No abstract

No abstract

Recent literature reviews have called into question the impact of recruitment activities on applicants’job choices. However, most previous findings have been based on cross‐sectional ratings obtained immediately after initial screening interviews, thus raising questions about the degree to which prior conclusions are bound to that particular methodology. In contrast, the present study used longitudinal structured interviews to let job seekers explain, in their own words, how they made critical job search and choice decisions. Interview transcripts revealed that recruitment practices played a variety of roles in job seeker decisions. For example, consistent with signaling theory, subjects interpreted a wide variety of recruitment experiences (recruiter competence, sex composition of interview panels, recruitment delays) as symbolic of broader organizational characteristics. In addition, a number of “contingency” variables emerged that seemed to affect the perceived signaling value of recruitment experiences (e.g., prior knowledge of the company, functional area of the recruiter). Also notable were the strongly negative effects of recruitment delays, particularly among male students with higher grade point averages and greater job search success. Finally, our results suggest that certain applicant reactions may be systematically related to sex, work experience, grade point average, and search success. The article concludes with practical and research implications.

Although there is a voluminous psychological literature on performance evaluation (PE), surprisingly little of this research examines the consequences of linking pay to evaluated performance in work settings. Rather, PE research has been dominated by cognitive processing, measurement, and construct validity issues. At the same time, a large literature on pay-for-performance (PFP) linkages does exist, but most of it has been conducted in disciplines other than psychology. We think this pattern should change. To this end, we briefly trace the origins of the general separation of PE research from PFP research in psychology. From there, we review recent research on the relationship between PE and performance improvement, particularly with respect to multisource or 360-degree evaluation. We then turn to research on various PFP systems, such as merit pay and individual and group incentives. We conclude with suggestions as to how psychological research can make useful contributions to knowledge of PE, PFP, and performance improvement.

Studies of the relationship between human resource (HR) practices and firm performance typically use a single respondent to assess firm level HR practices or HR effectiveness. However, previous research in other substantive areas suggests that rater differences are a potentially important source of measurement error. We demonstrate analytically the potential consequences of both random and systematic measurement error in research on HR and firm performance. However, our main focus is on random error and we show how generalizability theory can be applied to obtain better estimates of reliability by simultaneously recognizing multiple sources (e.g., items, raters) of random measurement error. These more inclusive reliability estimates, in turn, offer the possibility of more precisely quantifying substantive relationships in the HR and firm performance literature. In our sample, reliabilities (as estimated by generalizability coefficients) for single-rater assessments of HR variables were generally below .SO. This degree of measurement error, if present in substantive studies on HR and firm performance, could lead to considerable bias, given that an unstandardized regression coefficient is corrected for measurement error in the independent variable by dividing by its reliability coefficient (not its square root). We also found only limited convergent validity between HR and line managers ratings of a second type of HR measure, HR Barry Gerhart is now at the University of Wisconsin-Madison We thank the reviewers for their helpful comments. COPYRIGHT 8 2000 PERSONNEL PSYCHOLOGY, INC 804 PERSONNEL PSYCHOLOGY effectiveness. In general, our findings suggest that future researchers need to devote greater attention to measurement error and construct validity issues. Our study provides an example of how generalizability theory can be useful in this pursuit.In recent years, we have seen a good deal of attention focused on better understanding how firms' human resources (HR) decisions influence their financial performance. Conceptual work continues to emphasize the traditional view that HR decisions have an impact through building human capital (skills and abilities) and enhancing motivation toward a firm's objectives. However, it also suggests that HR may differ from other types of resources (e.g., technology) because of the greater difficulty in imitating successful HR systems and because of HR's unique role in organizational learningWe do not argue that [the firm] is the only appropriate level of analysis, or that this research question is not without significant methodological