100% satisfaction guarantee Immediately available after payment Both online and in PDF No strings attached
logo-home
Previously searched by you
Previously searched by you
logo
INDUSTRIAL PSYCH EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS WITH COMPLETE SOLUTIONS VERIFIED $10.99
Add to cart
Quickly navigate to
Preview
  2.  
  3. INDUSTRIAL PSYCH
  4.  
  5. INDUSTRIAL PSYCH

Exam (elaborations)

INDUSTRIAL PSYCH EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS WITH COMPLETE SOLUTIONS VERIFIED
 0 purchase
  • Course
  • INDUSTRIAL PSYCH
  • Institution
  • INDUSTRIAL PSYCH

INDUSTRIAL PSYCH EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS WITH COMPLETE SOLUTIONS VERIFIED Schmidt & Hunter 1998 This article discusses quantifying the dollar amount each employee produces as a performance indicator. (Liana) Is it possible to quantify this amount? Is there anything that might be missed when ...

[Show more]

Preview 4 out of 197  pages

Document information

  • November 3, 2024
  • 197
  • 2024/2025
  • Exam (elaborations)
  • Questions & answers

Subjects

  • industrial psych exam questions and answers with c

Written for

  • INDUSTRIAL PSYCH
All documents for this subject (15)

Seller

avatar-seller
NurseAdvocate

Reviews received

Content preview

INDUSTRIAL PSYCH EXAM QUESTIONS AND

ANSWERS WITH COMPLETE SOLUTIONS VERIFIED
Schmidt & Hunter 1998


This article discusses quantifying the dollar amount each employee produces as a performance indicator.

(Liana)

Is it possible to quantify this amount?

Is there anything that might be missed when quantifying each employee's contribution?

What would be the best method of quantifying an employee's dollar amount produced?

If you successfully quantify the dollar amount each employee produces, are there any problems that may

arise? (e.g., Nordstrom Employee working commission).

Performance on the job was typically measured by supervisor ratings. What are our thoughts on this

method? Other measures used were production records, sales records. (Liana).

The article discusses reference checks, indicating that at the time of publication employers avoided

providing negative information about former employees due to legal concerns (being sued). This

measure provided a 12% increase in validity over the GMA measure. (Liana)

Has this changed? Are employers now more willing to provide negative information about applicants?

Do you believe reference checks are useful?


Denisi & Murphy (2017)


We review 100 years of research on performance appraisal and performance management, highlighting

the articles published in JAP, but including significant work from other journals as well. We discuss

trends in eight substantive areas: (1) scale formats, (2) criteria for evaluating ratings, (3) training, (4)

,reactions to appraisal, (5) purpose of rating, (6) rating sources, (7) demographic differences in ratings,

and (8) cognitive processes, and discuss what we have learned from research in each area. We also focus

on trends during the heyday of performance appraisal research in JAP (1970-2000), noting which were

more productive and which potentially hampered progress. Our overall conclusion is that JAP's role in

this literature has not been to propose models and new ideas, but has been primarily to test ideas and

models proposed elsewhere. Nonetheless, we conclude that the papers published in JAP made

important

contribution to the filed by addressing many of the critical questions raised by others. We also suggest

several areas for future research, especially research focusing on performance management.




Our title included a question mark suggesting potential doubts

about whether the substantial body of research published in the last

100 years in JAP has made a substantial contribution to our

understanding of performance appraisal and performance management.

The answer is both "yes" and "no." It should be clear that we

have come a long way from examining rating scale formats to

determine their effects on rating errors, and JAP has contributed

substantially to this progress. We have certainly learned that the

specific format of the rating scale used is not the most important

consideration in developing appraisal systems and that traditional

error measures are not the best way to evaluate such systems. We

have learned that demographic characteristics may have less influence

on ratings than we had believed, that some rater cognitive

,processes are related to appraisal decisions, and that it is possible

to train rates to do a better job. Certainly, these accomplishments

can be considered progress.

However, perhaps the most significant progress we have made

during this time is to come to better appreciate the critical influence

of the context in which performance appraisal occurs on the

process and outcomes of appraisal (Murphy & DeNisi, 2008), and

the role of JAP in this area is smaller and more indirect. Performance

appraisal is used for a variety of purposes in organizations

(Cleveland et al., 1988), and these purposes influence the way

performance is defined (e.g., task performance vs. contextual performance;

Podsakoff, Ahearne, & MacKenzie, 1997) and the way

raters and ratees approach the task of performance appraisal (Murphy

& Cleveland, 1995). The appraisal effectiveness model proposed

by Levy and Williams (2004) summarizes much of the

research on the role of social context and emphasizes the importance

of rate reactions to appraisals and the acceptability of ratings,

and some of the work summarized in this review has appeared in

JAP. However, most of the research published in JAP has been

decontextualized, examining different facets of the rating process

(e.g., cognitive processes, rating scales, rater training) in isolation,

and it has become clear that we will not make progress in understanding

how or why appraisals succeed without considering why

appraisals are done in the first place, and how the climate, culture,

, norms, and beliefs in organizations shape the appraisal process and

the outcomes of appraisals.

Contextualizing performance appraisal research implies paying

attention to when and why performance appraisal is carried out and

the contextual variables that are likely to be important range from

quite distal (e.g., national cultures) to quite proximal (e.g.,

supervisor-subordinate relationships). For example, there may be

aspects of national culture (or organizational culture) that make it

less acceptable to give anyone negative feedback, and this may put



pressure on raters to intentionally inflate ratings. In fact, we know

little about how culture and societal norms really affect appraisal

decisions and processes; JAP has made few contributions here.

There is descriptive research that indicates that different practices

and policies are more likely in some parts of the world than in

others (e.g., Varma, Budhwar, & DeNisi, 2008), but we do not

fully understand how cultural norms may make certain practices

more or less effective. Also, we need more research on the effectiveness

of individual-level performance management techniques

in different cultures. The archive for this issue also includes a

model of various factors that might affect performance appraisal

processes and changes in individual performance. This model is

adapted from Murphy and DeNisi (2008).

At the most fundamental level, the question mark in our title

The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:

Guaranteed quality through customer reviews

Guaranteed quality through customer reviews

Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.

Quick and easy check-out

Quick and easy check-out

You can quickly pay through credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.

Focus on what matters

Focus on what matters

Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!

Frequently asked questions

What do I get when I buy this document?

You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.

Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?

Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.

Who am I buying these notes from?

Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller NurseAdvocate. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.

Will I be stuck with a subscription?

No, you only buy these notes for $10.99. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.

Can Stuvia be trusted?

4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)

67418 documents were sold in the last 30 days

Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy study notes for 15 years now

Start selling
$10.99
  • (0)
Add to cart
Added