenbe g, 2022; Goule -
Pelle ie e al., 2022), indi iduals do likely no bene i om pe ec ionism, be i a wo k o in o he li e
domains. Because pe ec ionism is no only o ganiza ionally bu also socie ally encou aged, he e is a
need o aise socie al awa eness o i s missing bene i s and possible downsides. This awa eness could
help o lessen socie al p essu es o s i e o pe ec ion.
Ins ead o s i ing o pe ec ion, ou esul s sugges ha i is bene icial i employees s i e o ex-
cellence in hei daily wo k as excellencism was posi i ely ela ed o e o and pe o mance wi hou
nega i e implica ions o employee well- being. Inc easing employee e o and pe o mance is a c ucial
conce n o manage s (Van Iddekinge e al., 2023). Co espondingly, i migh be emp ing o ad ise
employees o s i e o excellence and o ad ise p ac i ione s o encou age employees' excellencism a
wo k. Howe e , we eel ha his ad ice would be p ema u e gi en he lack o empi ical indings on
excellencism a wo k.
Limi a ions and u u e esea ch di ec ions
Ou s udy has limi a ions ha need o be discussed. Fi s , we es ed a media ion model in which he
assessmen s o he media o and ou come a iables we e no empo ally sepa a ed, which can aise con-
ce ns ega ding hei empo al o de (see Aguinis e al., 2017). Mo e p ecisely, we assessed e o , in- ole
16 o 20
|
MOHR and DIETZ
pe o mance and a igue concu en ly in he end- o - wo kday su eys. To allay conce ns ega ding he
concu en assessmen o e o and in- ole pe o mance, he e is a s ong heo e ical basis o assum-
ing ha e o p ecedes pe o mance (Locke & La ham, 2002; Van Iddekinge e al., 2023). Mo eo e ,
ega ding he concu en assessmen o e o and a igue, we asked pa icipan s o epo hei expe i-
ences e e ing o di e en ime ames (see Fishe & To, 2012). Tha is, pa icipan s epo ed on hei
e o expendi u e e e ing o hei a e noon a wo k, whe eas we used a s a e measu e o assess pa -
icipan s' a igue a he end o he wo kday.
Second, he high pe ec ionism- excellencism and e o in ensi y- pe sis ence co ela ions a bo h le -
els aise ques ions abou whe he ou esul s a e biased by a lack o disc iminan alidi y and, ela edly,
by mul icollinea i y o common me hod bias. Bo h pe ec ionism and excellencism as well as e o
in ensi y and pe sis ence ha e been concep ualized as closely ela ed bu dis inc cons uc s (Gaud eau
e al., 2022; Van Iddekinge e al., 2023); he e o e, i is impo an o ea hem as sepa a e cons uc s
on heo e ical g ounds. The esul s o ou mul ile el CFA compa isons p o ided i s e idence ha
he cons uc s a e empi ically dis inguishable by showing ha he models ha di e en ia ed be ween
pe ec ionism and excellencism and be ween e o in ensi y and pe sis ence i ed he da a signi ican ly
be e han he espec i e one- ac o solu ions. Resul s o a close in es iga ion using he CICFA(sys)
echnique (Rönkkö & Cho, 2022) showed a ma ginal p oblem ega ding disc iminan alidi y wi h e-
spec o he measu emen s o pe ec ionism and excellencism a he wi hin- pe son le el, ou main le el
o analysis. In ace o his ma ginal p oblem, i is p obably sa e o in e p e hese scales as ep esen a-
ions o dis inc cons uc s a he wi hin- pe son le el (see Rönkkö & Cho, 2022).
Howe e , he e we e also mode a e disc iminan alidi y p oblems in ou da a (i.e., pe ec ionism
s. excellencism a he be ween- pe son le el, e o in ensi y s. pe sis ence a bo h le els). I is ec-
ommended o discuss he high co ela ions ound in ou s udy wi h e e ence o he in e ela ionships
ound in p io s udies and o discuss possible causes o he high co ela ions (Rönkkö & Cho, 2022).
