Personnel Psychology and Human Resources Management

A Reader for Students and Practitioners

Ivan T. Robertson, Cary Cooper, Ivan T. Robertson, Cary Cooper

• Verlag: Wiley-Blackwell
• Jahr: 2015
• ISBN:
  9781119090601
• Auflage: 1
• Thema: Psicologia
• Thema: Psicologia in industrie e organizzazioni

Part of a three-volume set of books which are themed collections ofreprinted articles from the International Review of Industrial andOrganizational Psychology (IRIOP) from 1997-2001. Each volumeprovides collections around a topic area, with new introductionswritten by the editors for each volume. Written by leading scholarswith international reputations in their fields, this authoritativecollection provides a high quality, review that will be aninvaluable resource for students, researchers and practitioners.
* Topic focussed, 'best of' collections on a specific themeconveniently incorporated into one book
* Ideal for graduate study, dissertations, projects, seminars
This volume covers key topics at the interface of human resourcemanagement (HRM) and Industrial/Organizational Psychology. Thechapters focus on the individual and are grouped into two sections: Personnel Psychology covering topics such as personnel selection, assessment, 360 degree feedback, assessment centres and cognitiveability testing and HRM which considers wider issues, includinglearning strategies, training, absence, turnover, commitment andthe psychological contract.

Part I
PERSONNEL PSYCHOLOGY

Chapter 1
Personnel Selection Methods

Jesús F. Salgado

Universidad de Santiago de Compostela

INTRODUCTION

This review considers the literature that appeared from 1991 to Autumn 1997. I have also included some materials published before 1991 which may be relevant to this review and were not previously cited in reviews of personnel selection methods in IRIOP, as well as some new materials currently under publication.

In these last six years, a number of topics appear specially relevant in the personnel selection field. First, more attention has been given to the theoretical aspects concerning the validity of predictors of job performance. Second, interviews based on a behavioral and structured format (e.g., situational, behavior description, behavioral structured interviews) have been the subject of a great deal of investigation. Third, personality measures have received a lot of interest from researchers in personnel selection and appear to be predictors of job performance against previous beliefs. Fourth, advances in methodology have also been of interest (e.g., improvements in meta-analysis and utility analysis). In addition to these issues, this review covers traditional topics of personnel selection methods: abilities, biodata, assessment centers, simulations, references and job analysis.

In order to find the literature for this review I used three strategies. First, I conducted several computer-aided searches in the PsycLit data base, using the main concepts as entry words (e.g., personnel selection, ability, personality, job performance) and cross-intersecting between them. Second, I conducted hand-made searches in the most relevant journals which cover the personnel selection area (e.g., Journal of Applied Psychology, Personnel Psychology, Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology). Third, I wrote to over one hundred researchers asking for relevant articles.

Several publications must also be remarked upon in this introduction. Dunnette and Hough (1990–1994) have edited the second edition of the ‘Bible’ of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Smith and Robertson (1993) have published the third edition of the personnel selection ‘Bible’ in Great Britain. Anderson and Herriot (1997) have edited an International Handbook of Selection and Assessment with contributors from 20 American, Asian and European countries. Other relevant books were edited or published by Cook (1993), Murphy (1996), Rumsay, Walker and Harris (1994), Schmitt and Borman (1993), and Schuler, Farr and Smith (1993). Also, a new journal has been published since 1993: the International Journal of Selection and Assessment (Neil Anderson, Editor). Furthermore, two commemorations must be noted. In 1992 the American Psychological Association celebrated its Centennial, and the Journal of Applied Psychology) (JAP) published several articles related to the date (Austin & Villanova, 1992; Harrel, 1992; Katzell & Austin, 1992; Landy, 1992). The Society of Industrial and Organizational Psychology (APA’s Division 14) celebrated its golden anniversary in 1996. To commemorate this date JAP published five articles on the history of applied psychology (Benjamin, 1997; Farr & Tesluk, 1997; Koppes, 1997; Landy, 1997; Van de Walter, 1997).

Finally, I must acknowledge to being a little biased in my review. The number of articles, book chapters, congress presentations, and so on, was so large, that I had to be somewhat selective, and to be selective in this field is very difficult and risky. Because of the fact that American literature on personnel selection is more well known than the European contributions, I tended to show the current European research whenever possible. I made this choice taking into account the fact that American literature is very well covered in the Annual Review chapters on personnel selection. Thus, I thought that showing the European contributions could open doors for possible cooperation between researchers from both continents.

