Category Archives: *Journal of Business and Psychology
Improving websites used to recruit applicants (Human Resource Management)
Topic: Recruiting
Publication: Journal of Business and Psychology (in press)
Article: Reactions to recruitment web sites: Visual and verbal attention, attraction, and intentions to pursue employment
Authors: Allen, D. G., Biggane, J. E., Pitts, M., Otondo, R., & Van Scotter, J.
Reviewed by: Alexandra Rechlin
If you’ve looked for a new job in the past five or ten years, there’s a good chance that you checked out a company’s website to learn more about open positions. Did aspects of the site affect your reactions to the company and your likelihood of applying? According to recent research, they probably did.
To best understand applicant reactions to recruitment websites, the researchers used a combination of methods, utilizing eye-tracking software and surveys as well as having participants explain their thoughts while viewing the websites. Participants paid more attention to information when presented as hyperlinks on text than when it was presented as part of graphics or navigation tools. Content, site design, and communication features (especially the extent of interpersonal involvement of the user with the website, which the researchers called parasocial interaction) were all important.
The researchers had a number of recommendations based on their findings. Providing lots of information in pretty graphics may not be necessary, as job seekers will likely be looking for content found in text and hyperlinked information. Organizations need to make information about the job opening, the organization, and geographic location obvious and easily accessible. Finally, organizations need to pay attention not only to the information they provide and the quality of the website design, but also to communication features. The information provided needs to be useful and straightforward, and interactions need to be more personable and social.
human resource management, organizational industrial psychology, organizational management
Size Matters in Court? Determinations of Adverse Impact Based on Organization Size (IO Psychology)
Topic: Assessment, Discrimination, HR Policy, Statistics
Publication: Journal of Business Psychology (JUN 2012)
Article: Unintended consequences of EEO enforcement policies: Being big is worse than being bad
Authors: R. Jacobs, K. Murphy, and J. Silva
Reviewed By: Megan Leasher
Adverse impact occurs when neutral-appearing employment practices have an unintentional, discriminatory effect on a protected group. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission is charged with enforcing all federal legislation related to employment discrimination and adheres to the 1978 Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures for “rules of thumb” on inferring whether adverse impact is present.
However, it’s tricky for a plaintiff to present conclusive evidence that adverse impact is present in an organization’s practices. Statistical evidence is needed to demonstrate whether employment practices are truly discriminating against a protected group. Jacobs and colleagues investigate a common statistical method, known as “significance testing,” which is often used in courts to demonstrate evidence of adverse impact. Significance testing compares the difference between the proportion of majority candidates selected and the proportion of protected class candidates selected in an employment decision. If the test finds the difference between these proportions to be “statistically significant,” courts generally interpret this to mean that adverse impact is present.
This method seems to make sense from a high level, but problems arise when you look under the surface. The outcome of significance testing is greatly influenced by the number of people who are included in the analysis. Specifically, the more people you include in a significance test, the greater the likelihood of finding a statistically significant difference between groups. So, if you have an organization with many people included in the analysis, you are much more likely to yield a significant difference between majority and protected groups than you would with a smaller organization with fewer people to include in the exact same analysis. This is the primary argument of the authors; why do courts use significance testing to demonstrate adverse impact when, by nature of the test, the results would almost always find that big organizations are discriminating and smaller ones are not?
The authors conducted a series of studies to determine sources of differences in adverse impact significance testing. They found that the number of people included in the analysis was the strongest predictor in whether or not a statistically significant difference was found between groups. Size accounted for 49% of the final outcome of the analysis, which was almost five times greater than what any other factor (e.g., score differences on assessment in question, proportion in each group selected, etc.) accounted for. They also discovered an interesting threshold: When an adverse impact significance test is conducted with 500 or more people in the analysis, very small differences between the groups’ selection proportions will be statistically significant (yet below 500 these same comparisons would not be significantly different).
