Evaluation and Use of Four Job Analysis Methods for Personnel Selection

Exploratory comparative study of four job analysis methods.

“…One intriguing question to address in future research is whether there are a significant number of personnel selection situations in which a formal job analysis may not be needed. Our survey results (Levine et al, 1979) and those of others (e.g., Hollenbeck & Borman, Note 2) appear to indicate that no one job analysis method is sufficient for personnel selection. However, if our speculation regarding the importance of the psychometrician versus the job analysis method for personnel selection has merit, we may find that a person who is closely familiar with psychometrics can study a brief job description, spend a brief time conversing with a few incumbents and supervisors, and then produce as good an exam battery as someone who has gone through an expensive, formal job analysis study.…”

“…The favored status of task analysis and job elements among the study participants prior to the study (Levine et al, 1979) prompted consideration of the use of survey data for covariance analysis. However, there is a serious question about the appropriateness of the analysis of covariance due to the prevailing differences among the participants on the variables that would serve as covariates (cf.…”

“…These telephone contacts were followed by the mailing of preliminary survey questionnaires when possible participation in the study was indicated over the telephone. The questionnaires are described in the survey report (Levine et al, 1979). Sixty-four of the 94 respondents who agreed to participate were later sent a cover letter and a packet of materials that described their various tasks and provided necessary background materials.…”

“…Perhaps the major conclusion, though of course still tentative, offered by those using more than one job analysis method in their work is that there is no one best way to do job analysis (cf. Levine, Bennett, & Ash, 1979;Prien, 1977). One method may be superior to another for a specific application, such as development of a performance appraisal system, but less suitable for a different application, such as position classification.…”

Antecedents to Job Success in Business Process Management

“…The effect of experience on expertise (and hence job performance) is intuitive: those with experience have had more time to gain expertise, and therefore, should have higher performance than those with less experience. Experience has long been used as an important discriminator in applicant assessment, because it is easily obtainable and has robust predictive validity (Cascio, 2006;Levine & Flory, 1975). The research record bears this out, as experience has been found to have a significant positive relationship with expertise (McDaniel, Schmidt, & Hunter, 1988;Schmidt et al, 1986).…”