Springer Nature is making SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

A comparison of supervisor and incumbent estimates of SDy

  • 39 Accesses

Abstract

This study attempted to determine if experienced job incumbents were capable of providing estimates of worth that were similar to those provided by supervisors. The job class investigated in this study was Eligibility Technician, primarily found in Social or Human Services Departments of public agencies. The participants were Eligibility Supervisors (n=120), and Eligibility Technicians (n=203). The Schmidt, Hunter, McKenzie, and Muldrow (1979) global estimation method was used to obtain estimates of worth at the 15th, 50th and 85th percentiles of job performance. The results indicated that job incumbents provided estimates of job worth that were not statistically different from supervisorial estimates.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Blankenship, M.H., Cesare, S.J., Giannetto, P.W., & Mandel, M.Z. (1991). An investigation of SDy estimates: Equivalence across methods.Paper presented at the Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association, San Francisco, California.

  2. Bobko, P., Karren, R., & Kerkar, S.P. (1987). Systematic research needs for understanding supervisory-based estimates of SDy in utility analysis.Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 40, 69–95.

  3. Bobko, P., Karren, R., & Parkington, JJ. (1983). Estimation of standard deviations in utility analyses: An empirical test.Journal of Applied Psychology, 68, 170–176.

  4. Boudreau, J.W. (1983). Economic considerations in estimating the utility of human resource productivity improvement programs.Personnel Psychology, 36, 551–576.

  5. Boudreau, J.W. (1989). Selection utility analysis: A review and agenda for future research. In M. Smith & I.T. Robertson (Eds.),Advances in selection and assessment (pp. 227–257). New York: John Wiley & Sons.

  6. Burke, M.J., & Frederick, J.T. (1984). Two modified procedures for estimating standard deviations in utility analysis.Journal of Applied Psychology, 69, 482–489.

  7. Burke, M.J., & Frederick, J.T. (1986). A comparison of economic utility estimates for alternate SDy estimation procedures.Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 334–339.

  8. Brogden, H.E. (1949). When testing pays off.Personnel Psychology, 2, 171–183.

  9. Cascio, W.F. (1991).Costing human resources: The financial impact of behavior in organizations (3rd ed.). Boston: Kent.

  10. Cascio, W.F. (1993). Assessing the utility of selection decisions: Theoretical and practical considerations. In N. Schmitt, W.C. Borman, & Associates (Eds.),Personnel selection in organizations (pp. 310–340). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

  11. Cascio, W.F., & Ramos, R.A. (1986). Development and application of a new method for assessing job performance in behavioral/economic terms.Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 20–28.

  12. Cesare, S.J., Blankenship, M.H., & Giannetto, P.W. (1994). A dual focus of SDy estimates: A test of the linearity assumption and multivariate applications.Human Performance, 7, 435–455.

  13. Cesare, S.J., Blankenship, M.H., Giannetto, P.W., & Mandel, M.Z. (1993). A predictive validation study of the methods used to select eligibility technicians.Public Personnel Management, 22, 107–122.

  14. Cronbach, L.J., & Gleser, G.C. (1965).Psychological tests and personnel decisions (2nd ed.). Urbana: University of Illinois Press.

  15. Edwards, J.E., Frederick, J.T., & Burke, M.J. (1988). Efficacy of modified CREPID SDys on the basis of archival organizational data.Journal of Applied Psychology, 73, 529–535.

  16. Greer, O.L., & Cascio, W.F. (1987). Is cost accounting the answer? Comparison of two behaviorally based methods for estimating the standard deviation of job performance in dollars with a cost-accounting-based approach.Journal of Applied Psychology, 72, 588–595.

  17. Hayes, W.L. (1963).Statistics for psychologists. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.

  18. Hunter, J.E., Schmidt, F.L., & Judiesch, M.K. (1990). Individual differences in output as a function of job complexity.Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 28–42.

  19. Mathieu, J.E., & Tannenbaum, S.I. (1989). A process-tracing approach toward understanding supervisors' SDy estimates: Results from five job classes.Journal of Occupational Psychology, 62, 249–256.

  20. Matthews, M.D., Looper, L.T., & Engquist, S.K. (1990).Applicability of utility models to the evaluation of military manpower and personnel research programs: A critical review and illustrations (AFHRL-TP-90-54). Air Force Systems Command: Brooks Air Force Base, Texas.

  21. Mayer, R.S. (1983).An evaluation of alternative methods of estimating the standard deviation of job performance to determine the utility of a test in a fixed-treatment sequential employee selection process. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Personnel Management Association Assessment Council, Washington, D. C.

  22. Raju, N.S., Burke, M.J., & Normand, J. (1990). A new approach for utility analysis.Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 3–12.

  23. Schmidt, F.L., Hunter, J.E., McKenzie, R.C., & Muldrow, T.W. (1979). Impact of valid selection procedures on work-force productivity.Journal of Applied Psychology, 64, 609–626.

  24. Schmidt, F.L., Hunter, J.E., & Pearlman, K. (1982). Assessing the economic impact of personnel programs on workforce productivity.Personnel Psychology, 35, 333–347.

  25. Schmidt, F.L., Mack, M.J., & Hunter, J.E. (1984). Selection utility in the occupation of U.S. park ranger for three modes of test use.Journal of Applied Psychology, 6, 490–497.

  26. Tannenbaum, S.I., & Dickinson, T.L. (1987). Estimating SDy: The effectiveness of delphi and critical incident methodologies.Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Psychological Association, New York New York.

  27. Vance, RJ., & Colella, A. (1990). The utility of utility analysis.Human Performance, 3, 123–139.

  28. Weekley, J.A., Frank, B., O'Connor, E.J., & Peters, L.H. (1985). A comparison of three methods of estimating the standard deviation of performance in dollars.Journal of Applied Psychology, 70, 122–126.

  29. Zeidner, J., & Johnson, C.D. (1989).The utility of selection for military and civilian jobs. Institute for Defense Analyses (P-2239): Alexandria, Virginia.

Download references

Author information

Correspondence to Mark H. Blankenship Ph.D..

Additional information

Portions of this paper were presented as part of a symposium entitled,A psychometric and fiscal assessment for selecting eligibility workers: Multiple agency results. Annual meeting of the International Personnel Management Association Assessment Council, Chicago, Illinois, June, 1991.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Blankenship, M.H., Cesare, S.J. & Giannetto, P.W. A comparison of supervisor and incumbent estimates of SDy. J Bus Psychol 9, 415–425 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02230979

Download citation

Keywords

  • Social Psychology
  • Estimation Method
  • Social Issue
  • Human Service
  • Global Estimation