A meta-analysis of the criterion-related validity of prehire work experience

Organizations frequently screen or select job applicants based on their work experience. Despite this, surprisingly little is known about the criterion-related validity of prehire experience, which reflects the amount, duration, or type of experience workers have acquired before they enter a new organization. To address this critical gap in the literature, we used meta-analysis to synthesize data from 81 independent samples that reported relations between prehire experience and performance or turnover. Results revealed overall corrected correlations of .06 for job performance (k = 44, n = 11,785), .11 for training performance (k = 21, n = 8,176), and .00 for turnover (k = 32, n = 11,676). Measures that capture prehire experience with tasks, jobs, or occupations relevant to workers’ current position also are only weakly related to the outcomes (e.g.,  = .07 for job performance). Two exceptions to our main findings are that (a) prehire experience is somewhat more predictive of job performance when workers first start a new job and (b) measures of task-level experience predict training performance, although these results are based on small subsets of primary studies. Overall, the present findings suggest that the types of prehire experience measures organizations currently use to screen job applicants generally are poor predictors of future performance and turnover. We therefore caution organizations from selecting employees based on such measures unless more positive evidence emerges.     

Job Experience and Big Five Personality Dimensions

Using a sample of engineers (N=80), the correlation between job experience and the personality dimensions was estimated. The results showed very small correlations. Based on these results, we suggest that composites created with job experience and personality measures can be useful for personnel selection.     

The work-related flow inventory: Construction and initial validation of the WOLF

The WOrk-reLated Flow inventory (WOLF) measures flow at work, defined as a short-term peak experience characterized by absorption, work enjoyment, and intrinsic work motivation. Results of Study 1 among 7 samples of employees (total N = 1346) from different occupational groups offer support for the factorial validity and reliability of the WOLF. Study 2 examined the validity of the WOLF in more detail among some of the samples. Positive correlations between a general flow index and the three flow dimensions confirm the convergent validity of the WOLF. In addition, the findings of Study 2 provide evidence for the construct and predictive validity of the WOLF using five job characteristics as predictors of flow, and other-ratings of performance as outcomes.     

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.     

A META-ANALYSIS OF WORK SAMPLE TEST VALIDITY: UPDATING AND INTEGRATING SOME CLASSIC LITERATURE

Work sample tests have been used in applied psychology for decades as important predictors of job performance, and they have been suggested to be among the most valid predictors of job performance. As we examined classic work sample literature, we found the narrative review by Asher and Sciarrino (1974) to be plagued by many methodological problems. Further, it is possible that data used in this study may have influenced the results (e.g., r = .54) reported by Hunter and Hunter in their seminal work in 1984. After integrating all of the relevant data, we found an observed mean correlation between work sample tests and measures of job performance of .26. This value increased to .33 when measures of job performance (e.g., supervisory ratings) were corrected for attenuation. Our results suggest that the level of the validity for work sample tests may not be as large as previously thought (i.e., approximately one third less than previously thought). Further, our work also summarizes the relationship of work sample exams to measures of general cognitive ability. We found that work sample tests were associated with an observed correlation of .32 with tests of general cognitive ability.     

Why Openness to Experience is not a Good Predictor of Job Performance

Recent meta‐analyses investigating the relationship between personality and job performance have found that openness to experience is the least predictive of the Big Five factors. Unlike other research that has sought to explain the low criterion‐validity with relation to job performance, this study explores the actual construct of openness to experience, suggesting that it consists of two dimensions that relate differentially to job performance thus reducing correlations between overall measures of openness to experience and performance criteria. Exploratory factor analysis of the six sub‐dimensions, or facets, of the NEO PI‐R (a popular measure of the Big Five factors) produced two factors of openness to experience corresponding to different areas to which people are open. A confirmatory factor analysis on a second set of data provided some support for this result. A pattern of differential relationships between the two factors and other variables including personality, biodata and supervisor‐rated performance offered further support for the multidimensionality of openness to experience. The implications of these findings for future research in the selection context are discussed.     