We a e no awa e o any p e ious s udies in es iga ing he pe ec ionism–excellencism o e o
in ensi y- pe sis ence ela ionships a he wi hin- pe son le el; hus, we canno compa e ou co ela ions
a his le el. The be ween- pe son co ela ion o pe ec ionism and excellencism in ou s udy ( = .77)
was highe han co ela ions epo ed in p e ious wo k (e.g., = .64 in Bien e al., 2025; = .51 in Goule -
Pelle ie e al., 2022, S udy 1). As o he s udies in es iga ed his in e ela ionship in con ex s ou side he
wo kplace, i migh be ha pe ec ionism and excellencism a e mo e closely in e ela ed and, hus, less
clea ly dis inguishable in he wo k con ex . Howe e , i migh also be ha he be ween- pe son co ela-
ions di e because hey we e gained om a epea ed, daily assessmen e e ing o a speci ic ime ame
(i.e., one's mo ning a wo k) and no o a one- ime assessmen o pe ec ionism and excellencism in gen-
e al. This migh apply o he e o in ensi y and pe sis ence ela ionship ( = .83) as well, which was also
ound o be lowe in p e ious esea ch ( = .65; De Cooman e al., 2009). To conclude, albei ou disc im-
inan alidi y indings do no indica e a p oblem ha would equi e a undamen al econcep ualiza ion
o he cons uc s and hei measu emen in u u e esea ch (Rönkkö & Cho, 2022), hey aise doub s
ega ding he applicabili y o hese cons uc s and, hus, hei heo e ical ounda ions (see Gaud eau
e al., 2022; Van Iddekinge e al., 2023), ac oss di e en con ex s, s udy designs and ime ames.
Rega ding mul icollinea i y, he esul s o ou complemen a y analyses showed ha mul icollinea i y
is no an issue in ou model. Thus, we a e con iden ha each a iable in ou model p o ides added alue
and shows subs an ial unique ela ionships wi h he ou come a iables. We acknowledge ha all o ou
measu es sha e common me hod a iance due o he use o same- sou ce sel - epo s. Acco dingly, ou
esul s migh be a ec ed by common me hod bias (Podsako e al., 2012). We ook se e al measu es
o mi iga e possible me hod biases, such as ensu ing pa icipan s' anonymi y and aiming o educe
e alua ion app ehension as well as pa ly empo ally sepa a ing he assessmen s o ou ocal a iables
(Podsako e al., 2003). Fu he mo e, we speci ied a wo- le el model wi h iden ical pa hs a he wi h-
in- and be ween- pe son le el, he eby pe son- mean cen ing ou a iables a he wi hin- pe son le el.
Due o his pe son- mean cen ing, he ela ionships a he wi hin- pe son le el canno be a ec ed by
be ween- pe son di e ences ha a e common sou ces o me hod bias (e.g., social desi abili y; Gab iel
e al., 2019). Albei he assumed ac o s uc u e o ou measu es was easonable and we excluded some
|
17 o 20
PERFECTIONISM AND EXCELLENCISM AT WORK
o he commonly known sou ces o me hod bias o minimize i s impac , i is no possible o comple ely
ule ou ha ou esul s we e in- o de la ed by common me hod bias.
Ou s udy p epa es he g ound o ui ul u u e esea ch. Gi en he p e alence and impac o
pe ec ionism a wo k, mo e esea ch on he di e en ia ion be ween pe ec ionism and excellencism
and ela ed implica ions in he wo k con ex is impe a i e. Al hough ou esul s indica ed ha pe ec-
ionism is an unnecessa y pu sui a wo k, u u e esea ch is needed o eplica e o e ine his inding.
As esea ch in o he domains sugges ed (e.g., Gaud eau e al., 2022; Gaud eau & Schellenbe g, 2022;
Goule - Pelle ie e al., 2022), i migh be ha pe ec ionism can also be a ha m ul pu sui a wo k o
ha —unde speci ic ci cums ances—i e en u ns ou o be a bene icial pu sui (Gaud eau e al., 2022).
Fo ins ance, ou s udy ocused on day- o- day pe o mance o employees wo king in a ious indus ies.
I migh be ha pe ec ionism only shows unique pe o mance bene i s o speci ic occupa ions such
as musicians o hea su geons o which pe o ming close o pe ec ion is pa o hei daily wo k.
