Doctoral Dissertations

Date of Award

12-1999

Degree Type

Dissertation

Degree Name

Doctor of Philosophy

Major

Industrial and Organizational Psychology

Major Professor

Robert T. Ladd

Committee Members

Joyce Russell, Larry James, Kathy Lawler

Abstract

The present study examined the role of professional and managerial experience in interpreting and using managerial assessment center data. Given the rising use of the assessment center method to select employees, it is essential to understand the degree to which professional and managerial experience impacts the accuracy of interpreting assessment center results. Past selection decision studies have failed to provide a clear answer to this question. The purpose of this study was to ascertain which type of experience, managerial or psychological, is essential in making accurate selection decisions.Several hypotheses based on past selection and performance appraisal research, as well as the expert decision making literature, were examined. A secondary purpose of the current study was to examine the type of information being used across varying groups making selection decisions, in hopes of shedding light on differences in the decision making process. The decision processes of three different subject groups representing managers, trained assessment center assessors and undergraduate students were examined in this study. Forty-two managers from various companies, 34 Industrial And Organizational Psychology doctoral students trained as assessment center raters, and50 undergraduate students served as subjects for this study. Subjects read three managerial job descriptions, examined assessment center results in the form of written summary reports, and rated 16 applicants on overall assessment center performance.predicted job performance, and four skill sets. Subject matter experts’ ratings (i.e..managers with a graduate degree in I/O Psychology and assessment center experience)served as the criterion.VICalculations of Cronbach’s (1955) evaluative accuracy components revealed that undergraduate students’ ratings were the least accurate. The findings also revealed that managers were more capable than trained assessors at distinguishing dimensional differences in performance across individuals (i.e., stereotype accuracy). However,trained assessors were slightly more accurate in their rank ordering of applicants, and they were also slightly better than managers in making accurate dimension x applicant distinctions. A dominance analysis was performed to ascertain the relative importance of dimensional skill ratings in making predictions concerning the applicants’ on-the-job performance. The results of the dominance analysis indicated that the subject groups used the information provided in different ways when making their selection decisions.These findings were further supported by the content analysis of subjects’ written rationale for making their hiring decisions. Managers were more likely to focus on future possibilities and the skills applicants needed to acquire in order to fulfill the job requirements. In contrast, trained assessors tended to focus on the dichotomous decision to hire or not hire applicants. Limitations of the present study are discussed, in addition to the practical implications of the findings. Suggestions for future research are also outlined.

Download
Files over 3MB may be slow to open. For best results, right-click and select "save as..."

Share

COinS