Validity and Utility of Alternative Predictors of Job Performance

摘要

Meta-analysis of the cumulative research on various predictors of job performance shows that for entry-level jobs there is no predictor with validity equal to that of ability, which has a mean validity of .53. For selection on the basis of current job performance, the work sample test, with mean validity of .54, is slightly better. For Federal entry-level jobs, substitution of an alternative predictor would cost from $3.12 billion a year (job tryout) to $15.89 billion a year (age). Hiring on ability has a utility of $15.61 billion a year, but affects minority groups adversely. Hiring on ability by quotas would decrease this utility by 5%; a third strategy, that of using a low cutoff score, would decrease utility by 83%. Using other predictors in conjunction with ability tests might improve validity and reduce adverse impact, but there is as yet no data base for studying this possibility.