Fu he mo e, whe eas pe ec ionism migh be unneeded o success ully pe o ming e e yday o mun-
dane asks (Gaud eau, 2019), i migh be bene icial o asks ha equi e employees' maximum pe o -
mance. Rela edly, i would be insigh ul o esea ch pe ec ionism and excellencism in ela ion o o he
indica o s o pe o mance (e.g., c ea i i y, Goule - Pelle ie e al., 2022) and (un- )desi ed beha iou a
wo k (e.g., chea ing, Gaud eau & Schellenbe g, 2022; coun e p oduc i e wo k o o ganiza ional ci izen-
ship beha iou ). Fu u e esea ch could also ocus on objec i e pe o mance indica o s (e.g., p omo ions)
o on pe o mance wi hin o he ime ames (e.g., long- e m ca ee success). Pe ec ionism and excel-
lencism bo h showed subs an ial a iance a he day le el (i.e., 17% and 26%, espec i ely); howe e ,
mos o hei a iance was a he be ween- pe son le el. The e o e, u u e esea ch should examine bo h
wi hin- pe son a iabili y and be ween- pe son di e ences o pe ec ionism and excellencism.
We also call o a close examina ion o excellencism in he wo k con ex . Ou esul s poin o pos-
sible bene icial e ec s (i.e., o daily e o and in- ole pe o mance) o excellencism a wo k. Howe e ,
he e migh also be a ‘da k side’ o excellencism a wo k (Gaud eau, 2019; Gaud eau e al., 2022). Fo in-
s ance, high le els o excellencism wi hin wo k eams could lead o unheal hy compe i ion o success ul
excellence s i e s migh eel he p essu e o aim highe and highe and, hus, u n in o pe ec ionis s.
Fu u e esea ch should u n o hese issues.
Finally, i migh be wo hwhile o u he in es iga e he ela ionship be ween pe ec ionism, excel-
lencism, and e o in a ious con ex s. As p e ious esea ch has shown, people s i ing o pe ec ion
migh no e eal ha hey in es ed e o o achie e hei goals; ins ead, hey migh emphasize ha hey
eached hei goals wi hou in es ing e o (i.e., e o less pe ec ionism, T a e s e al., 2015). The e o e, i
migh be ha he ela ionships be ween pe ec ionism, excellencism and e o di e when using ob-
jec i e indica o s o assess e o ins ead o sel - epo s. In his ega d, schola s could also ake up he
ecen ly p oposed di e en ia ion be ween lexible (i.e., pu suing goals wi h an open and b oad ocus ha
allows one o a end o o he goals) and igid pe sis ence (i.e., pu suing goals wi h a na owe ocus ha
acili a es eaching some goals, bu no o he s; Valle and e al., 2023). I is likely ha excellencism, wi h
i s ocus on de e mined bu lexible goal pu sui , ela es o lexible pe sis ence, whe eas pe ec ionism,
wi h i s ocus on elen less goal pu sui , ela es o igid pe sis ence.
AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS
Monique Moh : Concep ualiza ion; da a cu a ion; in es iga ion; o mal analysis; p ojec adminis a-
ion; me hodology; w i ing – o iginal d a . Ca olin Die z: In es iga ion; p ojec adminis a ion; w i -
ing – e iew and edi ing.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We hank Ca hy Ihln, Annika Leibige , Susanne Lu , Lieselo e Mah and An on Recknagel o hei
help in da a collec ion.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST STATEMENT
The au ho s epo no con lic o in e es .
18 o 20
|
MOHR and DIETZ
DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT
Da a on he ocal s udy a iables and he code o ou main analysis a e a ailable a h ps:// os . io/ p7y / .
ORCID
Monique Moh h ps://o cid.o g/0000-0001-6878-8808
Ca olin Die z h ps://o cid.o g/0000-0001-7847-1230
REFERENCES
Aguinis, H., Edwa ds, J. R., & B adley, K. J. (2017). Imp o ing ou unde s anding o mode a ion and media ion in s a egic
managemen esea ch. O ganiza ional Resea ch Me hods, 20(4), 665–685. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1177/ 10944 28115 627498
Albani, C., Blase , G., Geye , M., Schmu ze , G., B ähle , E., Baile , H., & G ulke, N. (2005). Übe p ü ung de Gü ek i e ien de
deu schen Ku z o m des F agebogens “P o ile o Mood S a es” (POMS) in eine ep äsen a i en Be ölke ungss ichp obe
[The Ge man Sho Ve sion o “P o ile o Mood S a es” (POMS): Psychome ic e alua ion in a ep esen a i e sample].
