I think these authors make some good points but this research did not seem to add anything beyond the Macan and Highhouse article. These authors only pointed out the futility of these utility estimates, but did not give any useful techniques to communicate the utility of HR practices. How can we make these estimates more useful and understandable by supervisors?
I agree with Shane. In addition, I wonder if organizations find that the need of an “expert” to explain the need for a selection procedure because of its utility doesn’t intimidate some managers, as this seems to be a source of pressure that is external from the actual organization and its goals. Similar to my question to Macan and Highhouse (1994), how can experts in the area of selection and utility analyses work together with management within in an organization to develop a strong selection procedure with utility toward organizational goals?
•Why are utility estimates not respected by management? Point blank! If we do not know this, then we cannot move forward or makes any changes. We are supposed to be able to help the company make critical decisions for success. How do we do this if we are using techniques that are not valued and undermining our purpose and professional reputation? This article gave us insight and warning only.
Although the article provide us with some measures as to why the managers were not convinced in the utility condition, we only find out that they were not convinced by the psychologists advice. What are some reasons managers might not have been convinced? Do you think they just got lost and did not understand it? I think it would have been helpful to have some kind of measure seeing how well the managers understood utility analysis.
The authors admit that their "trusted advisor" manipulation may have been weak. I wonder if a pilot study asking participants to rate the credibility of various information sources (e.g. best practices, "Harvard Business Review," etc.) and the degree to which they might rely on each source for information relative to a decision on whether or not to implement an HR program or intervention might have allowed them to utilize a stronger manipulation?
So maybe utility analysis is not useful in terms of persuasion, but it could be useful for other purposes. What do you think are some other purposes of utility analysis?
I think these authors make some good points but this research did not seem to add anything beyond the Macan and Highhouse article. These authors only pointed out the futility of these utility estimates, but did not give any useful techniques to communicate the utility of HR practices. How can we make these estimates more useful and understandable by supervisors?
ReplyDeleteI agree with Shane. In addition, I wonder if organizations find that the need of an “expert” to explain the need for a selection procedure because of its utility doesn’t intimidate some managers, as this seems to be a source of pressure that is external from the actual organization and its goals. Similar to my question to Macan and Highhouse (1994), how can experts in the area of selection and utility analyses work together with management within in an organization to develop a strong selection procedure with utility toward organizational goals?
ReplyDelete•Why are utility estimates not respected by management? Point blank! If we do not know this, then we cannot move forward or makes any changes. We are supposed to be able to help the company make critical decisions for success. How do we do this if we are using techniques that are not valued and undermining our purpose and professional reputation? This article gave us insight and warning only.
ReplyDeleteAlthough the article provide us with some measures as to why the managers were not convinced in the utility condition, we only find out that they were not convinced by the psychologists advice. What are some reasons managers might not have been convinced? Do you think they just got lost and did not understand it? I think it would have been helpful to have some kind of measure seeing how well the managers understood utility analysis.
ReplyDeleteOK, so this empirical study is telling us that managers aren’t persuaded by utility analysis. Are there other purposes for utility analysis?
ReplyDeleteThe authors admit that their "trusted advisor" manipulation may have been weak. I wonder if a pilot study asking participants to rate the credibility of various information sources (e.g. best practices, "Harvard Business Review," etc.) and the degree to which they might rely on each source for information relative to a decision on whether or not to implement an HR program or intervention might have allowed them to utilize a stronger manipulation?
ReplyDeleteSo maybe utility analysis is not useful in terms of persuasion, but it could be useful for other purposes. What do you think are some other purposes of utility analysis?
ReplyDelete