Lisa M. Keeping

Participation in the performance appraisal process and employee reactions: A meta-analytic review of field investigations.

The relationship between participation in the performance appraisal process and various employee reactions was explored through the meta-analysis of 27 studies containing 32 individual samples. The overall relationship (ρ) between participation and employee reactions, corrected for unreliability, was.61. Various conceptualizations and operationalizations of participation and employee reactions also were discussed and analyzed. Overall, appraisal participation was most strongly related to satisfaction, and value-expressive participation (i.e., participation for the sake of having ones voice heard) had a stronger relationship with most of the reaction criteria than did instrumental participation (i.e., participation for the purpose of influencing the end result). The results are discussed within the framework of organizational justice.

Performance appraisal reactions: measurement, modeling, and method bias.

In this study, the authors attempted to comprehensively examine the measurement of performance appraisal reactions. They first investigated how well the reaction scales, representative of those used in the field, measured their substantive constructs. A confirmatory factor analysis indicated that these scales did a favorable job of measuring appraisal reactions, with a few concerns. The authors also found that the data fit a higher order appraisal reactions model. In contrast, a nested model where the reaction constructs were operationalized as one general factor did not adequately fit the data. Finally, the authors tested the notion that self-report data are affectively driven for the specific case of appraisal reactions, using the techniques delineated by L. J. Williams, M. B. Gavin, and M. L. Williams (1996). Results indicated that neither positive nor negative affect presented method biases in the reaction measures, at either the measurement or construct levels.

Recruitment on the Net: How Do Organizational Web Site Characteristics Influence

The use of organizational web sites for recruitment has become increasingly common. Despite their widespread growth, however, little is known about how these web sites influence recruitment outcomes. In the current paper, we present a model that explicates how job seekers interact with and respond to web site characteristics to predict various job seeker attitudes and behaviors. We suggest that job seekers are initially affected by the facade of a web site, comprised of the web site’s aesthetic and playfulness features. Coupled with system features of the web site, these initial affective reactions then influence perceptions of the usability of the web site. Perceptions of usability and affective reactions work through two key mediating constructs, job seeker search behavior and web site attitude, to ultimately predict applicant attraction. Throughout the paper we present a series of testable propositions that should serve to guide future research.

Organizational Web Sites: Web Site Content and Style as Determinants of Organizational Attraction

Organizational web sites have become a primary source of information for job seekers. To date, no research has attempted to determine which aspects of organizational web sites most influence job-seeker attraction to an organization. The current paper reports the results of two studies that examined how perceptions of organizational web site content (compensation, organizational culture, and training opportunities) and style (aesthetics and usability) influence organizational attraction. The present findings demonstrate that both the content and style of organizational web sites are important precursors of organizational attraction. These findings are discussed both in terms of their practical implications for designing effective recruitment web sites and their implications for future empirical work on organizational recruitment activities.

When Does Self-Esteem Relate to Deviant Behavior? The Role of Contingencies of Self-Worth

Researchers have assumed that low self-esteem predicts deviance, but empirical results have been mixed. This article draws upon recent theoretical developments regarding contingencies of self-worth to clarify the self-esteem/deviance relation. It was predicted that self-esteem level would relate to deviance only when self-esteem was not contingent on workplace performance. In this manner, contingent self-esteem is a boundary condition for self-consistency/behavioral plasticity theory predictions. Using multisource data collected from 123 employees over 6 months, the authors examined the interaction between level (high/low) and type (contingent/noncontingent) of self-esteem in predicting workplace deviance. Results support the hypothesized moderating effects of contingent self-esteem; implications for self-esteem theories are discussed.

The road to performance ratings is paved with intentions A framework for understanding managers’ intentions when rating employee performance

Employee performance appraisals are complex events in organizations. They occur in contextually rich environments and have implications for careers, training opportunities, remuneration, and interpersonal relationships. For years, the study of performance appraisals has mirrored this complexity and has revealed a multitude of variables that can influence the accuracy of performance ratings. Of late, the importance of managers’ intentions as a determinant of performance ratings has gained prominence. What is less understood is where these intentions come from and what determines their relative strength or weakness. In the current paper, we present a model that explains the simultaneous presence and strength of multiple rating intentions that managers can have when rating employee performance.

The Dimensions and Mechanisms of Mindfulness in Regulating Aggressive Behaviors

On the basis of the notion that the ability to exert self-control is critical to the regulation of aggressive behaviors, we suggest that mindfulness, an aspect of the self-control process, plays a key role in curbing workplace aggression. In particular, we note the conceptual and empirical distinctions between dimensions of mindfulness (i.e., mindful awareness and mindful acceptance) and investigate their respective abilities to regulate workplace aggression. In an experimental study (Study 1), a multiwave field study (Study 2a), and a daily diary study (Study 2b), we established that the awareness dimension, rather than the acceptance dimension, of mindfulness plays a more critical role in attenuating the association between hostility and aggression. In a second multiwave field study (Study 3), we found that mindful awareness moderates the association between hostility and aggression by reducing the extent to which individuals use dysfunctional emotion regulation strategies (i.e., surface acting), rather than by reducing the extent to which individuals engage in dysfunctional thought processes (i.e., rumination). The findings are discussed in terms of the implications of differentiating the dimensions and mechanisms of mindfulness for regulating workplace aggression.

An Exploratory Study Investigating the Purpose of Unstructured Interview Questions

Interviews are central to selection. The literature recommends that practitioners rely on structured interviews as opposed to unstructured interviews (Schmidt & Hunter, 1998), however practitioners prefer unstructured methods (Dipboye, 1994) and little research directly compares the effectiveness of individual structured elements to their unstructured counterparts. Given that different structured question types have been studied in the literature (Taylor & Small, 2002), but that practitioners often prefer unstructured methods, the present research explores why interviewers use unstructured questions. We use signaling theory as an organization framework, and conduct an exploratory, qualitative study using Mechanical Turk. Results revealed the following primary purposes of using unstructured interview questions: capturing the candidates’ nature, collecting supplemental information, circumventing the candidates’ facade, and comforting the candidate. These results provide the first steps required to understan...

International Comparison of Group Differences in General Mental Ability for Immigrants Versus Non‐Immigrants

Globalization has led to increased migration and labor mobility over the past several decades and immigrants generally seek jobs in their new countries. Tests of general mental ability (GMA) are common in personnel selection systems throughout the world. Unfortunately, GMA test scores often display differences between majority groups and ethnic subgroups that may represent a barrier to employment for immigrants. The purpose of this study was to examine differences in GMA based on immigrant status in 29 countries (or jurisdictions of countries) throughout the world using an existing database that employs high-quality measurement and sampling methodologies with large sample sizes. The primary findings were that across countries, non-immigrants (n = 139,464) scored approximately half of a standard deviation (d = .53) higher than first-generation immigrants (n = 22,162) but only one-tenth of a standard deviation (d = .12) higher than second-generation immigrants (n = 6,428). Considerable variability in effect sizes was found across countries as Nordic European and Germanic European countries evidenced the highest non-immigrant/first-generation immigrant mean differences and Anglo countries the smallest. Countries with the lowest income inequality tended to evidence the highest differences in GMA between non-immigrants and first-generation immigrants. Implications for GMA testing as a potential barrier to immigrant employment success and the fields current understanding of group differences in GMA test scores will be discussed.