PERSONALITY AND JOB PERFORMANCE: EVIDENCE OF INCREMENTAL VALIDITY

It is suggested that personality variables are significant predictors of job performance when carefully matched with the appropriate occupation and organization. The present study investigates the relationship between specific personality variables and job performance in a sample ( N = 43) of accountants. The results indicate that even with the effects of cognitive ability taken into account, three personality scales (orientation towards work; degree of ascendancy; and degree and quality of interpersonal orientation) are significantly related to important aspects of job performance. It is suggested that the overall validity of selection strategies might be improved with the addition of measures of relevant personality dimensions when appropriately matched to an occupation and organization.     

THE EFFECT OF JOB OFFER TIMING ON OFFER ACCEPTANCE, PERFORMANCE, AND TURNOVER

Employers often enjoy some discretion in how quickly they extend job offers following candidate interviews. Applicant reactions research suggests that quicker offers are more likely to be accepted. This paper reports an archival study investigating the effect of offer timing on offer acceptance and employment outcomes with field data ( N  = 3,012) from 1 large company, including both student ( N  = 906) and experienced ( N  = 2,106) candidates. The 2 groups differed markedly in their recruiting processes, but job seekers of both types were more likely to accept earlier offers. Further, we found no differences for either performance ratings or turnover among employees hired after quicker offers and those who accepted later offers. It therefore appears that employers may benefit from accelerating their postinterview job offer processes, improving their acceptance rates, and reducing vacancy times without incurring either performance or turnover penalties.     

A META-ANALYSIS OF THE VALIDITY OF METHODS FOR RATING TRAINING AND EXPERIENCE IN PERSONNEL SELECTION

This paper reviews the validity evidence for systematic methods used to evaluate training and experience (T&E) ratings in personnel selection. Meta-analytic summaries of the data indicate that validity varies with the type of T&E evaluation procedure used. The lllinois job element and behavioral consistency methods each demonstrated useful levels of validity (.20 and .45, respectively) with small corrected standard deviations, thus supporting validity generalization. Both the point and task methods yielded low mean validities (.11 and .15, respectively) with larger variability. The authors hypothesized that both the point and task methods were affected by a job experience moderator. Partial support for this hypothesis was found. Moderator analyses suggested that the point method was most valid when the applicant pool had low mean levels of job experience and was least valid with an experienced applicant pool. Additional research is desirable on all T&E methods to decrease the potential impact of second-order sampling error in the meta-analytic results. Further research is also needed to explicate the constructs measured by T&E evaluations.     

THE VALIDITY OF THE JOB CHARACTERISTICS MODEL: A REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS

The validity of Hackman and Oldham's Job Characteristics Model was assessed by conducting a comprehensive review of nearly 200 relevant studies on the model as well as by applying meta-analytic procedures to a large portion of the data. The evidence indicated that the available correlational results are reasonably valid in light of the issues examined. Results tended to support the multidimensionality of job characteristics, but there was less agreement on the exact number of dimensions. The corrected correlational results of the meta-analysis indicated that job characteristics related both to psychological and behavioral outcomes. Concerning psychological states, the results tended to support their mediating (e.g., intervening) role between job characteristics and personal outcomes. The pattern of correlations between the job characteristics and psychological states was less supportive of the model. Meta-analytic results demonstrated that most of the cross-study variance was due to statistical artifacts. True variance across studies was found for the job characteristics-performance relationship, however, and subsequent analyses suggested that growth-need strength moderates this relationship. Implications for potential revisions of the model and for practice are discussed.     

IMPLICATIONS OF THE MULTIDIMENSIONAL NATURE OF JOB PERFORMANCE FOR THE VALIDITY OF SELECTION TESTS: MULTIVARIATE FRAMEWORKS FOR STUDYING TEST VALIDITY

Although most studies of criterion-related validity focus on univariate relationships, the complex and multidimensional nature of the performance construct and the widespread use of multiple selection devices argue in favor of multivariate frameworks for evaluating validity. Using a Monte Carlo simulation we estimated the validity of general cognitive ability tests and personality tests in predicting "job performance," where performance is conceptualized as a composite of multiple performance measures (i.e., individual job task performance and organizational citizenship behaviors). The validity of a selection battery varies substantially as a function of the relative weight given to both predictors and criteria; the 95% confidence interval for validities ranged from .20 to .78. The effective weights given to performance dimensions accounted for 34% of the variance in selection battery validities; depending on precisely how "performance" is defined, the same test battery can have relatively high or relatively low levels of validity. Our model suggests that the way an organization defines job performance is a source of true and important variability in validities, and that the validity of selection tests for predicting complex performance criteria may show considerably less generalizability that current metaanalysis of univariate validities would suggest.     

JOB CLASSIFICATION APPROACHES AND THE IMPLEMENTATION OF VALIDITY GENERALIZATION RESULTS

This paper compares two job classification methods for showing the appropriateness of cognitive tests in settings that were not involved in supplying data for a validity generalization analysis. One approach was an elaborate quantitative procedure that involved a lengthy job inventory and a multivariate item analysis. This approach was shown to be highly successful when applied to the responses from 1179 job inventories collected in 54 petroleum-petrochemical plants from 30 different companies. The other procedure involved simple job classification judgments by supervisors and incumbents. This latter approach was shown to be as effective, but was much less time consuming and costly. Professional and legal implications of these findings are discussed.     

MODELING JOB PERFORMANCE IN A POPULATION OF JOBS

The Army Selection and Classification Project has produced a comprehensive examination of job performance in 19 entry-level Army jobs (Military Occupational Specialties) sampled from the existing population of entry-level positions. Multiple methods of job analysis and criterion measurement were utilized in a subsample of nine jobs to generate over 200 performance indicators, which were then used to assess performance in a combined sample of 9,430 job incumbents. An iterative procedure involving a series of content analyses and principal components analyses was used to develop a basic array of up to 32 criterion scores for each job. This basic set of scores formed the starting point of an attempt to model the latent structure of performance in this population of jobs. After alternative models were proposed for the latent structure, the models were submitted to a goodness-of-fit test via LIS-REL VI. After accounting for two components of method variance, a five-factor solution was judged as the best fit. The implications of the results and the modeling procedure for future personnel research are discussed.     

NUMBER AND SPECIFICITY OF PERFORMANCE OUTCOMES IN THE PREDICTION OF ATTITUDES AND BEHAVIORAL INTENTIONS

The problem of how many performance outcomes to use and how specific they should be in predicting satisfaction and behavioral intentions was addressed. 323 soldiers responded to a desirability and instrumentality scale for each of 16 potential outcomes obtainable from outstanding performance. Scores were factor analysed and composites were formed to reflect each dimension. Three criteria (satisfaction, perceived effort and intention to reenlist) were predicted using (a) all 16 outcome items, (b) only 11 items defining four outcome dimensions and (c) 4 items only, each item reflecting an outcome dimension. In all cases, the 11-item set was a better predictor than the 16-item set, and the 4-item set was nearly as effective as the 16-item set. Instrumentalities were found to be significantly better predictors of satisfaction than of effort, while the reverse was true of valences. It was suggested that adequacy of coverage of the out come domain rather than list length or outcome specificity, was the critical issue in improving predictability.