The model proposed by Steele-Johnson, Osburn, and Pieper implies that it is critical to have a thorough, long-term understanding of a job before selecting any particular predictor construct(s) to select employees for a job. What are some ways that we can improve job analysis methods to account for the possibility of change over time in a job?
I appreciated the integrative model presented here to help get a handle on the complexity of factors affecting the relationship between cognitive ability and performance. In the section of the article on organizational variables, the authors do not cite any research after 1993 and comment that contextual factors in organizations have received little attention in I/O research. Is this because these are difficult to measure? What might be other reasons?
Motivation was briefly discussed in its relationship to performance with regards to maximal or typical performance. Why is motivation not addressed or individually reviewed regarding performance? Motivation seems to be a strong play in determining the ability of those with a lower cognitive ability. If we neglect motivation, are we discriminating against those with less cog. ability?
The complexity of creating an effective organizational selection and performance management program seems clear after reading Steele-Johnsosn, Osburn, & Pieper (2000). This points to the importance of the program undergoing continuous or at least periodic reevaluation and adjustment. What implications does this have for outsourced HR companies when marketing their services to businesses? Might businesses who want their selection and performance management systems to remain relevant to what is actually going on with jobs within the organization be better served by keeping selection/performance appraisal in-house? Certainly, it seems that the dynamic character of predicting performance could impact the cost differentials of the outsourcing versus in-house decision.
While the model presented by Steele-Johnson, Osburn, and Pieper (2000) is useful from a theoretical standpoint, it does not provide much practical advice. Last class we were talking about the gap between scientists and practitioners and this article does not seem to bridge this gap. Out of the 27 pages, the authors spent only half a page talking about the impact of their model on practitioners. Is the authors' model practical at an organizational level? What about for smaller organizations? How would one implement the advice from this article, aside from the use of cognitive tests?
With industry evolving at an ever-increasing rate, is it even reasonable to expect stable criteria for job performance? Has this changed with as technology and globalization has evolved?
The paper discusses the simplex model. What factors might moderate the relationship between performance measures. That is, will the effect of time be greater for some conditions compared to others?
The authors cover a number of variables that could influence the dynamic criteria issue. Can you think of any that should have also been considered? Any that standout particularly? Do you think a sociological level of analysis would be appropriate to consider (e.g., a society’s political and religious climate)?
The model proposed by Steele-Johnson, Osburn, and Pieper implies that it is critical to have a thorough, long-term understanding of a job before selecting any particular predictor construct(s) to select employees for a job. What are some ways that we can improve job analysis methods to account for the possibility of change over time in a job?
ReplyDeleteI appreciated the integrative model presented here to help get a handle on the complexity of factors affecting the relationship between cognitive ability and performance. In the section of the article on organizational variables, the authors do not cite any research after 1993 and comment that contextual factors in organizations have received little attention in I/O research. Is this because these are difficult to measure? What might be other reasons?
ReplyDeleteMotivation was briefly discussed in its relationship to performance with regards to maximal or typical performance. Why is motivation not addressed or individually reviewed regarding performance? Motivation seems to be a strong play in determining the ability of those with a lower cognitive ability. If we neglect motivation, are we discriminating against those with less cog. ability?
ReplyDeleteThe complexity of creating an effective organizational selection and performance management program seems clear after reading Steele-Johnsosn, Osburn, & Pieper (2000). This points to the importance of the program undergoing continuous or at least periodic reevaluation and adjustment. What implications does this have for outsourced HR companies when marketing their services to businesses? Might businesses who want their selection and performance management systems to remain relevant to what is actually going on with jobs within the organization be better served by keeping selection/performance appraisal in-house? Certainly, it seems that the dynamic character of predicting performance could impact the cost differentials of the outsourcing versus in-house decision.
ReplyDeleteWhile the model presented by Steele-Johnson, Osburn, and Pieper (2000) is useful from a theoretical standpoint, it does not provide much practical advice. Last class we were talking about the gap between scientists and practitioners and this article does not seem to bridge this gap. Out of the 27 pages, the authors spent only half a page talking about the impact of their model on practitioners. Is the authors' model practical at an organizational level? What about for smaller organizations? How would one implement the advice from this article, aside from the use of cognitive tests?
ReplyDeleteWith industry evolving at an ever-increasing rate, is it even reasonable to expect stable criteria for job performance? Has this changed with as technology and globalization has evolved?
The paper discusses the simplex model. What factors might moderate the relationship between performance measures. That is, will the effect of time be greater for some conditions compared to others?
ReplyDeleteThe authors cover a number of variables that could influence the dynamic criteria issue. Can you think of any that should have also been considered? Any that standout particularly? Do you think a sociological level of analysis would be appropriate to consider (e.g., a society’s political and religious climate)?
ReplyDelete