I wonder how the motivational drive to move up the company affects the anxiety of the applicants. It would seem this increased motivational force would increase the stakes of the selection testing procedures. This could be a reciprocal relationship or one with a feedback loop. How does the fact that the applicants used in this study were volunteers affect the results? It seems this would have major motivational influences, that is, the type of applicants that would volunteer for this study would have more motivation to perform better. Do you think this is a major range restriction?
In the case of promotions, what role would perceptions of justice about the organization have on the perceptions of justice about the selection/promotion process? How might we design selection and promotion processes to ameliorate testing anxiety?
If the same promotional exam is given each time someone is promoted to a new position, how might this affect individuals performance on the exam if they have done it several times?
Good questions you guys. I do think the findings emphasize the importance both of just treatment and of fairness of processes during selection. This is an important area to train on (for those administering testing battery.)
I wonder if the negative responses of highly motivated employees who were turned down for promotion might be mitigated by a transparent evaluation system that gives them information about their strengths and deficits and provides opportunities for development?
I felt like this article repeated the same information over and over again. Anxiety = bad; procedural just = good. How might we apply these findings to the workplace?
I wonder how the motivational drive to move up the company affects the anxiety of the applicants. It would seem this increased motivational force would increase the stakes of the selection testing procedures. This could be a reciprocal relationship or one with a feedback loop. How does the fact that the applicants used in this study were volunteers affect the results? It seems this would have major motivational influences, that is, the type of applicants that would volunteer for this study would have more motivation to perform better. Do you think this is a major range restriction?
ReplyDeleteIn the case of promotions, what role would perceptions of justice about the organization have on the perceptions of justice about the selection/promotion process? How might we design selection and promotion processes to ameliorate testing anxiety?
ReplyDeleteIf the same promotional exam is given each time someone is promoted to a new position, how might this affect individuals performance on the exam if they have done it several times?
ReplyDeleteGood questions you guys. I do think the findings emphasize the importance both of just treatment and of fairness of processes during selection. This is an important area to train on (for those administering testing battery.)
ReplyDeleteI wonder if the negative responses of highly motivated employees who were turned down for promotion might be mitigated by a transparent evaluation system that gives them information about their strengths and deficits and provides opportunities for development?
ReplyDeleteI felt like this article repeated the same information over and over again. Anxiety = bad; procedural just = good. How might we apply these findings to the workplace?
ReplyDelete