PPmP: Psycho he apie Psychosoma ik Medizinische Psychologie, 55(7), 324–330. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1055/ s- 2004- 834727
Bae , M., & Shaw, J. D. (2017). Falling in lo e again wi h wha we do: Academic c a smanship in he managemen sciences.
Academy o Managemen Jou nal, 60(4), 1213–1217. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 5465/ amj. 2017. 4004
Ba es, D., Mächle , M., Bolke , B., & Walke , S. (2015). Fi ing linea mixed- e ec s models using lme4. Jou nal o S a is ical
So wa e, 67(1), 1–48. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 18637/ jss. 067. i01
Bien, K., Wagne , J., & B and , N. D. (2025). Who ends o be a pe ec ionis ic adolescen ? Dis inguishing pe ec ionism om
excellencism and in es iga ing he links wi h he Big Fi e and sel - es eem. B i ish Jou nal o Psycholog y, 116(1), 108–130.
h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1111/ bjop. 12739
B own, S. P., & Leigh, T. W. (1996). A new look a psychological clima e and i s ela ionship o job in ol emen , e o , and
pe o mance. Jou nal o Applied Psycholog y, 81(4), 358–368. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1037/ 0021- 9010. 81.4. 358
Bu ns, D. D. (1980). The pe ec ionis 's sc ip o sel - de ea . Psychology Today, 14(6), 34–52.
Cu an, T., & Hill, A. P. (2019). Pe ec ionism is inc easing o e ime: A me a- analysis o bi h coho di e ences om 1989 o
2016. Psychological Bulle in, 145(4), 410–429. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1037/ bul00 00138
De Cooman, R., De Gie e , S., Pepe mans, R., Jege s, M., & Van Acke , F. (2009). De elopmen and alida ion o he Wo k
E o Scale. Eu opean Jou nal o Psychological Assessmen , 25(4), 266–273. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1027/ 1015- 5759. 25.4. 266
Deme ou i, E., Bakke , A. B., Geu s, S. A. E., & Ta is, T. W. (2009). Daily eco e y om wo k- ela ed e o du ing non- wo k
ime. In S. Sonnen ag, P. L. Pe ewé, & D. C. Gans e (Eds.), Cu en pe spec i es on job- s ess eco e y (pp. 85–123). Eme ald
G oup Publishing Limi ed. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1108/ S1479 - 3555(2009) 00000 07006
Ende s, C. K., & To ighi, D. (2007). Cen e ing p edic o a iables in c oss- sec ional mul ile el models: A new look a an old
issue. Psychological Me hods, 12(2), 121–138. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1037/ 1082- 989X. 12.2. 121
Fishe , C. D., & To, M. L. (2012). Using expe ience sampling me hodology in o ganiza ional beha io . Jou nal o O ganiza ional
Beha io , 33(7), 865–877. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1002/ job. 1803
Fle , G. L., & Hewi , P. L. (2020). Re lec ions on h ee decades o esea ch on mul idimensional pe ec ionism: An in oduc-
ion o he special issue on u he ad ances in he assessmen o pe ec ionism. Jou nal o Psychoeduca ional Assessmen , 38(1),
3–14. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1177/ 07342 82919 881928
F i z, C., & Sonnen ag, S. (2005). Reco e y, heal h, and job pe o mance: E ec s o weekend expe iences. Jou nal o Occupa ional
Heal h Psycholog y, 10(3), 187–199. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1037/ 1076- 8998. 10.3. 187
F os , R. O., Heimbe g, R. G., Hol , C. S., Ma ia, J. I., & Neubaue , A. L. (1993). A compa ison o wo measu es o pe ec ion-
ism. Pe sonali y and Indi idual Di e ences, 14(1), 119–126. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1016/ 0191- 8869(93) 90181 - 2
Gab iel, A. S., Podsako , N. P., Beal, D. J., Sco , B. A., Sonnen ag, S., T ougakos, J. P., & Bu s, M. M. (2019). Expe ience sam-
pling me hods: A discussion o c i ical ends and conside a ions o schola ly ad ancemen . O ganiza ional Resea ch Me hods,
22(4), 969–1006. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1177/ 10944 28118 802626
Gaud eau, P. (2019). On he dis inc ion be ween pe sonal s anda ds pe ec ionism and excellencism: A heo y elabo a ion and
esea ch agenda. Pe spec i es on Psychological Science, 14(2), 197–215. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1177/ 17456 91618 797940
Gaud eau, P. (2021). Sepa a ing he co e de ini ional ea u e and he signa u e exp essions o disposi ional pe ec ionism:
Implica ions o heo y, esea ch, and p ac ice. Pe sonali y and Indi idual Di e ences, 181, 110975. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1016/j.