These findings support the powerful impact of sample size on determinations of adverse impact via significance testing, but they do not tell us if members of majority and protected class groups are really experiencing systemic, differential outcomes in employment practices. Unless a statistical method can accurately assess the latter issue, it is meaningless. This oversimplification leads us to believe that virtually all larger organizations are guilty of discrimination and virtually all smaller organizations are not. This common practice in courts only serves to make small organizations feel impervious and invincible and leave large organizations running in fear.
The authors close by asserting that regulatory standards should always reflect current scientific knowledge, yet the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures still reflect the science of decades past. They advocate for not only alternative methods to more appropriately measure adverse impact, but also for a more dynamic definition of adverse impact; one that considers multiple, interactive factors before a determination can be made. Current practice is supporting the message that to be big is to be bad and to be small is to be nice, which goes directly against the spirit of anti-discrimination legislation.
human resource management, organizational industrial psychology, organizational management
source for picture: http://www.freedigitalphotos.net/images/Leadership_g403-Team_Leader_p19976.html
The Placement of Demographic Questions in Surveys (IO Psychology)
Topic: Surveys
Publication: Journal of Business and Psychology (SEP 2012)
Article: Demographic question placement: Effect on item response rates and means of a Veterans Health Administration survey
Authors: R. Teclaw, M. C. Price, & K. Osatuke
Reviewed by: Alexandra Rechlin
Imagine that you’re taking a survey for your company, and you’re immediately given demographic questions. Now imagine that you’re asked about your demographics at the end of the survey. Are you more likely to respond to the demographic questions in the first situation or the second? Would answering demographic information right away affect your responses to the survey?
In I-O psychology and in many HR departments, there has been debate about the placement of demographic questions. Some argue that asking about demographics will decrease responding, others contest that it doesn’t matter, and others maintain that it will change the responses themselves.
In a recent study, Robert Teclaw and his colleagues analyzed data from over 75,000 Veterans Administration (VA) surveys. They found that when demographic questions were asked first, respondents were more likely to answer them. There wasn’t really a difference in response rates for the regular survey items, and the means for the survey items were also similar for those who received demographic questions first and those who were asked about their demographics last.
While more research still needs to be conducted to better understand the effect of demographic question placement, it appears from this study that asking about demographics at the beginning of a survey won’t adversely affect responses and will even increase response rates for the demographic questions.
human resource management, organizational industrial psychology, organizational management
Talkin’ ‘bout my generation: Does it affect work-related attitudes?
Topic: Job Attitudes, Organizational Commitment, Job Satisfaction, Turnover
Publication: Journal of Business and Psychology (in press)
Article: Generational differences in work-related attitudes: A Meta-analysis
Authors: D. P. Costanza, J. M. Badger, R. L. Fraswer, J. B. Severt, & P. A. Gade
Reviewed by: Alexandra Rechlin
Do generational differences predict work-related attitudes, like job satisfaction and commitment? Although many organizations base training programs and interventions on the belief that there are generational differences, research has found mixed results. David Costanza and his colleagues recently conducted a meta-analysis using the available research findings to determine if there really are generational differences in work-related attitudes.
Contrary to popular belief, there were not meaningful differences in work-related attitudes (like job satisfaction or organizational commitment) due to the generation of the worker. Older workers were slightly more satisfied than younger workers, but this result was likely due to the difference in age or tenure of the employees and not due to generational differences. Also, older workers were less likely to leave their jobs; but again, this result is best explained by factors other than generational differences.
So what’s the takeaway message from this meta-analysis? Don’t just assume that there are generational differences that you have to deal with. The research doesn’t support the idea that workers’ attitudes are affected by their generation, so before implementing any interventions or programs based on mitigating generational differences, conduct a needs assessment of your employees. Find out if there are any differences that need to be addressed before just assuming that you need to develop an intervention.
human resource management, organizational industrial psychology, organizational management
Birds of a Feather: Studying Personality Similarity in Organizations and Occupations
Topic: Personality
Publication: Journal of Business and Psychology (2012)
Article: Homogeneity of Personality in Occupations and Organizations: A Comparison of Alternative Statistical Tests
Authors: Bradley-Geist, J. C., and Landis, R. S.
