This chapter analyses the association of subjective (quantitative and qualitative) job insecurity and the employment contract (‘objectively measured’ insecurity) with a variety of performance measures in academia. Academia is an interesting context to explore these associations, due to increasing demands and insecurity over the years. Contrasting hypotheses are advanced: is insecurity associated with an increase or decrease in performance, labelled the positive, challenge versus the negative, hindrance path, respectively. Additionally, contrasting hypotheses regarding the interaction between subjective job insecurity and the employment contract are developed. We hypothesise that both could strengthen each other in determining performance (‘intensification’ hypothesis), versus that the employment contract could buffer the association of subjective job insecurity with performance (‘violation’ hypothesis). The data of the ten countries are used to test our hypotheses. The results only support the negative, hindrance path between insecurity and performance: insecurity is associated with a decrease in productive work behaviour and an increase in counterproductive work behaviour. The interactions found dominantly corroborated the ‘violation’ hypothesis, suggesting that those working on a permanent contract more strongly decreased their productive work behaviour. Not all tested associations were significant, however. The results suggest quantitative job insecurity to play the most prominent role, and in-role work behaviours to be the most strongly affected performance dimension.