paid. 2021. 110975
Gaud eau, P., & Schellenbe g, B. J. I. (2022). A i udes o spo ans owa d he elec onic sign- s ealing scandal in Majo League
Baseball: Di e ing associa ions wi h pe ec ionism and excellencism. Jou nal o Spo & Exe cise Psycholog y, 44(3), 220–229.
h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1123/ jsep. 2021- 0136
Gaud eau, P., & Schellenbe g, B. J. I. (2024). The impac o in e ne - based cogni i e beha io he apy o pe ec ionism: A e-
in e p e a ion h ough he lens o he model o excellencism and pe ec ionism. Beha iou al and Cogni i e Psycho he apy, 52(3),
288–300. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1017/ S1352 46582 3000516
Gaud eau, P., Schellenbe g, B. J. I., Ga eau, A., Kljajic, K., & Manoni- Milla , S. (2022). Because excellencism is mo e han good
enough: On he need o dis inguish he pu sui o excellence om he pu sui o pe ec ion. Jou nal o Pe sonali y and Social
Psycholog y, 122(6), 1117–1145. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1037/ pspp0 000411
|
19 o 20
PERFECTIONISM AND EXCELLENCISM AT WORK
Gaud eau, P., Schellenbe g, B. J. I., & Quesnel, M. (2024). F om heo y o esea ch: In e p e a ional guidelines, s a is ical
guidance, and a shiny app o he model o excellencism and pe ec ionism. Eu opean Jou nal o Pe sonali y, 38(5), 839–860.
h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1177/ 08902 07023 1221478
Geldho , G. J., P eache , K. J., & Zyphu , M. J. (2014). Reliabili y es ima ion in a mul ile el con i ma o y ac o analysis ame-
wo k. Psychological Me hods, 19(1), 72–91. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1037/ a0032138
Goule - Pelle ie , J.- C., Gaud eau, P., & Cousineau, D. (2022). Is pe ec ionism a kille o c ea i e hinking? A es o he model
o excellencism and pe ec ionism. B i ish Jou nal o Psycholog y, 113(1), 176–207. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1111/ bjop. 12530
Ha a i, D., Swide , B. W., S eed, L. B., & B eiden hal, A. P. (2018). Is pe ec good? A me a- analysis o pe ec ionism in he
wo kplace. Jou nal o Applied Psycholog y, 103(10), 1121–1144. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1037/ apl00 00324
Hockey, R. (2013). The psycholog y o a igue: Wo k, e o and con ol. Camb idge Uni e si y P ess. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1017/ CBO97
81139 015394
H abluik, C., La ham, G. P., & McCa hy, J. M. (2012). Does goal se ing ha e a da k side? The ela ionship be ween pe ec-
ionism and maximum e sus ypical employee pe o mance. In e na ional Public Managemen Jou nal, 12(1), 5–38. h ps:// doi.
o g/ 10. 1080/ 10967 494. 2012. 684010
Kan e , R., F ese, M., & Johnson, R. E. (2017). Mo i a ion ela ed o wo k: A cen u y o p og ess. Jou nal o Applied Psycholog y,
102(3), 338–355. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1037/ apl00 00133
Locke, E. A., & La ham, G. P. (2002). Building a p ac ically use ul heo y o goal se ing and ask mo i a ion: A 35- yea odyssey.
Ame ican Psychologis , 57(9), 705–717. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1037/ 0003- 066X. 57.9. 705
Lüdecke, D., Ben- Shacha , M. S., Pa il, I., Waggone , P., & Makowski, D. (2021). Pe o mance: An R package o assessmen ,
compa ison and es ing o s a is ical models. Jou nal o Open Sou ce So wa e, 6(60), 3139. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 21105/ joss. 03139
McNai , D. M., Lo , M., & D oppleman, L. F. (1971). Manual o he p o ile o mood s a es. Educa ional and Indus ial Tes ing
Se ice.