Reviewer: Neil Morelli
You’ve probably heard the expression, “It takes a certain type of person to be a (fill in occupation),” but is this really true? According to the attraction-selection-attrition (ASA) homogeneity hypothesis, it is. ASA says that organizations or occupations are likely to be made of people with similar personalities, attitudes, and values due to the “weeding-out” process of recruiting certain “types”, selecting certain “types”, and retaining certain “types.”
Typically, this hypothesis has been tested using a multivariate analysis of variance or MANOVA, which makes conclusions about within-group similarity based on between-group differences. In this study, the authors wanted to accomplish two things. One, offer up a new, more direct test of ASA called the average deviation (AD), which focuses primarily on the degree of agreement within a group. And two, the authors wanted to answer the question, “are people similar in occupations to the same degree they are similar in organizations?”
Bradley-Geist and Landis examined Myers-Briggs results from more than 15,000 managers to test their hypotheses. Other than making the case for using AD to test the ASA homogeneity hypothesis, the authors discovered that the ASA model was supported (to similar degrees) at both the organizational and occupational level. In other words, birds of a feather really do flock together. Practically, this means that there are certain personality types that are more strongly associated with certain organizations and occupations; thus, identifying relevant personality traits could help predict organizational or occupational membership.
human resource management, organizational industrial psychology, organizational management
Online survey invitations and perceived anonymity (IO Psychology)
Topic: Surveys
Publication: Journal of Business and Psychology (in press)
Article: Effects of personalized versus generic implementation of an intra-organizational online survey on psychological anonymity and response behavior: A field experiment
Authors: Karsten Mueller, Tammo Straatmann, Kate Hattrup, & Marco Jochum
Reviewed by: Alexandra Rechlin
Survey research, specifically online survey research, is a joy and a burden for many of us in the profession. It’s easy to collect data with online surveys, but response rates are notoriously low. Trying to get those response rates up to acceptable level can be a chore. Should you send out a generic link to everyone or tailor the invite to make it seem more personal (with a password too). While generic invitations are often used because they seem more anonymous, personalized invitations are beneficial because they allow us to track who has taken the survey and keep people from taking the survey multiple times. So what’s best? Does the type of survey invitation (generic or personalized) affect participants’ responses and the extent of perceived anonymity?
Actually, it may not matter at all. The authors found that there was no difference in response rates for the two groups; the two groups were equally likely to complete the survey and they left approximately the same number of items unanswered. Responses for both rating scale items and open-ended questions were also comparable across the two groups. Participants did perceive the generic invitation to be slightly more anonymous than the personalized one, but the difference was very small.
The results of this study suggest that requiring survey respondents to use a personalized password may not be as negative as previously thought. As far as the responses and response rates, it did not really matter if the survey invitation was generic or personalized. So go forth and do whatever you were doing before. It’s fine.
human resource management, organizational industrial psychology, organizational management
Increasing Training Transfer (I/O Psychology)
Topic: Training, Learning, Motivation
Publication: Journal of Business and Psychology EC 2011)
Article: Influencing learning states to enhance trainee motivation and improve training transfer
Authors: Weissbein, D. A., Huang, J. L., Ford, J. K., & Schmidt, A. M.
Reviewed by: Alexandra Rechlin
How many times have you heard about or participated in a training program but the information or skills learned didn’t get retained or used after the training ended? This transfer of training problem is common and frustrating to those who develop or pay for training programs.
In this paper, Weissbein, Huang, Ford, and Schmidt (2011) conducted a study in which they gave undergraduates a pretraining intervention before the participants received interpersonal negotiation training. The pretraining intervention was designed to increase internal locus of control (the belief that outcomes are under one’s control through one’s own behaviors and actions). In this intervention, participants viewed a video in which actors suggested that it was possible to improve as a negotiator through effort and learning correct strategies. The participants were then told by the trainer that they shouldn’t be afraid to ask questions or make mistakes, and the trainer also reminded them that they should focus on effort and learning.
