Reading...
Play button
Play button
Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
40 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
Job analysis
|
Identifies the nature of the job; KSAOs (knowledge, skills, abilities, and other characteristics, and a way of measuring job performance
|
|
|
Job evaluation - what is the purpose?
|
To determine the relative worth of jobs to set salaries
|
|
|
Different subjective raters and pros/cons
|
Self: most lenient but least subject to halo effect; supervisor: generally most reliable, also most common; peer: good at predicting training success and future promotions
|
|
|
Training to reduce rater biases
|
Most effective when focused on distinguishing different levels of perf, rather than on avoiding biases (ex. of the former- Frame-of-reference training). Having raters rate specific behaviors rather than global traits also reduces biases
|
|
|
Relative rating scales
|
Reduce central tendency, leniency, and strictness biases, but disliked, prohibited for most federal jobs, and less useful for providing feedback.
|
|
|
Examples of relative techniques
|
Paired comparison, forced distribution
|
|
|
Incremental validity is affected by...
|
Selection ratio (low sr's - many applicants for a job - increase incremental validity); Base rate (moderate br's are associated with greatest incr validity)
|
|
|
Taylor-Russell tables
|
Used to estimate the % of successful new hires, with the validity coefficient, base rate, and selection ratio
|
|
|
Adverse impact
|
Determined by Four-Fifths (80%) rule - minimum hiring rate for minorities is 80% of the hiring rate of the majority group
|
|
|
Reasons for adverse impact
|
Differential validity (predictor is less valid for one group) and unfairness (predictor has same degree of validity across groups, but one group consistently scores lower on predictor despite same proportion meeting criterion cutoff
|
|
|
To address differential validity...
|
Don't use that predictor- or use a different one that us equally valid across groups
|
|
|
To address unfairness...
|
Use different predictor cutoff scores for the different groups
|
|
|
Multiple regression for job selection
|
Predictor scores weighted and summed to yield criterion score - a compensatory procedure
|
|
|
Multiple cutoff
|
Noncompensatory
|
|
|
Multiple hurdles
|
Noncompensatory. Saved time and $ b/c not all predictors are administered to everyone - must meet cutoff of 1st test to take 2nd test and so on
|
|
|
General mental ability test
|
Avg correlation with job performance is around 0.51
|
|
|
Job knowledge tests
|
May have even more predictive validity than GMA tests, but only for the specific job & if applicants have had prior training
|
|
|
interest tests
|
E.g., SCII and KOIS - more valid for predicting job choice, satisfaction and persistence than success
|
|
|
Biodata
|
E.g., Biographical Information Blank; some items lack face validity
|
|
|
Interviews
|
Most commonly-used method. Accuracy improved by training in observation and interpersonal skills; reliability/validity improved by structured interview; past-oriented ?s are more valid
|
|
|
Work samples
|
Sometimes used as part of realistic job preview - to decrease turnover
|
|
|
In-basket test
|
A situational (work sample) test used in assessment centers when evaluating managerial personnel
|
|
|
Advantages of on-the-job training
|
High job relevance, maximum opportunities for transfer of training, ongoing feedback opps
|
|
|
Pros and cons of off-the-job training
|
Opportunities to focus on specific techniques , provide supplemental info, flexibility to tolerate learning errors. Cons: low trainee motivation, ltd transfer of training, and higher costs due to time off from job
|
|
|
kirkpatrick's 4 levels of criteria to evaluate training programs
|
1. Reaction criteria (most commonly assessed), 2. Learning criteria (next most common), 3. Behavioral criteria, 4. Results criteria (least commonly assessed but most important- value of the training program in terms of organizati's goals
|
|
|
Super's career dev theory
|
A life-span,life-space theory that also includes the self-concept- job satisfaction, stability and success are based on whether the job matches the self-concept
|
|
|
Life-span in Super's theory
|
5 stages in career dev: 1. Growth (0-14); 2. Exploration (14-25); 3. Establishment (25-45); 4. Maintenance (45-65); 5. Disengagement (65+)
|
|
|
Holland'a model
|
Personality-job environment fit (RIASEC -realistic, investigative, artistic, social, enterprising, conventional
|
|
|
Roes's model
|
Similar to Holland's w/ a personality-job match. Influenced by Maslow. 8 basic types (svc, technology) and 8 levels (from support, unskilled to innovation and independent responsibility)
|
|
|
T and O'H's processes and phases
|
(Repetitive). Processes = differentiation and integration. Phases = anticipation/ preoccupation and implementation/ adjustment
|
|
|
Krumboltz
|
Social learning theory of career decision-making. 4 influencing factors incl genetics, environment, learning experiences, and task approach skills
|
|
|
Brousseau & Driver's 4 career concepts
|
Linear, expert, spiral, and transitory
|
|
|
Theory of work adjustment
|
Work Values Assessment is based on it and helps ppl find jobs that meet their needs and values.
|
|
|
Taylor/scientific management theory posit greatest motivator is...
|
$. He advocates for a differential piece-rate system of payment.
|
|
|
Performance is a function of
|
Ability+ Motivation + Environment
|
|
|
Alderfer's ERG theory
|
Alters maslow's 5 needs to 3: existence, relatedness, and growth and adds that they are not nec hierarchical and ppl can exp more than one at a time
|
|
|
Need for achievement
|
(Other needs incl power and affiliation). Prefer tasks of moderate difficulty and risk, as well as frequent, concrete feedback.
|
|
|
goal setting theory for ppl w high and low nACH
|
High: self-set goals assoc w greater commitment; low: assigned goals assoc w greater commitment; goals tend to be more difficult when workers contribute to the process
|
|
|
Expectancy (VIE) theory
|
Ppl will work hard if they believe high effort will lead to good perf (expectancy), perf will lead to rewards (instrumentality), and views rewards as desirable (valence)
|
|
|
Fiedler's contingency theory
|
Low LPC leaders perform best in highly favorable or unfavorable environments, while high LPC leaders do well in moderate environments
|