PREDICTING JOB PERFORMANCE OF YOUTH TRAINEES UNDER A JOB TRAINING PARTNERSHIP ACT PROGRAM (JTPA): CRITERION VALIDATION OF A BEHAVIOR-BASED MEASURE OF WORK MATURITY

Current concepts of the construct of work maturity have focused on a cognitive developmental perspective. This study demonstrates the criterion-related validity of a behavior-based measure of work maturity. The work-maturity levels of 142 youth enrollees in a job training program sponsored by the Job Training Partnership Act (JTPA) were measured using a locally relevant, behavior-based instrument. Through factor and linear regression analyses, the construct of work maturity was defined and related to later job performance. Two work-maturity factors (Time Consciousness and Sociability) were found to predict a weighted composite criterion composed of ten job performance dimensions. In addition, the ability of individual dimensions to predict job performance was also examined. Future studies of work maturity that combine cognitive and behavioral measures are suggested.     

WORK ENGAGEMENT: A QUANTITATIVE REVIEW AND TEST OF ITS RELATIONS WITH TASK AND CONTEXTUAL PERFORMANCE

Many researchers have concerns about work engagement's distinction from other constructs and its theoretical merit. The goals of this study were to identify an agreed‐upon definition of engagement, to investigate its uniqueness, and to clarify its nomological network of constructs. Using a conceptual framework based on Macey and Schneider (2008; Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 1, 3–30), we found that engagement exhibits discriminant validity from, and criterion related validity over, job attitudes. We also found that engagement is related to several key antecedents and consequences. Finally, we used meta‐analytic path modeling to test the role of engagement as a mediator of the relation between distal antecedents and job performance, finding support for our conceptual framework. In sum, our results suggest that work engagement is a useful construct that deserves further attention.     

CONCEPTUAL INTEGRATION AND EMPIRICAL TEST OF JOB DESIGN AND COMPENSATION RELATIONSHIPS

A conceptual integration of job design and compensation draws on interdisciplinary job design, job evaluation, and labor economic theory. It is argued that job design influences the number and level of skills required and the degree to which jobs are physically aversive or hazardous. External labor markets also respond to skill and physical requirements. Job evaluation links job design and market forces by analyzing jobs'compensable factors that reflect these requirements, and then relating them to the market through wage surveys across firms. An empirical examination presents relationships between job design and pay or job evaluation measures. Strongly supportive results replicate in two separate samples (total n = 213 jobs) which differ in industries, job types, skill levels, job design measures, job evaluation measures, and labor markets. Motivational job design had higher job evaluation measures reflecting higher skill requirements, and mechanistic and perceptual/motor design had lower evaluation measures reflecting lower skill requirements. Biological design had lower evaluation measures reflecting physical requirements.     

The construct of work commitment: testing an integrative framework

This study meta-analytically examined extensive literature associated with work commitment. The primary purposes were to (a) cumulate correlations among dimensions of work commitment to see which were intercorrelated and (b) determine impact of work commitment dimensions and subdimensions on specific outcome variables (job satisfaction, job performance, turnover intentions, and turnover). Results were cumulated across 997 articles. The positive manifold of correlations suggests the presence of a common psychological construct underlying different commitment forms, with the exception of calculative, continuance, and union commitment. Most of the 94 meta-analyzed correlations were small, suggesting that concept redundancy is not a major concern. Meta-analyses of the correlations of 24 commitment constructs with 4 outcome variables suggest that different commitment forms have similar patterns of correlations with outcome variables.     

PREDICTING TRAINING SUCCESS: NOT MUCH MORE THAN g

The roles of general ability ( g ) and specific abilities ( s₁ … s_g ) were investigated in prediction of job-training-school grades. Subjects were 78,041 Air Force enlistees in 82 jobs. General ability and specific abilities were defined by scores on the first and subsequent unrotated principal components of the enlistment selection and classification test, the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery. Linear models analyses revealed that s₁ … s ₉ added little to the prediction afforded by g. It was also determined that a common prediction equation for all jobs was almost as predictive as an equation for each job.     

