Cross‐study differences in the contributions of work attitudes to the turnover process led us to (a) estimate the six relations among job satisfaction, organizational commitment, turnover intention/withdrawal cognitions, and turnover using meta‐analysis; (b) assess the effects of several psychometric moderators on those relations; and (c) compare the influences of satisfaction and commitment in the turnover process by applying path analysis to the meta‐analytic correlations. Based on aggregations involving a total of 178 independent samples from 155 studies, results showed that (a) satisfaction and commitment each contribute independently to the prediction of intention/cognitions; (b) intention/cognitions are predicted more strongly by satisfaction than by commitment; (c) intention/cognitions mediate nearly all of the attitu‐dinal linkage with turnover; and (d) attitudinal contributions to the turnover process vary with the use of single‐ versus multi‐item scales, the 9‐ versus 15‐item version of the Organizational Commitment Questionnaire, and turnover intention versus withdrawal cognition scales.

Evidence for situational specificity of personality-job performance relations calls for better understanding of how personality is expressed as valued work behavior. On the basis of an interactionist principle of trait activation (R. P. Tett & H. A. Guterman, 2000), a model is proposed that distinguishes among 5 situational features relevant to trait expression (job demands, distracters, constraints, releasers, and facilitators), operating at task, social, and organizational levels. Trait-expressive work behavior is distinguished from (valued) job performance in clarifying the conditions favoring personality use in selection efforts. The model frames linkages between situational taxonomies (e.g., J. L. Holland's [1985] RIASEC model) and the Big Five and promotes useful discussion of critical issues, including situational specificity, personality-oriented job analysis, team building, and work motivation.

No abstract

The purpose of this study was to investigate conflicting findings in previous research on personality and job performance. Meta‐analysis was used to (a) assess the overall validity of personality measures as predictors of job performance, (b) investigate the moderating effects of several study characteristics on personality scale validity, and (c) appraise the predictability of job performance as a function of eight distinct categories of personality content, including the “Big Five” personality factors. Based on review of 494 studies, usable results were identified for 97 independent samples (total N= 13,521). Consistent with predictions, studies using confirmatory research strategies produced a corrected mean personality scale validity (.29) that was more than twice as high as that based on studies adopting exploratory strategies (.12). An even higher mean validity (.38) was obtained based on studies using job analysis explicitly in the selection of personality measures. Validities were also found to be higher in longer tenured samples and in published articles versus dissertations. Corrected mean validities for the “Big Five” factors ranged from .16 for Extroversion to .33 for Agreeableness. Weaknesses in the reporting of validation study characteristics are noted, and recommendations for future research in this area are provided. Contrary to conclusions of certain past reviews, the present findings provide some grounds for optimism concerning the use of personality measures in employee selection.

) offers adequate specificity for meeting key research challenges. A "hyperdimensional" taxonomy of managerial competencies, derived from the earlier models and developed using unique methods, was subjected to content validation by expert review in 3 studies. In the first 2, a total of 110 Academy of Management members sorted 141 behavioral elements into 47 competencies with average hit rates of 68% and 85%, respectively. Results directed model refinements, including addition of 6 competencies. In Study 3, 118 subject matter experts sorted behaviors into targeted competencies in a more rigorous task with an average hit rate of 88.5%. Findings support the model's content validity, its continued development, and most importantly, the pursuit of specificity in understanding and predicting managerial behavior. HUMAN PERFORMANCE, 13(3), Copyright © 2000, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.Requests for reprints should be sent to Robert P. Tett, Department of Psychology, Wright State University, Dayton, OH 45435. E-mail: robert.tett@wright.eduThe Scientific Mind-a mind nimble and versatile enough to catch the resemblances of things, which is the chief point, and at the same time steady enough to fix and discern their subtle differences; endowed by nature with the desire to seek, patience to doubt, fondness to meditate, slowness to assert, readiness to reconsider, carefulness to set in order, and neither affecting what is new nor admiring what is old and hating every kind of imposture.Francis BaconBacon's conceptualization of science as the search for resemblances and differences finds no more apt application than in the arena of managerial behavior. Owing largely to its complexity and its importance to organizational success, managerial behavior has been the topic of repeated scientific investigation spanning more than 80 years (Borman & Brush, 1993). A unifying aim of that research has been to identify the general dimensions of managerial performance. Although contributing to the study of management by summarizing a complex domain, the generalist approach suffers from certain key limitations. Perhaps its biggest shortcoming is its encouragement of the assumption that specific exemplars within general categories are equivalent with respect to function, causes, and measurement. Short-term and strategic planning, for example, are often seen under the same heading (e.g., Borman & Brush, 1993;Yukl & Lepsinger, 1992), yet their correlates and value in particular contexts can vary substantially: We should be cautious about generalizing performance in short-term planning to performance in strategic vision when considering an individual for promotion from middle to upper management. Such concerns call for carefully reasoned articulation of managerial behavior. The need for greater construct specificity is prompted also by repeated prescriptions for theory in understanding trait-performance linkages (Borman & Motowidlo, 1997;Guion & Gottier, 1965;Tett, Jackson, & Rothstein, 1991;Tett, Jackson, Rothstein, & Reddon, 1999). An impor...