An Examination of the Validity and Incremental Value of Needed‐at‐Entry Ratings for a Customer Service Job

We examined needed‐at‐entry ratings of knowledge, skills, abilities, and other characteristics (KSAOs) provided by job experts (N= 285) during a job analysis for a customer service manager position. To serve as an external referent, a group of industrial and organisational psychologists (N= 31) rated the perceived trainability of each KSAO. Analyses revealed only limited support for the validity of inferences drawn from job experts' needed‐at‐entry ratings. Consistent with our hypotheses, less validity evidence was found for ratings of the more person‐oriented and abstract “AO” attributes than for the more job‐oriented and concrete “KS” attributes. In general, job experts tended to rate attributes as needed‐at‐entry that psychologists thought could be developed on the job. We also found that failing to collect needed‐at‐entry ratings, and relying on only the more common importance‐to‐the‐job ratings, would have resulted in a rather different set of critical KSAOs identified for assessment during the selection process.