This study is concerned with the experience of a particular company which undertook to improve its selection program through the installation of a test battery. This involved special adaptations of techniques commonly employed in industrial situations.

No description available.

This study replicated and extended an earlier study by Banki and Latham (2010) and developed an equivalent SJT and SI in order to examine whether the two methods correlated differently with cognitive ability, personality, job experience, and job performance. The results of this study showed that the SJT and SI only correlated .20 and that the correlations for the SI with Extraversion, customer service experience, and overall work experience were significantly different from the correlations for the SJT. Participants felt that the SJT and SI provided the same opportunity to perform one’s skills and level of scoring consistency. However, participants felt significantly more anxiety during the SI than the SJT. The practical and theoretical implications of these findings are discussed.

The purpose of this study was to investigate the criterion-related validity of an assessment center's competency dimension ratings, exercise ratings, and standardized test scores. Numerous studies have clearly demonstrated assessment centers display substantial evidence of content and criterion-related validity. However, the inability of assessment centers to display construct-related validity has caused a great deal of concern among researchers. The suggestions of these researchers are addressed through a more detailed examination of the criterion-related validity of an assessment center. Despite a number of methodological issues, two competency dimensions and two components stand out as viable predictors of the criteria used in this study. Examination of individual and incremental validity coefficients reveals the Strategic Focus and Attracting and Developing Talent competency dimensions, the In-Basket exercise, and the Watson-Glaser scaled score consistently predict the criteria used in this study. The implications of these results for future research are discussed.