Reference no: EM131428058
Discussion : Predictor Effectiveness in Criterion Measure Estimation
After a potential predictor of employee performance is identified, it is necessary to observe its relationship with one or more criterion measure(s) of work related behaviors and/or performance. The criterion measures selected for employee performance predictors usually align with job-related tasks, behaviors, and outcomes. Depending on the specificity of the criterion, an in-depth analysis of the job may or may not be needed. How relevant are organizational factors such as turnover and absenteeism?
How relevant is an employee's personality or credit history? The criterion should dictate what you are measuring. Criterion measures should be selected based on job relevance, the relationship with chosen employee performance predictors, stability, and alignment with organizational outcomes (Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Inc., 2003).
For this Discussion, select two employee performance predictors described in Learning Resources and current literature. Consider how each may or may not be effective in predicting sales performance.
Post a descriptions of the two predictors you selected. Explain which might be the most and least effective predictors of sales performance as a criterion measure. Provide concrete examples and citations from the Learning Resources and current literature to justify your post. 1.5 pages, at least 4 references in APA Style
Example 1:
Descriptions of the two predictors you selected
My options have been narrowed to aptitude testing and the experience listed on the applicant's resume.
Explain which might be the most and least effective predictors of sales performance as a criterion measure.
Effective personnel assessment involves a systematic approach towards gathering information about applicants' job qualifications, such as the applicant's resume. Factors contributing to successful job performance, such as oral communication (interview) or problem solving (aptitude test) are identified using a process called job analysis.
Job analysis identifies the duties performed on the job and the competencies needed for effective job performance. Basing personnel assessment closely on job analysis results makes the connection between job requirements and personnel assessment tools more transparent, thereby improving the perceived fairness of the assessment process (U.S. Office of Personnel Management, 2007).
Criterion measurement is the empirical and concrete evidence that can be quantified. The strongest predictor that achieves this would-be aptitude testing. Aptitude testing can be designed to fit the specific jobs; in this case, the salesperson position. Testing can be done on things such as spelling and sentence composition.
A salesperson must possess the ability to communicate not only orally, but must also possess the ability to compose and correspond in writing. The aptitude test can be quantified by a score that ranges from 0-100. Applicants could be selected based on their score, and if there is a tie, the selection could then move to the experience listed on the applicants' resumes.
Provide concrete examples and citations from the Learning Resources and current literature to justify your post.
Predictive validity compares the measure in question (aptitude testing) with an outcome assessed later (APA, 1974). An organization could implement an aptitude test for selection, then compare it to sales that are recorded over time. This would give the organization an idea if there is a relationship between the aptitude of the applicant and their ability to sale.
Personality tests could essentially "predict" how a person might perform, but some argue that the responses of the applicants may not be genuine. A common criticism of the use of personality assessments for selection purposes is the possibility that job applicants might engage in response distortion or faking (e.g., Morgeson et al., 2007).
REFERENCES
American Psychological Association, Inc. (1974). "Standards for educational & psychological tests" Washington D. C.: Author.
Morgeson, F. P., Campion, M. A., Dipboye, R. L., Hollenbeck, J. R., Murphy, K., & Schmitt, N. (2007). Are we getting fooled again? Coming to terms with limitations in the use of personality tests for personnel selection. Personnel Psychology, 60(4), 1029-1049.