No abstract

No abstract

The problem of turnover has become one of major importance to both Industry and the milItary. The costs of even a small turnover are great In terms of money, personnel utilization, training, and time, The frustration experienced by those who leave an organization, as well as that felt by those-who failed In their performance of selecting and training these Individuals, results In a huge waste of human energy. The reduction In turnover would Improve any organization's program of human utilization and also Its financial position (Lawler, 1970). Because of the high costs accrued from attrItion, a study of the relationships of turnover with other variables could prove to be beneficial and profitable. The Initial step In the study of turnover Is to determine which characterIstics differentiate between those who leave an organization and those who stay within an organization. Within the military the knowledge of the distinctive characteristics of those who either remain within th6 organization or leave it would be helpful In the subsequent selection of men to be enlisted Into the allvol unteer force. During the last decade Plag and his associates (1966, 1967) have studied the relationships of naval enlistee characteristics and the subsequent performance of V,. those men during their first tours of duty. Predictors of success or failure In completing a term of enlistment have been examined end from these re.earch efforts odds for effectiveness have evolved. Briefly stated, a man's odds for effectiveness are mathematically determined by using combinations of four variables; number Výy of arrests, number of suspensions and expulsions from school, years of education completed, and score on the Armed Forces Quelification Test. These odds for effectiveness have been compi led Into actuarial tables which provide the recruiter 4Auwmwed Wa publi Meeowe D~atibuto U11~s

No abstract

WHEN supervisor ratings of performance are obtained in industrial or military training programs to serve as predictors of later performance ratings in the field, attention should perhaps be given to the organizational rank of the supervisors involved.Different ranks or status levels of supervisors in formal organizations are generally accompanied by corresponding differences in roles and in responsibilities relative to subordinate personnel. Such role differences could conceivably affect the way in which subordinates are perceived by supervisors (see Jones & Thibaut, 1958, pp. 151-178), and thereby could affect the extent to which performance ratings are in agreement with earlier predictions or ratings.The present study, conducted in a military setting, reveals the amount of agreement between performance ratings given a t different times by supervisors of similar and dissimilar rank levels. MethodOn a sample of 1,762 male enlisted Marines, platoon supervisors rated their men as being among the upper 25%, middle 50%, or lower 25% of their peers on overall performance after the first two weeks of basic training. After two years of duty, 893 of those subjects were again rated on overall performance on the same scale by their field supervisors. ,4nd finally, toward the end of four years of duty, still another group of field supervisors rated 1,242 of the subjects on a seven-point scale ranging from "outstanding" to "inferior performance." Both two-year