PERFORMANCE AND JOB ANALYSIS ISSUES

Four advances were particularly relevant on performance topics and job analysis in the years that this review covers. One was the contribution made by J.P. Campbell (1994; Campbell, McCloy, Oppler & Sager, 1993; Campbell, Gasser & Oswald, 1996), who outlined a multidimensional theory of job performance. The second advance was the suggestion made by Borman and Motowidlo (1993) that job performance must be distinguished as task performance and contextual performance, The third advance was the result of work done by C. Viswesvaran (1993), who sustained that a general factor of job performance was responsible for most of the covariation among job performance dimensions. Furthermore, research was focused on investigating psychometric characteristics of job performance ratings (Salgado & Moscoso, 1996; Viswesvaran, Ones & Schmidt, 1996). An extended and comprehensive review of performance evaluation in work setting was written by Arvey and Murphy (1998) as an Annual Review chapter. The fourth remarkable advance was related to the development of a prototype to build an Occupational Information Network (O*NET; Peterson, Mumford, Borman, 1995).

Job Performance

Based on the findings of Project A, Campbell (1994; Campbell et al., 1993) has developed a conception of job performance characterized as a multidimensional construct. The theory is based mainly on four notions: ‘(1) the assumption of a general job performance factor cannot represent the best fit; (2) the notion of an ultimate criterion has no meaning; (3) the subjective versus objective distinction is false; and (4) there is a critically important distinction to be made between performance and the results of performance’ (Campbell et al., 1993, p.38). To Campbell, performance is the same as behavior, and only includes actions or behaviors relevant to the organization’s goals. Performance is not the consequence of action, it is the action itself. Therefore, it is necessary to distinguish between performance and consequences of performance (e.g., effectiveness, productivity or utility). Campbell et al. (1993) suggested that job performance is composed of eight factors, common to all jobs, but with different relevance for each one. The factors are: (1) job-specific task proficiency; (2) non-job-specific task proficiency; (3) written and oral communication task proficiency; (4) demonstration of effort; (5) maintenance of personal discipline; (6) facilitation of peer and team performance; (7) supervision/leadership; and (8) management/ administration. Furthermore, according to Campbell et al. (1993) there are three determinants of individual differences in performance: (a) Declarative Knowledge (i.e., knowledge about facts and things); (b) Procedural Knowledge and Skill (i.e. cognitive skill, interpersonal skill); and (c) Motivation (i.e., combined choice effect to expend effort, choice of effort level to be expended, and choice to persist in the expenditure of that level of effort). A confirmatory factor analysis has given empirical support to his model (McCloy, Campbell & Cudeck, 1994).

A second relevant advance with regards to job performance is the suggestion made by Borman and Motowidlo (1993) to distinguish job performance as two different clusters of behaviors. They suggest that job performance includes both in-role behaviors as well as extra-role behaviors. The first behaviors assess task performance and the second behaviors assess what they call ‘contextual’ performance. The contextual performance construct is closely related to other constructs known as prosocial organizational behavior (Brief & Motowidlo, 1986), organizational citizenship (Munene, 1995; Organ, 1988), organizational spontaneity (George & Brief, 1992) and personal initiative (Frese, Fay, Hilburger et al., 1997). Borman and Motowidlo suggest that task performance is the incumbent proficiency when performing technical or services activities while contextual performance is the contribution made by the incumbent beyond the explicit job requirements (e.g., extra effort, cooperativeness, etc.). Borman and Motowidlo have also suggested that typical measures of job performance Include not only task proficiency but also contextual proficiency. However, these two dimensions of job performance are not related to the same predictors. Task proficiency should be related to predictors of knowledge and aptitude (e.g., cognitive ability tests, job knowledge tests) while contextual performance should be related to motivational predictors (e.g., personality factors). Borman and Motowidlo (1997) have provided a taxonomy of contextual performance which is composed of five categories: (1) persisting with enthusiasm and extra effort where necessary to complete one’s task activities successfully; (2) volunteering to carry out task activities that are not formally part of one’s job; (3) helping and cooperation with others; (4) following organizational rules and procedures; (5) endorsing, supporting, and defending organizational objectives. According to Motowidlo, Borman and Schmit (1997), contextual and task performance are different in three ways. First, task activities vary across jobs whereas contextual activities are more general across jobs. Second, task activities are role-prescribed whereas contextual activities tend to be extra-role behaviors. Third, cognitive ability is a probable antecedent of task performance while personality and motivational variables are more probable antecedents of contextual performance.

Several studies supported the hypothesized differences between task performance and contextual performance. For example, Motowidlo and Van Scotter (1994) found that task and contextual performance contributed independently to overall performance. They also found that task proficiency was better predicted using cognitive ability while personality dimensions predicted contextual performance. Van Scotter and Motowidlo (1996) have made an effort to refine the construct of contextual performance by dividing it into two elements: interpersonal facilitation and job dedication. Interpersonal facilitation is the set of behaviors that contribute to organizational goal accomplishment (e.g., altruism, helping coworkers, acts that improve moral, cooperation, removing barriers). Job de...

Inhaltsverzeichnis

• Cover
• Table of Contents
• Title
• Copyright
• ABOUT THE SERIES
• ABOUT THE EDITORS
• CONTRIBUTORS
• INTRODUCTION
• Part I: PERSONNEL PSYCHOLOGY
• Part II: HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
• INDEX
• End User License Agreement