The development of a general measure of job performance /
This paper discusses the development, initial psychometric assessment, and field test of a measure of general job performance. Six hundred and forty student participants with employment experience rated the extent to which 120 items designed to represent Campbell's (1990a) six non-task specifi...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Thesis Book |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
[Place of publication not identified] :
[publisher not identified] ;
2000.
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://proxy.library.tamu.edu/login?url=http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?did=728416271&sid=1&Fmt=2&clientId=2945&RQT=309&VName=PQD |
| Summary: | This paper discusses the development, initial psychometric assessment, and field test of a measure of general job performance. Six hundred and forty student participants with employment experience rated the extent to which 120 items designed to represent Campbell's (1990a) six non-task specific job performance factors were relevant for measuring performance in their jobs. Scale refinement procedures were used to reduce the scale to 59 items. Additional analyses examined the differences in perceived dimension relevance across various job-types represented in the sample. In a field test of the instrument, 287 U.S. Air Force enlisted technicians personnel and their immediate supervisors completed the same measure with respect to the technicians' jobs. The technicians and supervisors provided ratings of both item relevance for the technicians' jobs and the technicians' actual performance on each item. Initial analyses of the field data focused on assessing the fit of various conceptual models of performance to the relevance data. Models tested included a one-factor model, a six-factor model, and a hierarchical model with six first-order factors and a second-order general performance factor. Across the dimension relevance data provided by both technicians and supervisors, the six-factor model provided the best fit to the data. However, the fit of the model was only marginal at best. Additional analyses of the field data examined (1) the similarity between incumbents' and supervisors' ratings of dimension relevance, (2) the similarity between incumbents' and supervisors' ratings of incumbents' job performance, and (3) relationships between ratings of performance and dimension relevance for both incumbents and supervisors. Incumbents' ratings of dimension relevance were generally higher in magnitude and only weakly related to those provided by their supervisors. Similarly, incumbents' self-ratings of job performance were higher in magnitude and weakly associated with those provided by their supervisors. Significant relationships between dimension relevance ratings and performance ratings were obtained for both technicians' ratings and supervisors' ratings. The relevance/performance relationships were significantly stronger for the ratings provided by technicians. Implications of the findings and limitations of the present study are discussed. |
|---|---|
| Item Description: | Vita. "Major Subject: Psychology". |
| Physical Description: | xiii, 122 leaves : illustrations ; 28 cm. Issued also on microfiche from University Microfilm Inc. |
| Bibliography: | Includes bibliographical references (leaves 92-100). |