Cha Cha Cha Changes…in Selection and Training

Topic: Performance, Selection, Training
Publication: Journal of Applied Psychology (JUL 2009)
Article: Effects of selection and training on unit-level performance over time: A latent growth modeling approach  
Authors: C. H. Van Iddekinge, C. H. Ferris, P. L. Perrewe, A. A. Perryman, F. R. Blass, & T. D. Heetderks
Blogger: Benjamin Granger

Recently, Van Iddekinge and colleagues conducted a study of the organizational impact of employee selection and training practices. They collected data from 861 business units of a large fast food organization in the U.S. Data (including profits) were collected on a monthly basis for a full calendar year.

Van Iddekinge et al. expected that changes in organizational units’ use of selection and training practices would correspond to changes in business-unit performance (customer service, retention, and profits) over time.

Results indicated that, in general, as business units increased their adherence to developed selection and training procedures, customer service and retention improved. As units got more lax in their use of the prescribed selection and training procedures, customer service and retention dropped. Finally,  changes in selection and training ultimately led to changes in business unit profits.

These findings suggest that business units within an organization may vary in their use of selection and training methods, even when the organization has set standards for such practices (scary, huh?). More importantly, changes in the use of these important HR functions impact business-unit performance (e.g., customer service, retention and profits).

Finally, and this is great news for IO psychologists, changes in selection and training had fairly  large relations with changes in performance. So we must be doing something right!

Van Iddekinge, C.H., Ferris, G.R., Perrewe, P.L., Perryman, A.A., Blass, F.R., & Heetderks, T.D. (2009). Effects of selection and training on unit-level performance over time: A latent
growth modeling approach. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(4), 829-843.