DYNAMIC CRITERIA REVISITED: A LONGITUDINAL STUDY OF PERFORMANCE STABILITY AND PREDICTIVE VALIDITY

The concept of dynamic criteria has been the subject of a recent debate regarding both the definition and prevalence of the phenomenon (Austin, Humphreys, & Hulin, 1989; Barrett & Alexander, 1989; Barrett, Caldwell, & Alexander, 1985). The present paper questions the adequacy of the conceptual framework underlying the debate and provides data supporting a refined concept of dynamic criteria. The incidence and possible causes of change in relative performance were investigated using weekly performance data from 509 sewing machine operators. Analyses were conducted to determine the degree of performance consistency, potential moderators of consistency, and the stability of predictor-criteria relationships using multiple predictors and criteria. Results revealed a steady decline in performance stability coefficients as the interval between measures increased. This decay was evident regardless of employees' prior job experience, cognitive ability, or psychomotor ability. Analyses of predictive validity coefficients revealed temporal changes in validity for both objective and subjective criteria, but not in the expected direction. The validity of cognitive ability increased, the validity of psychomotor ability was stable, and that of prior job experience decreased over time. Implications for theory and research are discussed.     

THE BIG FIVE PERSONALITY DIMENSIONS AND JOB PERFORMANCE: A META-ANALYSIS

This study investigated the relation of the "Big Five" personality dimensions (Extraversion, Emotional Stability, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, and Openness to Experience) to three job performance criteria (job proficiency, training proficiency, and personnel data) for five occupational groups (professionals, police, managers, sales, and skilled/semi-skilled). Results indicated that one dimension of personality, Conscientiousness, showed consistent relations with all job performance criteria for all occupational groups. For the remaining personality dimensions, the estimated true score correlations varied by occupational group and criterion type. Extraversion was a valid predictor for two occupations involving social interaction, managers and sales (across criterion types). Also, both Openness to Experience and Extraversion were valid predictors of the training proficiency criterion (across occupations). Other personality dimensions were also found to be valid predictors for some occupations and some criterion types, but the magnitude of the estimated true score correlations was small (ρ < .10). Overall, the results illustrate the benefits of using the 5-factor model of personality to accumulate and communicate empirical findings. The findings have numerous implications for research and practice in personnel psychology , especially in the subfields of personnel selection, training and development, and performance appraisal.     

Revised questionnaire on the sense of humor

Abstract.— A Sense-of-Humor Questionnaire (SHQ), based on the proposed 3–dimensional theory of sense of humor, was given to male and female students in social and physical sciences to test its construct validity. There were positive and significant correlations between the laughter-activating dimension (M_p) and each of the two laughter-inhibiting dimensions (L_p, and E_p), the latter being zero correlated with each other. In a two-way analysis of variance (sex X science), the main effects were a sex difference on the L_p- as well as E_p-dimension, while no main effect was found on the M_p-dimension. The L_p-scores discriminated between men and women in the social sciences, and the E_p-scores in the physical sciences. All results are in agreement with theory.     

Is there a general factor in ratings of job performance? A meta-analytic framework for disentangling substantive and error influences

A database integrating 90 years of empirical studies reporting intercorrelations among rated job performance dimensions was used to test the hypothesis of a general factor in job performance. After controlling for halo error and 3 other sources of measurement error, there remained a general factor in job performance ratings at the construct level accounting for 60% of total variance. Construct-level correlations among rated dimensions of job performance were substantially inflated by halo for both supervisory (33%) and peer (63%) intrarater correlations. These findings have important implications for the measurement of job performance and for theories of job performance.     

