A framework for understanding the etiology of organizational behavior is presented. The framework is based on theory and research from interactional psychology, vocational psychology, I/O psychology, and organizational theory. The framework proposes that organizations are functions of the kinds of people they contain and, further, that the people there are functions of an attraction-selection-attrition (ASA) cycle. The ASA cycle is proposed as an alternative model for understanding organizations and the causes of the structures, processes, and technology of organizations. First, the ASA framework is developed through a series of propositions. Then some implications of the model are outlined, including (1) the difficulty of bringing about change in organizations, (2) the utility of personality and interest measures for understanding organizational behavior, (3) the genesis of organizational climate and culture, (4) the importance of recruitment, and (5) the need for person-based theories of leadership and job attitudes. It is concluded that contemporary I/O psychology is overly dominated by situationist theories of the behavior of organizations and the people in them.

The people make the place

This article summarizes the practical and theoretical implications of 85 years of research in personnel selection. On the basis of meta-analytic findings, this article presents the validity of 19 selection procedures for predicting job performance and training performance and the validity of paired combinations of general mental ability (GMA) and Ihe 18 other selection procedures. Overall, the 3 combinations with the highest multivariate validity and utility for job performance were GMA plus a work sample test (mean validity of .63), GMA plus an integrity test (mean validity of .65), and GMA plus a structured interview (mean validity of .63). A further advantage of the latter 2 combinations is that they can be used for both entry level selection and selection of experienced employees. The practical utility implications of these summary findings are substantial. The implications of these research findings for the development of theories of job performance are discussed. From the point of view of practical value, the most important property of a personnel assessment method is predictive validity: the ability to predict future job performance, job-related learning (such as amount of learning in training and development programs), and other criteria. The predictive validity coefficient is directly proportional to the practical economic value (utility) of the assessment method (Brogden, 1949; Schmidt, Hunter, McKenzie, & Muldrow, 1979). Use of hiring methods with increased predictive validity leads to substantial increases in employee performance as measured in percentage increases in output, increased monetary value of output, and increased learning of job-related skills (Hunter, Schmidt, & Judiesch, 1990). Today, the validity of different personnel measures can be determined with the aid of 85 years of research. The most wellknown conclusion from this research is that for hiring employees without previous experience in the job the most valid predictor of future performance and learning is general mental ability ([GMA], i.e., intelligence or general cognitive ability; Hunter & Hunter, 1984; Ree & Earles, 1992). GMA can be measured using commercially available tests. However, many other measures can also contribute to the overall validity of the selection process. These include, for example, measures of

/pdf/the-validity-and-utility-of-selection-methods-in-personnel-meyzri6y9y.pdf

The validity and utility of selection methods in personnel psychology: Practical and theoretical implications of 85 years of research findings.

Measurement and control of response bias.

In order for researchers to understand and predict behavior, they must consider both person and situation factors and how these factors interact. Even though organization researchers have developed interactional models, many have overemphasized either person or situation components, and most have failed to consider the effects that persons have on situations. This paper presents criteria for improving interactional models and a model of person-organization fit, which satisfies these criteria. Using a Q-sort methodology, individual value profiles are compared to organizational value profiles to determine fit and to predict changes in values, norms, and behaviors.

/pdf/improving-interactional-organizational-research-a-model-of-3r4gy77gq5.pdf

Improving Interactional Organizational Research: A Model of Person-Organization Fit

Publisher Summary This chapter discusses social behavior through self-evaluation maintenance (SEM) model. It describes several studies to provide a feel for the kind of research that has been completed in an attempt to explore the predictions of the model. The SEM model is composed of two dynamic processes. Both the reflection process and the comparison process have as component variables the closeness of another and the quality of that other's performance. These two variables interact in affecting self-evaluation but do so in quite opposite ways in each of the processes Model establishes the comprehensiveness of the research and the interactive quality of its predictions. Next, the SEM model is fit into the perspective of related work, including self-theories, social comparison theory, and Cialdini's BIRGing research. The chapter reviews the epistemological status of the model. It discusses some of the implications of the research for a variety of areas in psychology.

/pdf/toward-a-self-evaluation-maintenance-model-of-social-2k0ckmk1fr.pdf

Toward a Self-Evaluation Maintenance Model of Social Behavior

Toward a classification of persons.

This paper provides a review and critique of the background data literature. As a life history measure, the effective application of background data items is based on a developmental strategy in which a pattern of prior behavior and experiences is related to certain forms of criterion performance. This principle pro vides a framework for discussing the various issues in volved in generating an adequate pool of background data items. The four principal methods for scaling background data items are examined: rational scaling, factorial scaling, empirical keying, and subgrouping. The relative strengths and weaknesses of these four techniques are considered along with current research needs in each area. This review indicates that substan tial progress has been made in the development and application of background data measures, but that al ternatives to the traditional empirical keying strategy should receive more attention.

Methodology Review: Principles, Procedures, and Findings in the Application of Background Data Measures

The hypothesis was examined that organizational specificity of biodata validity results from the methods typically used to select and key items. In this study, items were initially screened for job relevance, keying was based on large samples from multiple organizations, and items were retained only if they showed validity across organizations. Cross-validation was performed on approximately 11,000 first-line supervisors in 79 organizations. The resulting validities were meta-analyzed across organizations, age levels, sex, and levels of education, supervisory experience, and company tenure. In all cases, validities were generalizable. Validities were also stable across time and did not appear to stem from measurement of knowledge, skills, or abilities acquired through job experience. Finally, these results provide additional evidence against the hypothesis of situational specificity of validities, the first large-sample evidence in a noncognitive domain. Substantial evidence now indicates that the two most valid predictors of job performance are cognitive ability tests and biodata instruments. The quantitative review of the literature by Hunter and Hunter (1984) has estimated the average validity of tests of general cognitive ability against supervisory ratings of overall job performance as .47, whereas the average (cross

https://www.biz.uiowa.edu/faculty/fschmidt/meta-analysis/Rothstein_et_al_1990.pdf

William A. Owens

Papers

Toward a classification of persons.

Methodology Review: Principles, Procedures, and Findings in the Application of Background Data Measures

Biographical Data in Employment Selection: Can Validities Be Made Generalizable?

Biodata Handbook: Theory, Research, and Use of Biographical Information in Selection and Performance Prediction

Toward one discipline of scientific psychology.