In the digital era, to enhance performance and achieve high-quality development, an increasing number of enterprises have begun to implement electronic performance monitoring. However, existing studies have yielded inconsistent conclusions regarding the impact of electronic performance monitoring on employees’ job performance. To clarify the overall relationship between these variables and explore the underlying causes of the discrepancies, this study, grounded in social information processing theory, examines the effects of two kinds of electronic performance monitoring (e.g., developmental and preventive) on employees’ job performance, as well as the mediating role of self-efficacy. On the basis of data collected at two time points from 223 employees in China, we test the mediation models. The findings indicate that both developmental and preventive electronic performance monitoring positively affect employees’ job performance, with self-efficacy serving as a partial mediator in this relationship. This study offers practical management strategies and establishes a foundation for the effective implementation of electronic performance monitoring in enterprises aimed at enhancing employees’ self-efficacy and job performance.

Background: In the digital era, the nursing workplace has experienced profound changes, exposing nurses to complex career shocks. Existing professional studies often overemphasize individual agency in career development, neglecting how environmental stressors such as career shocks influence job performance through psychological mechanisms. Aim: Grounded in the job demands–resources (JD‐R) model, this research examines how positive and negative career shocks differently influence the job performance of nurses, paying particular attention to the moderating effect of psychological resilience. Methods: This research employs a cross‐sectional quantitative design. A total of 385 nurses were recruited through convenience sampling. Data were collected using questionnaires, and structural equation modeling (SEM) was utilized to analyze the relationships among the variables via Mplus. Results: The findings show that both positive and negative career shocks have a positive relationship with nurses’ job performance. Psychological resilience demonstrated a significant positive moderating effect on the relationship between positive career shocks and nurses’ job performance, amplifying the beneficial effects of positive shocks; however, it showed no significant moderating effect on the link between negative career shocks and nurses’ job performance. Conclusion: This study elucidates the influence pathways and mechanisms of positive and negative career shocks on nurses’ job performance, thereby contributing to the advancement of nursing management research.