Showing papers in "Personnel Psychology in 2019"
153 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the authors examined the properties of LinkedIn-based assessments in two studies and found that initial ratings correlate with self-reports for more visible skills (leadership, communication, and planning) and personality traits (extraversion), and for cognitive ability.
Abstract: Various surveys suggest LinkedIn is used as a screening and selection tool by many hiring managers. Despite this widespread use, fairly little is known about whether LinkedIn meets established selection criteria, such as reliability, validity, and legality (i.e., no adverse impact). We examine the properties of LinkedIn-based assessments in two studies. Study 1 shows that raters reach acceptable levels of consistency in their assessments of applicant skills, personality, and cognitive ability. Initial ratings also correlate with subsequent ratings done oneyear later (i.e., demonstrating temporal stability), with slightly higher correlations when profile updates are taken into account. Initial LinkedIn-based ratings correlate with self-reports for more visible skills (leadership, communication, and planning) and personality traits (Extraversion), and for cognitive ability. LinkedIn-based hiring recommendations are positively associated with indicators of career success. Potential adverse impact is also limited. Profiles that are longer, include a picture, and have more connections are rated more positively. Some of those features are valid cues to applicants’ characteristics (e.g., applicants high on Conscientiousness have longer profiles). In Study 2, we show that an itemized LinkedIn assessment is more effective than a global assessment. Implications of these findings for selection and future research are discussed.
61 citations
48 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors draw from social psychological and resource-based theories to meta-analytically examine the existence, form, and magnitude of curvilinear relationships between destructive leadership and followers' workplace behaviors.
Abstract: We draw from social psychological and resource-based theories to meta-analytically examine the existence, form, and magnitude of curvilinear relationships between destructive leadership and followers’ workplace behaviors (i.e., job performance, organizational citizenship behaviors, and workplace deviance). Overall, our meta-analytic results demonstrate weak evidence of curvilinear relationships between destructive leadership and followers’ workplace behaviors. However, we did find some support for the application of social psychological theories when examining the curvilinear effects of destructive leadership on followers’ workplace behaviors at extreme levels of destructive leadership (i.e., two standard deviations below and above the mean). Our findings are important because they (1) provide support for prior research that has examined the linear effects of destructive leadership on followers’ workplace outcomes and (2) refine our knowledge of the effects of destructive leadership on followers’ workplace outcomes by demonstrating the existence, form, and magnitude of curvilinear effects at extreme levels of destructive leadership. Overall, this study’s meta-analytic regression, relative weight, and semipartial correlation results have important implications for (1) how to interpret the conclusions drawn from prior destructive leadership research, (2) how to conduct future studies that examine destructive leadership, and (3) practitioners’ attempts to deter destructive leadership and limit its harmful effects on followers.
45 citations
38 citations
30 citations
28 citations
28 citations
27 citations
26 citations
TL;DR: Li et al. as mentioned in this paper found that conscientiousness did not influence work-family outcomes through occupational prestige, whereas GMA and conscientiousness were both related to work-to-family conflict and enrichment through their relationship with occupational prestige and coping styles.
Abstract: Correspondence AndrewLi,DepartmentofManagement,Marketing, andGeneralBusiness,WestTexasA&M University,CC213H,Canyon, Texas. Email: ali@wtamu.edu Abstract This study proposed amodel in which employee general mental ability (GMA) and conscientiousness are linked to work–family conflict and enrichment through their relationship with occupational prestige and coping styles. We evaluated this model in a sample of 709 working adults from the National Survey of Midlife Development II in the United States. Results indicate that, through occupational prestige and subsequent psychological job demands and financial well-being, GMA was related to work-to-family conflict (WFC) and family-to-work conflict (FWC). GMA was also related to work-tofamily enrichment (WFE) but not family-to-work enrichment (FWE) through occupational prestige and autonomy. In contrast, conscientiousness did not influence work–family outcomes through occupational prestige. Additionally, GMA and conscientiousness were both related to WFE/FWE through problem coping, whereas conscientiousness was related to FWC through avoidance coping. Examining the relative effects ofGMAand conscientiousness,we found that the indirect effects ofGMAthroughoccupational prestigewere stronger than those of conscientiousness, whereas the indirect effects of conscientiousness through problem coping were stronger than those of GMA. We discuss our findings in terms of the mechanisms through which stable individual differences may exert influences on work– family outcomes.
TL;DR: The authors found that structural links are more likely to foster cross-unit ties when organizational identification is high and unit identification is low, whereas lateral transfers are more often likely to result in cross unit ties when both organizational identification and unit ID are high.
Abstract: Cross-unit ties-relationships that facilitate discretionary information sharing between individuals from different business units-offer a range of organizational benefits. Scholars argue that organizations can promote cross-unit ties by: (a) formally bringing together individuals from different business units into structural links (e.g., cross-unit strategic committees) to encourage the formation of new cross unit ties and, (b) transferring individuals across units, which can increase cross-unit interaction when ties to the prior unit are maintained. This study considers the notion that the success of these formal interventions in fostering cross-unit interaction is contingent on identification with the local unit relative to identification with the broader organization. Specifically, we propose that structural links are more likely to foster cross-unit ties when organizational identification is high and unit identification is low. In contrast, lateral transfers are more likely to result in cross-unit ties when both organizational identification and unit identification are high. We find general support for these propositions in data obtained from a sample of senior leaders of a Fortune 200 agribusiness company before and after a restructuring designed to stimulate cross-unit information sharing. Our model and results make important contributions to our understanding of the relationship between formal and informal structure and reconcile conflicting views regarding the moderating effect of unit identification on intergroup relations.