Moh , M., Neshe Shoshan, H., & Sonnen ag, S. (2023). Pe ec ionism and cogni i e- beha iou al p ocesses in daily wo k:
Implica ions o sel - ela ed pe cep ions and emo ions. Eu opean Jou nal o Wo k and O ganiza ional Psycholog y, 32(6), 858–869.
h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1080/ 13594 32X. 2023. 2256499
Moh , M., Venz, L., & Sonnen ag, S. (2022). A dynamic iew on wo k- ela ed pe ec ionism: An eceden s a wo k and implica-
ions o employee well- being. Jou nal o Occupa ional and O ganiza ional Psycholog y, 95(4), 846–866. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1111/
joop. 12403
Mu hén, L. K., & Mu hén, B. O. (1998–2017). Mplus use 's guide (8 h ed.). Mu hén & Mu hén.
Newman, D. A. (2014). Missing da a: Fi e p ac ical guidelines. O ganiza ional Resea ch Me hods, 17(4), 372–411. h ps:// doi. o g/
10. 1177/ 10944 28114 548590
Ocampo, A. C. G., Wang, L., Kiazad, K., Res ubog, S. L. D., & Ashkanasy, N. M. (2020). The elen less pu sui o pe ec ion-
ism: A e iew o pe ec ionism in he wo kplace and an agenda o u u e esea ch. Jou nal o O ganiza ional Beha io , 41(2),
144–168. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1002/ job. 2400
Podsako , P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.- Y., & Podsako , N. P. (2003). Common me hod biases in beha io al esea ch: A
c i ical e iew o he li e a u e and ecommended emedies. Jou nal o Applied Psycholog y, 88(5), 879–903. h ps:// doi. o g/
10. 1037/ 0021- 9010. 88.5. 879
Podsako , P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., & Podsako , N. P. (2012). Sou ces o me hod bias in social science esea ch and ecom-
menda ions on how o con ol i . Annual Re iew o Psycholog y, 63, 539–569. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1146/ annu e - psych - 12071
0- 100452
P eache , K. J., Zyphu , M. J., & Zhang, Z. (2010). A gene al mul ile el SEM amewo k o assessing mul ile el media ion.
Psychological Me hods, 15(3), 209–233. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1037/ a0020141
R Co e Team. (2024). R: A language and en i onmen o s a is ical compu ing [Compu e so wa e]. h ps:// www. R- p oje c . o g/
Rönkkö, M., & Cho, E. (2022). An upda ed guideline o assessing disc iminan alidi y. O ganiza ional Resea ch Me hods, 25(1),
6–14. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1177/ 10944 28120 968614
Selig, J. P., & P eache , K. J. (2008). Mon e Ca lo me hod o assessing media ion: An in e ac i e ool o c ea ing con idence in e als o indi ec
e ec s [Compu e so wa e]. h p:// quan psy. o g/
Sonnen ag, S., & Zijls a, F. R. H. (2006). Job cha ac e is ics and o - job ac i i ies as p edic o s o need o eco e y, well- being,
and a igue. Jou nal o Applied Psycholog y, 91(2), 330–350. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1037/ 0021- 9010. 91.2. 330
S oebe , J. (2018a). The psychology o pe ec ionism: An in oduc ion. In J. S oebe (Ed.), The psycholog y o pe ec ionism: Theo y,
esea ch, applica ions (pp. 3–16). Rou ledge.
S oebe , J. (2018b). The psychology o pe ec ionism: C i ical issues, open ques ions, and u u e di ec ions. In J. S oebe (Ed.),
The psycholog y o pe ec ionism: Theo y, esea ch, applica ions (pp. 333–352). Rou ledge.
S oebe , J., & Damian, L. E. (2016). Pe ec ionism in employees: Wo k engagemen , wo kaholism, and bu nou . In F. M. Si ois
& D. S. Molna (Eds.), Pe ec ionism, heal h, and well- being (pp. 265–283). Sp inge .
