chapter 15 using tests in organizational settings

16
Chapter 15 Using Tests in Organizational Settings

Upload: isabella-andrews

Post on 11-Jan-2016

215 views

Category:

Documents


2 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Chapter 15 Using Tests in Organizational Settings

Chapter 15

Using Tests in Organizational Settings

Page 2: Chapter 15 Using Tests in Organizational Settings

History• Walter Dill Scott (1915) “The Scientific Selection

of Salesmen” – proposed that employers use group tests for personnel selection.

• Scott’s influence led to Army Alpha & Beta testing during WW I. Those were discontinued following WWI.

• Employment testing, however, continued when Millicent Pond (1927) studied the selection and placement of apprentice metal workers.

• Strong-Campbell Interest Inventory originated from this early work.

• The Psychological Corporation organized by J. McKeen Cattell began.

Page 3: Chapter 15 Using Tests in Organizational Settings

History (continued)

• WW II: Army General Classification Test (AGCT) developed by Bingham (chief psychologist of War Dept.).

• Multiple commercial applications have since been developed.

• 1964 Civil Rights Act stimulated interest in insuring that tests were valid and fair.

• 1978 – Uniform Guidelines for Employee Selection were developed.

Page 4: Chapter 15 Using Tests in Organizational Settings

Pre-employment Testing

The Employment Interview

Traditional – “getting to know you function.” …Biased by sex, age, race, and physical attractiveness.

-This bias has been attributed more to the interviewer than to the process.

Page 5: Chapter 15 Using Tests in Organizational Settings

Pre-employment Testing (cont.)The Employment Interview

Structured – standardized, allows scoring. Higher inter-rater reliability, internal consistency, and concurrent validity.– Focus on behavior – what you have done or can do

rather than how you feel about…

– Each candidate receives the same questions in the same order.

– The questions require a job analysis covering important job functions and duties (content validity); therefore job related.

– E.g, Human Resources Professional Job Interview

Page 6: Chapter 15 Using Tests in Organizational Settings

Performance Tests

• High-fidelity tests replicate the job setting as realistically as possible; e.g., flight simulator.– Assessment Centers – large scale replications of the job that

require candidates to solve typical job problems by role playing or demonstrating proficiency.

• Low-fidelity tests simulate the job task using a written, verbal, or visual description.– Video tests – candidates are shown typical job situations and

asked to choose his/her response from multiple choice format.

• Validity of performance tests in predicting job performance =.54

• Have high content validity, and are job related.

Page 7: Chapter 15 Using Tests in Organizational Settings

Tests for Specific Types of Jobs

E.g.,

Page 8: Chapter 15 Using Tests in Organizational Settings

Personality Inventories

• Examine traits found useful in predicting job success: conscientiousness, extraversion, emotional stability, etc.

E.g., The 16PF Questionnaire (developed by Raymond Cattell) gives a profile.

• Poor predictors of job success generally.

Page 9: Chapter 15 Using Tests in Organizational Settings

Five-factor Model of Personality(NEO Personality Inventory)

1. NEUROTICISM

2. EXTRAVERSION

3. OPENNESS TO EXPERIENCE

4. AGREEABLENESS

5. CONSCIENTIOUSNESS

Page 10: Chapter 15 Using Tests in Organizational Settings

The Hogan Personality Inventory (HPI)

• Adjustment• Ambition• Sociability• Likeability• Prudence• Intellectance• School success(Validity key to detect careless or random

responding.)

Page 11: Chapter 15 Using Tests in Organizational Settings

The Hogan Personality Inventory Predictive Validity:

• Sociability predicts sales revenue (r=.51)

• Prudence predicts supervisors’ ratings of conscientiousness (r=.22)

• School Success predicts training performance (r=.34-.55)

Page 12: Chapter 15 Using Tests in Organizational Settings

Integrity TestingTwo categories:

– Physiological measures– Paper-and-pencil tests

• Physiological – polygraph tests - problem with false positives (mistakenly classifying innocent takers as guilty) and poor predictive validity.

• The Employee Polygraph Protection Act lf 1988 forbids the use of the polygraph as an employment test. Interestingly, employers providing security services and government agencies are exempt from this law!

• Paper-and-pencil integrity tests predict counterproductive behaviors (.29-.39).

• But highly susceptible to faking.

Page 13: Chapter 15 Using Tests in Organizational Settings

Legal Constraints

• 1978 Uniform Guidelines for Employee Selection catalog “best practices” to promote fairness and legal defensibility of employment practices. (Note: Congress did not pass the Guidelines and therefore they are not federal law.)

• Any process that is used to make a hiring decision is defined as a “test.” Includes application forms, reference checks, letters of reference and tests.

• All employment tests must be job-related and based on a job analysis.

• “Adverse impact” is the exclusion of a disproportionate number of persons belonging to a protected class based on race, gender, age, etc. In these cases, alternative methods for assessing job candidates must be found.

Page 14: Chapter 15 Using Tests in Organizational Settings

Performance Impairment Tests• An alternative to chemical analysis for the presence of

drugs.• Can use a simulation to detect impairment in motor

skills or hand-eye coordination (similar to a video game).

• Compare to the individual’s baseline.• Can be done quickly and easily in the workplace as

opposed to taking the employee off the work site for drug testing.

Page 15: Chapter 15 Using Tests in Organizational Settings

Performance Appraisal• Ranking employees (best to worst)

– Forced distribution to get a normal curve, using categories such as “outstanding,” “above average,” etc. – prevents the ranker from assigning all people to one category.

• Rating employees– graphic rating scale- each of the scales represents a

dimension, such as quality or quantity of work. Guided by anchors.

– Behaviorally anchored rating scales (BARS) use on-the-job behaviors as anchors for the rating scale.

– Behavioral checklist - rating frequency of important behaviors.

Page 16: Chapter 15 Using Tests in Organizational Settings

Performance Appraisal• Rating Errors

– Leniency errors – giving all employees better ratings than they deserve.

– Severity errors – giving all employees worse ratings than they deserve.

– Central-tendency errors – using only the middle of the rating scale and ignoring highest and lowest scale categories.

– Halo effect – when raters let their judgment on one dimension influence judgments on other dimensions (ie.,giving low rating on quality and quantity of work when employee met standards for quantity of work)

• 3600 feedback: ratings from supervisors, peers, subordinates, or customers.