The authors found that the pretraining intervention was positively linked to motivation to learn, which in turn was positively related to transfer performance (through the increased prevalence of preparation activities). These results indicate that providing a pretraining intervention aimed at increasing trainees’ locus of control can increase training transfer.
human resource management,organizational industrial psychology, organizational management
If you’re a mentor, be sure to fulfill obligations
Topic: Mentoring, Human Resources
Publication: Journal of Business and Psychology (in press)
Article: Mentoring and psychological contract breach
Authors: Haggard, D. L.
Reviewed by: Alexandra Rechlin
Having a mentor can lead to many positive outcomes for the protégé, but what kinds of negative outcomes might a mentor cause? Haggard (in press) investigated the effect that mentoring breach (when the protégé perceives that the mentor has not fulfilled his or her obligations as a mentor) has on psychological contract breach (when an individual feels that the employer has not fulfilled its obligations). Psychological contract breach (PCB) is related to many negative outcomes, such as reduced organizational commitment, job satisfaction, in-role performance, and organizational citizenship behaviors.
Haggard found that protégé reports of mentoring breach were positively related to PCB. Additionally, PCB mediated the relationship between mentoring breach and job satisfaction, and the relationship between mentoring breach and job commitment. In other words, mentoring breach indirectly leads to outcomes through PCB. The relationship between mentoring breach and PCB was moderated by the supervisory nature of the relationship (i.e., the relationship was stronger when the mentor was the supervisor). The relationship was not moderated by the formality of the relationship.
These findings suggest that it would be advantageous for an organization to provide training for its mentors. Haggard suggests that training could be used to establish mentors’ obligations and the boundaries to those obligations, explain the consequences of mentoring breach, and teach supervisors how their actions may be perceived by subordinates. This training ideally would be provided to all supervisors, as some may not realize that they are informal mentors.
human resource management,organizational industrial psychology, organizational management
If you’re trying to cut costs, don’t cut the engagement survey
Topic: Engagement, Job Satisfaction, Surveys
Publication: Journal of Business and Psychology (JUN 2011)
Article: Measuring employee engagement during a financial downturn: Business imperative or nuisance?
Authors: Van Rooy, D. L., Whitman, D. S., Hart, D., & Caleo, S.
Reviewed by: Alexandra Rechlin
In these difficult economic times, organizations have been forced to cut costs. One way in which organizations are saving money is by reducing the use of employee surveys, but Van Rooy et al. (2011) contend that these surveys are valuable and should not be cut. The authors argue that measuring engagement is important because engagement has been shown to be related to many important business outcomes, such as turnover, efficiency, and performance. By researching engagement, an organization can better protect its current talent and prepare itself to attract talent that may leave other organizations.
The authors provide advice for practitioners who want to measure engagement but are looking to save money. Re-administering a survey without making changes from the previous administration will reduce costs, though it will present challenges if edits need to be made. Items should be directly actionable, so that responses to the items can be used to make real changes.
Building successful and sustainable HR interventions
Topic: Change Management, Strategic HR
Publication: Journal of Business and Psychology (JUN 2011)
Article: HR interventions that go viral
Authors: Yost, P. R., McLellan, J. R., Ecker, D. L., Chang, G. C., Hereford, J. M., Roenicke, C. C., Town, J. B., & Winberg, Y. L.
Reviewed by: Alexandra Rechlin
Why do some HR interventions fail while others succeed? In this article, Yost et al. (2011) attempt to answer that question by using three different methods: a literature review, a case study, and interviews with senior I/O and HR professionals. The authors provided a case study of a successful HR intervention. They noted five important characteristics of the intervention:
- It was strategic. Resources and tools were written in alignment with business strategy.
- It was systemic. The intervention complemented and enhanced other company initiatives.
- It was simple. Resources and tools were simple, easy to read and understand, and written in the language of business leaders (not that of HR).
- It was sustainable. The intervention was created with the explicit intent to sustain it for a long time.
- It was sneeze-able. It was designed to be interesting and passed on to others.
The authors also reviewed the literature and interviewed 16 senior I/O and HR professionals about both successful and unsuccessful HR interventions.
