Knowledge that Transforms

This study presents an analysis of the selection-utility implications of employing a valid test versus a structured employment interview in the selection of park rangers in the U.S. Park Service. Values of the standard deviation of job performance in dollars (SDy) were estimated using the method presented by Schmidt, Hunter, McKenzie, and Muldrow (1979) The impact on employee output of three modes of selection test use was examined: (a) top-down selection, (b) minimum required test scores equal to the mean and (c) minimum score at one standard deviation (SD) below the mean Top-down selection produces an increase in average productivity of about 13% This 13% increase translates into very large savings in dollar terms. Where the minimum required score was set at the mean, dollar value of output gains was only 45% as large as dollar value for top-down selection The percentage increase in output was 5.9% When the cutoff score was 1 SD below the mean, dollar value of output gains was only 16% of the top-down figure, and the percentage increase in output was only 2.1% It was concluded that employers using the minimum test score cutoff method of test use were doing so at substantial economic cost Questions related to the effects of psychological interventions on employee job performance and productivity have received increasing attention recently (Alluisi & Meigs, 1983;

Collected data on 799 employees at a large manufacturing firm who were promoted to supervisory positions during a 4-yr period, including criterion data gathered from supervisors from 1-mo to several years after the assessment. 71 predictor variables, 29 assessment evaluations, and 21 criterion variables were aggregated for ease of interpretation. Results show that (1) both assessment-center evaluations (personal history survey, short arithmetic test, measure of general ability, interview, and work exercises) and traditional predictors (supervisor's ratings) were unrelated to job performance, but (2) assessment-center evaluations were predictive of promotability. It is suggested that by the nature of the complex issues that assessment centers were designed to address, a psychometrically clean evaluation of them may be precluded. (13 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record

A field experiment was conducted to assess the effects of three types of job previews (realistically general, and no preview) on newly hired bank tellers. The N=249 new hires were monitored for 43 weeks after entry into the bank. The Specific Job Preview clearly and significantly lowered initial job expectations compared to the other two groups. There were no significant differences among job preview groups in terms of their initial attitudes toward the organization, nor their job performance. The major criterion of interest, overall job survival rates, was also unaffected by previews. However, the rate at which turnover did occur was significantly different. Among those who ultimately left the bank, those in the Specific and General job preview groups tended to leave during the first three weeks (during formal, off-the-job training), whereas the No Preview leavers departed more often during the first 20 weeks after training (during the acquisition of job competence up to standard). (Author)