S oebe , J., & Eismann, U. (2007). Pe ec ionism in young musicians: Rela ions wi h mo i a ion, e o , achie emen , and dis-
ess. Pe sonali y and Indi idual Di e ences, 43(8), 2182–2192. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1016/j. paid. 2007. 06. 036
S oebe , J., & Gaud eau, P. (2017). The ad an ages o pa ialling pe ec ionis ic s i ings and pe ec ionis ic conce ns: C i ical
issues and ecommenda ions. Pe sonali y and Indi idual Di e ences, 104, 379–386. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1016/j. paid. 2016. 08. 039
S oebe , J., & O o, K. (2006). Posi i e concep ions o pe ec ionism: App oaches, e idence, challenges. Pe sonali y and Social
Psychology Re iew, 10(4), 295–319. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1207/ s1532 7957p sp 10 04_ 2
20 o 20
|
MOHR and DIETZ
S oebe , J., & S oebe , F. S. (2009). Domains o pe ec ionism: P e alence and ela ionships wi h pe ec ionism, gende , age,
and sa is ac ion wi h li e. Pe sonali y and Indi idual Di e ences, 46(4), 530–535. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1016/j. paid. 2008. 12. 006
Tape, N., D y, M., Monaghan, B., Tan, N., & Tu nbull, D. (2024). The Scale o Pe ec ionism and Excellencism (SCOPE): An
adolescen - based alida ion s udy o he measu emen o pe ec ionism and excellencism. The Educa ional and De elopmen al
Psychologis , 41(1), 3–11. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1080/ 20590 776. 2023. 2289627
T a e s, L. V., Randall, E. T., B yan , F. B., Conley, C. S., & Bohne , A. M. (2015). The cos o pe ec ion wi h appa en ease:
Theo e ical ounda ions and de elopmen o he E o less Pe ec ionism Scale. Psychological Assessmen , 27(4), 1147–1159.
h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1037/ pas00 00109
Valle and, R. J., Chichekian, T., Ve ne - Filion, J., & Bélange , J. J. (2023). The wo aces o pe sis ence: How ha monious and
obsessi e passion shape goal pu sui . Mo i a ion Science, 9(3), 175–192. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1037/ mo 00 00303
Van Iddekinge, C. H., A nold, J. D., Aguinis, H., Lang, J. W. B., & Lie ens, F. (2023). Wo k e o : A concep ual and me a-
analy ic e iew. Jou nal o Managemen , 49(1), 125–157. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1177/ 01492 06322 1087641
Welsh, D. T., Bae , M. D., & Sessions, H. (2020). Ho pu sui : The a ec i e consequences o o ganiza ion- se e sus sel - se
goals o emo ional exhaus ion and ci izenship beha io . Jou nal o Applied Psycholog y, 105(2), 166–185. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10.
1037/ apl00 00429
Williams, L. J., & Ande son, S. E. (1991). Job sa is ac ion and o ganiza ional commi men as p edic o s o o ganiza ional ci i-
zenship and in- ole beha io s. Jou nal o Managemen , 17(3), 601–617. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1177/ 01492 06391 01700305
Wi h, S., Benoî , A., & Gaud eau, P. (2024). Sel - compassion as a mode a o in he ela ionships o excellencism and pe ec ion-
ism wi h indica o s o men al heal h. Mind ulness, 15(7), 1650–1664. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1007/ s1267 1- 024- 02388 - 5
W osch, C., Scheie , M. F., Mille , G. E., Schulz, R., & Ca e , C. S. (2003). Adap i e sel - egula ion o una ainable goals: Goal
disengagemen , goal eengagemen , and subjec i e well- being. Pe sonali y and Social Psycholog y Bulle in, 29(12), 1494–1508.
h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1177/ 01461 67203 256921
Zuu , A. F., Ieno, E. N., & Elphick, C. S. (2010). A p o ocol o da a explo a ion o a oid common s a is ical p oblems. Me hods
in Ecolog y and E olu ion, 1(1), 3–14. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1111/j. 2041- 210X. 2009. 00001. x
SUPPORTING INFORMATION
Addi ional suppo ing in o ma ion can be ound online in he Suppo ing In o ma ion sec ion a he
end o his a icle.
Appendix S1
How o ci e his a icle: Moh , M., & Die z, C. (2025). I ’s go o be pe ec ? Di e en ia ing he
unique daily ela ionships o pe ec ionism and excellencism wi h employee e o , pe o mance
and a igue. Jou nal o Occupa ional and O ganiza ional Psycholog y, 98, e70034. h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/
joop.70034
