Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
The use of personality measures in personnel selection: What does current…
The use of personality measures in personnel selection: What does current research support?
Personality measures becoming increasingly popular by companies. Growth can be explained by numerous meta-analytic research demonstrating a level of validity and predictability
current use of measures in selection
Survey conducted of recruiters in 2003 indicated that 30% of American companies used personality tests to screen many job applicants.
40% of fortune 100 companies use these tests for a range of job levels.
predicted in the US to be a $400 million industry and is growing on average at 10% per year.
most prevealent reason for using this type of testing was due to their contribution to employee fit and reducing turnover rates by as much as 20/30/40/70 % depending on evidence
although it is increasing many employers do not fully understand or use appropriately
are they valid predictors of job performance?
First ever attempt to prove using meta-analysis was Schmitt, Gooding... and they found a correlation of 0.15 his concluding personality measures were NOT valid
however through 1990s with intro of 5 factor model, lead to more optimistic view
Barrick and mount tested and found thhat through the range of traits and found highest correlation of 0.22 for conscientiousness
found that when validation studies employed a confirmatory research strategy they produced validity coefficients that were more than twice as high as studies
development of meta-analysis and the FFM of personality benefitted studies massively
meta analysis has been criticized. Must ensure that results are based of relevant samples, appropriate tests and performance criteria etc
key issues inc - the quality of data and studies contained - whether the meta-analysis is representative of the population of potential applications - whether the situation is intended for use is similar to the situation sampled in meta-analysis
as many studies use the FFM model many question whether the FFM is actually valid, whether more factors should be involved?
Current
research trends
moderator effects
the se of confirmatory research strategy significantly strengthened the personality-job performance relations.
Conscientiousness was positively related to employee development
different traits seem to be related to different skills
mediator effects
interpretation based on the low correlation found between personality measures and job performance is that personality may only have indirect effects, with stronger effects with mediator variables
eg- goal setting behaviours mediated the relations between conscientiousness and job performance in a sample of sales representatives
confirmatory research strategy provides valuable insights to the nature of personality-job performance relations.
x2 empirical studies examined incremental validity
Mc Manus and Kelly (1999) found that FFM measures of personality proivded incremental validity over biodata measures
personality data provided incremental validity over evaluations of managerial potential provided by an assessment center
in the decade after Barrick and Mounts 1991 publication they announced that they believed they had come to the point where there was no need for future meta-analyses of this type as there would be similar findings and conlusions. However not all researchers trust this.
Judge, Bono, Ilies and Gerhardt (2002) found that Neuroticism, Extraversion, openness to experience and Conscientiousness were all related to leadership, with extraversion being most significant
future trends involve taking more niche routes and trying to link them. For the futurre this could be very interesting as it would open more paths in hiring process
many conclude that taking neither broad or narrow (LIke this niche) is preferaable and is highly dependent on the situation
Recent trends examining broad and narrow personality predictors
recently Murphy and Dzieweczynski (2005) said that correlation between FFM and jib performance are v low. Also point out 3 main reasons - The absence of theory linking personality to job performance - difficulty in matching personality to relevant job performance criteria - poor quality of personality measures.
many find that narrow predictors are better especially when aided by job analyses
personality and team performance
Of 16 empirical studies, 15 involved FFM performance, and 1 including the broad trait of integrity. Overall 11/15 reported significant correlations between extraversion and various measures inc team performance. Conscientiousness and emotional stability were the other two found to be good predictors of team-related behaviors
Openess to expiernece was only correlated with team based perfomrance in 3/15 also mixed. and agreeableness if 9/16 however 3 were negative correlations.
internet based
Internet callows for 24/7 test taking and can have many potential costs savings. However there are only minor differences between internet and paper-ad-pencil admin of personality test. LIMITED RESEARCH
Research on faking
HR have concerns regarding the fact that applicants may strategically fake their responses and thus reduce the usefulness of personality scores
Studies found that fakes reponses comprised from 15-62%
It is commonly believed that people who "dissimulate" have an increased probability of being hired
many test publishers inc scales which have the advice that elevated scores on these scales may be indicative of dissiumlation
however now evidence that faking corrections not effective. Not feasible to develop a single universal faking scale for on which to base score corrections
fake warning conists of a warnong to test takers saying that fake detectors are being used and consequence of faking will lead to chance of being hired to be lower
more effectivd to have these warnings after certain events like a substantial percentage of items on the chosen personality scale refer to potentially observable manifestations of respective traits
theory of ITM (Item response theory) may be helpful in identifying fakers. Its a mathematical model to which probability is used of choosing various responses
force3d choice approach can be adopted to obtain more honest responses. Present statements in pairs or triplets which present different desirable traits and test taker chooses which best describes them
Snell suggests that there are two main determinants of faking the ability to fake and the motivation to fake. All remedies seem to aim to defeat one of them.