[Truncated abstract. Please see the pdf version of the abstract for the complete text.] This study examines the 'happy-productive worker' thesis, by investigating the impact of job-related affective well-being and intrinsic job satisfaction on managers' performance. The fundamental goal of the research was to establish which indicators of managers' affective well-being and intrinsic job satisfaction predict dimensions of their contextual and task performance. A critique was undertaken of the substantial literature on affective well-being, intrinsic job satisfaction and managers' performance. Key theoretical developments were integrated to provide linkages between the conceptual bases of these constructs. Warr's Vitamin Model was identified as the most comprehensive synthesis of research and theories into affective well-being. Evidence has emerged to suggest that managers' job performance comprises both contextual and task performance domains. Decades of research have been unable to establish a strong link between job satisfaction and performance. Affect has rarely been used as a predictor of managers' job performance outcomes. Despite mixed empirical evidence, there is support in the literature to suggest that a relationship exists between affective well-being, intrinsic job satisfaction and managers' performance. A series of ancillary research questions, underscoring the main goal of the study, were developed from the gaps identified in the literature to establish if there was an association between managers' affective well-being, intrinsic job satisfaction and their contextual and task performance. To what extent does affective well-being and intrinsic job satisfaction determine different dimensions of managers' contextual and task performance? Does the construct of managers' performance consist of the two dimensions, contextual and task performance? Does positive affective well-being result in enhanced managers' performance, and is poor affective well-being detrimental to managers' performance? These research questions were formed into hypotheses for testing. Questionnaire items were derived from the literature to establish the affective well-being and intrinsic job satisfaction scales. Managers' contextual and task performance scales were developed through an analysis of the literature. Questionnaire items were further refined using feedback from expert reviewers and a pilot survey. A cross-sectional survey was administered to managers (n=1,552) from a range of occupational groupings in 19 Western Australian private, public, and third sector organisations. A total of 400 useable questionnaires was returned, representing a response rate of 26%. Self-report data were used to measure affective well-being and intrinsic job satisfaction, while superiors' ratings provided an evaluation of managers' contextual and task performance. An empirical methodology was used to test the hypotheses to enable the research questions to be answered and to suggest a Partial Model of Managers' Affective Well-being, Intrinsic Job Satisfaction and Performance. Answering the research questions required the development of an instrument to measure the structure of managers' contextual and task performance. An 8- dimensional measurement model of managers' performance, derived from the survey data, was tested by exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis to differentiate the structure of managers' contextual and task performance. The performance construct was operationalised in terms of four contextual dimensions (Endorsing, Helping, Persisting, Following) and four task dimensions (Monitoring, Technical, Influencing, Delegating). These dimensions were confirmed through multi-sample analysis and cross-validation techniques of managers' and superiors' ratings (n = 200 and n = 125). Canonical correlation and standard multiple regression were used to analyse the linear combination of managers' affective well-being and intrinsic job satisfaction with contextual and task performance. Indicators of affective wellbeing and intrinsic job satisfaction were found to predict dimensions of managers' performance, irrespective of whether the performance scores were from self-report or superiors' ratings. A large amount of the variance of managers' performance was explained by affective well-being and intrinsic job satisfaction. Affective well-being selfreport (Positive Affect, Intrinsic Job Satisfaction) was found to be positively associated with a dimension of superiors' reports on task performance (Influencing). Positive associations for dimensions of affective well-being selfreport (Positive Affect, Anxiety and Relaxation) were also found to be negatively associated with dimensions of superiors' reports on managers' task performance (Monitoring) and contextual performance (Following) that was also negatively associated with the task performance dimension (Technical). As predicted, positive affective well-being was related to enhanced managerial performance, whereas diminished affective well-being indicated poorer performance.