[IPAC-List] The lights finally go on

[Jeff Feuquay]

Sheesh, Herman, you and Wayne are always grabbing my best ideas and using
using your knowledge and experience to explain them to me. (kidding, sorta)
But seriously, youse guys appear to be saying what many in the field have
been muttering about for some time, i.e., It's been quite awhile since we've
seen or heard anything truly exciting in personnel assessment . . . time for
us to step back and think differently about what it is we are really trying
to predict if we are to come up with a way to add value to what we do and
get over the 50% variance hump. (I do appreciate the optimism implicit in
citing the upper end of our prediction range rather than the norm.)

Jeff
On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 6:46 PM, Aguinis, Herman <haguinis at indiana.edu>wrote:


> Mark,

>

>

>

> The issue you mentioned in your posting about considering performance

> within a specific context was discussed in detail in the following article

> (available online at http://mypage.iu.edu/~haguinis --click on the

> "refereed journal articles" link):

>

>

>

> Cascio, W. F, & Aguinis, H. (2008). Staffing twenty-first-century

> organizations. Academy of Management Annals, 2, 133-165.

>

>

>

> Specifically, this article defines in situ performance as "the

> specification of the broad range of effects-situational, contextual,

> strategic, and environmental-that may affect individual, team, or

> organizational performance" (p. 146). The article's Abstract is below. Let

> me know if you think this article is addressing the phenomenon you described

> in your posting.

>

>

>

> All the best,

>

>

>

> --Herman.

>

> *****************************************************

>

> Herman Aguinis, Ph.D.

>

> Dean's Research Professor and

>

> Professor of Organizational Behavior and Human Resources

>

> Director, Institute for Global Organizational Effectiveness

>

> Department of Management and Entrepreneurship

>

> Kelley School of Business, Indiana University

>

> http://mypage.iu.edu/~haguinis/

>

> ****************************************************

>

>

>

> Abstract

>

>

>

> We highlight important differences between 21st-century organizations as

> compared to those of the previous century, and offer a critical review of

> the basic principles, typical applications, general effectiveness, and

> limitations of the current staffing model. That model focuses on identifying

> and measuring job-related individual characteristics to predict

> individual-level job performance. We conclude that the current staffing

> model has reached a ceiling or plateau in terms of its ability to make

> accurate predictions about future performance. Evidence accumulated over

> more than 80 years of staffing research suggests that general mental

> abilities and other traditional staffing tools do a modest job of predicting

> performance across settings and jobs considering that, even when combined

> and corrected for methodological and statistical artifacts, they rarely

> predict more than 50% of the variance in performance. Accordingly, we argue

> for a change in direction in staffing research

>  and propose an expanded view of the staffing process, including the

> introduction of a new construct, in situ performance, and an expanded view

> of staffing tools to be used to predict future in situ performance that take

> into account time and context. Our critical review offers a novel

> perspective and research agenda with the goal of guiding future research

> that will result in more useful, applicable, relevant, and effective

> knowledge for practitioners to use in organizational settings.

>

>

>

>

>