IN SUPPORT OF PERSONALITY ASSESSMENT IN ORGANIZATIONAL SETTINGS

Personality constructs have been demonstrated to be useful for explaining and predicting attitudes, behaviors, performance, and outcomes in organizational settings. Many professionally developed measures of personality constructs display useful levels of criterion-related validity for job performance and its facets. In this response to Morgeson et al. (2007) , we comprehensively summarize previously published meta-analyses on (a) the optimal and unit-weighted multiple correlations between the Big Five personality dimensions and behaviors in organizations, including job performance; (b) generalizable bivariate relationships of Conscientiousness and its facets (e.g., achievement orientation, dependability, cautiousness) with job performance constructs; (c) the validity of compound personality measures; and (d) the incremental validity of personality measures over cognitive ability. Hundreds of primary studies and dozens of meta-analyses conducted and published since the mid 1980s indicate strong support for using personality measures in staffing decisions. Moreover, there is little evidence that response distortion among job applicants ruins the psychometric properties, including criterion-related validity, of personality measures. We also provide a brief evaluation of the merits of alternatives that have been offered in place of traditional self-report personality measures for organizational decision making. Given the cumulative data, writing off the whole domain of individual differences in personality or all self-report measures of personality from personnel selection and organizational decision making is counterproductive for the science and practice of I-O psychology.     

The Role of Character Strengths for Task Performance,Job Dedication,Interpersonal Facilitation,and Organizational Support

It was hypothesized that character strengths relate to job performance. Both constructs were investigated with respect to their currently known dimensions (i.e., 24 character strengths; job performance: task performance, job dedication, interpersonal facilitation, organizational support) to get a comprehensive overview of their co-occurrence. Two samples, 318 and 108 employees, respectively, filled in measures assessing character strengths as traits and their usefulness at work, and the job performance dimensions. For Sample 2, also supervisors judged the employees’ job performance. Based on this set of two samples we show replicable associations between character strengths and job performance (self-reports and supervisory ratings). Furthermore, the number of individual strengths beneficial at work was related to job performance. These promising findings open a new field for research on human performance.     

PERSONALITY AND JOB PERFORMANCE: A CRITIQUE OF THE TETT, JACKSON, AND ROTHSTEIN (1991) META-ANALYSIS

Tett, Jackson, and Rothstein (1991) recently presented a meta-analysis of the relationship between personality and job performance. Many of their findings, particularly those pertaining to the Big Five personality dimensions, are at odds with one other large scale meta-analytic study (Barrick & Mount, 1991) investigating the relation between personality and performance. In order to reconcile these new results with previous findings, we examined differences in the sample sizes used, the process for assigning pre-existing scales to personality dimensions, and the nature of the jobs investigated. In addition, we found four technical errors in the Tett et al. moderator meta-analyses in computing sampling error, the bias correction, sampling error for bias corrected correlations, and computing sampling error variance across studies. These errors raise serious questions about the interpretation of their results for various moderators of the personality-job performance relationship.     

The Influence of Work Personality on Job Satisfaction: Incremental Validity and Mediation Effects

ABSTRACT Drawing from recent developments regarding the contextual nature of personality (e.g., D. Wood & B. W. Roberts, 2006 ), we conducted 2 studies (1 cross-sectional and 1 longitudinal over 1 year) to examine the validity of work personality in predicting job satisfaction and its mediation of the effect of global personality on job satisfaction. Study 1 showed that (a) individuals vary systematically in their personality between roles— they were significantly more conscientious and open to experience and less extraverted at work compared to at home; (b) work personality was a better predictor of job satisfaction than both global personality and home personality; and (c) work personality demonstrated incremental validity above and beyond the other two personality measures. Study 2 further showed that each of the work personality dimensions fully mediated the association between its corresponding global personality trait and job satisfaction. Evidence for the discriminant validity of the findings is also presented.     

Change driven by nature: A meta-analytic review of the proactive personality literature

This study provides the first comprehensive review of literature examining proactive personality. The authors use career success as a broad organizing framework, meta-analyzing 313 correlations from 107 studies. Results indicate proactive personality is positively related to objective and subjective career success. Further, results indicate proactive personality relates to variables consistent with contest mobility (e.g., job performance) and sponsored mobility (e.g., taking charge/voice behavior) avenues to career success. Proactive personality’s relationship with supervisor-rated overall job performance is particularly noteworthy in that it is stronger than that reported for any of the Big Five factors or the Big Five collectively. Proactive personality is positively related to a variety of employability-related variables (e.g., learning goal orientation, career self-efficacy), four Big Five trait factors (extraversion, openness to experience, conscientiousness, and neuroticism), but is unrelated to social desirability. The authors’ literature review indicates only the original 17-item scale and 10-item scale tend to exhibit good internal consistency.