The O*NET system provides job information through the use of occupational descriptions by utilizing a taxonomic approach (Peterson, et al., 2001). The job analysis that the O*NET will be compared to is the critical incident technique.
An advantage of the O*NET system compared to the critical incident technique is that it highlights a broad range of descriptors types for positions and occupations (Peterson, et al., 2001). For example, the broad range of descriptors focus on areas such as work requirements, worker characteristics, and necessary skills needed to perform, just to name a few (Peterson, et al., 2001; Peterson, & Jeanneret, 2007). Whereas, the critical incident technique descriptions of behaviors can be narrow (Hughes, Williamson, & Lloyd, 2007). This is because of the categorizing and defining of behaviors into dual descriptions, which can limit reporting the variances of human behaviors (Hughes, Williamson, & Lloyd, 2007). Another advantage the O*NET system when compared to the critical incident technique is that it provides cross job descriptions. Because of the common descriptors for various jobs, new descriptors do not need to be developed for every job …show more content…
Utilizing the same instrument can overstress relationships between job dimensions, cause unauthentic associations among responses, and falsely increase the internal consistency (as cited in Peterson, et al., 2001). Whereas, the critical incident technique collects job information from different methods (Peterson, et al., 2001). Methods such as observation and interviews are conducted to study behaviors that occur during job activity (Hughes, Williamson, & Lloyd, 2007; Flanagan, 1954). These methods provide immediate outlooks of human behavior, which aids in a more authentic experience (as cited in Hughes, Williamson, & Lloyd,
An advantage of the O*NET system compared to the critical incident technique is that it highlights a broad range of descriptors types for positions and occupations (Peterson, et al., 2001). For example, the broad range of descriptors focus on areas such as work requirements, worker characteristics, and necessary skills needed to perform, just to name a few (Peterson, et al., 2001; Peterson, & Jeanneret, 2007). Whereas, the critical incident technique descriptions of behaviors can be narrow (Hughes, Williamson, & Lloyd, 2007). This is because of the categorizing and defining of behaviors into dual descriptions, which can limit reporting the variances of human behaviors (Hughes, Williamson, & Lloyd, 2007). Another advantage the O*NET system when compared to the critical incident technique is that it provides cross job descriptions. Because of the common descriptors for various jobs, new descriptors do not need to be developed for every job …show more content…
Utilizing the same instrument can overstress relationships between job dimensions, cause unauthentic associations among responses, and falsely increase the internal consistency (as cited in Peterson, et al., 2001). Whereas, the critical incident technique collects job information from different methods (Peterson, et al., 2001). Methods such as observation and interviews are conducted to study behaviors that occur during job activity (Hughes, Williamson, & Lloyd, 2007; Flanagan, 1954). These methods provide immediate outlooks of human behavior, which aids in a more authentic experience (as cited in Hughes, Williamson, & Lloyd,