Pyburn, Ployhart, and Kravitz (this issue, 2008) introduced the diversityvalidity dilemma: that some of the most valid predictors of job performance are also associated with large racioethnic and sex subgroup predictor score differences. This article examines 16 selection strategies hypothesized to minimize racioethnic and sex subgroup differences and adverse impact and, hence, balance diversity and validity. Rather than presenting a highly technical review, our purpose is to provide practitioners with a concise summary, paying particular attention to comparing and contrasting the effectiveness of the strategies and reporting new developments. The paper is organized around 4 key questions: (a) Which strategies are most effective for reducing subgroup differences? (b) Which strategies do not involve a validity tradeoff? (c) What are the major new developments in strategies for reducing adverse impact? (d) What are the major new developments in alternative predictor measurement methods (e.g., interviews, situational judgment tests, assessment centers) for reducing adverse impact? We then conclude with recommendations and caveats for how to best balance diversity and validity. These ideas are developed further in Kravitz (this issue, 2008), who considers even broader approaches for solving the diversity-validity dilemma.Recruiting and selecting competent employees is critical to an organization's competitive advantage. Many organizations also believe that creating a diverse workforce is important for business, social, or ethical reasons. Recruitment and selection are essential mechanisms for increasing diversity, but some of the most valid selection procedures exhibit racioethnic and sex differences such that minority (non-White) and female subgroups We thank the editor, three anonymous reviewers, David Kravitz, Keith Pyburn, and Fred Oswald for their many helpful suggestions and recommendations.

Most work on organizational justice has been cross-sectional and focused on specific justice dimensions rather than perceptions of overall justice. As a result, little is known about how overall justice perceptions unfold over time. This study attempts to bridge gaps in the literature by examining overall organizational and overall supervisory justice perceptions of 213 individuals over 3 points in time. Results showed significant variability in overall justice perceptions across time. Specifically, within-person variance accounted for 24% and 29% of the total variance in overall organizational and supervisory justice, respectively. Further, compared with specific justice dimensions, trust emerged as a particularly strong predictor of within-person and between-person variance in overall justice perceptions. Implications for the justice literature and organizational practice are discussed.

This quasi‐experimental study compares the equivalence of proctored Web‐based tests to paper‐and‐pencil tests in a selection setting. The predictor battery was composed of measures of Conscientiousness, Agreeableness, Emotional Stability, a biodata form, and a situational judgment test. Three samples were administered the same test items, but differed with respect to context and test format: 425 incumbents completed a paper‐and‐pencil version, 2,544 applicants completed a paper‐and‐pencil version, and 2,356 applicants completed an identical Web‐based version (although these individuals were not randomly assigned to test format, the job and organization were the same for all samples). The results found effects for both context and test format. Relative to the applicants completing the paper‐and‐pencil measures, the Web‐based measures showed (a) better distributional properties, (b) lower means, (c) more variance, (d) higher internal consistency reliabilities, and (e) stronger intercorrelations. Although the applicant context resulted in higher mean responses than the incumbent context, this difference was about twice as large for the paper‐and‐pencil test than for the Web‐based test. All such differences were greater for personality measures than for biodata and situational judgment tests. Overall, these results suggest that proctored Web‐based testing has some positive benefits relative to paper‐and‐pencil measures, and we identify several implications of these findings for research and practice.

In this article, we examine the effects of passive leadership on workplace incivility across two studies. Study 1 examines passive leadership-incivility relationships in a sample of employee-supervisor dyads, and Study 2 examines these relationships in a sample of employee-coworker dyads. Results from these studies suggest that passive leadership has a significant direct effect on behavioral incivility and an indirect effect through experienced incivility. Moreover, our results suggest that the relationship between experienced incivility and behavioral incivility is conditional on the level of passive leadership, such that the effect of experienced incivility on behavioral incivility is stronger at higher levels of passive leadership.

Summary In this paper, we examine the effects of leadership consideration and structure on two important organizational behavior outcomes: employee perceptions of organizational justice and counterproductive work behavior (CWB). We examine these effects across two studies using multisource data (employees and supervisors in Study 1; employees and coworkers in Study 2). Results reveal that consideration and structure have distinct effects across distributive, procedural, informational, and interpersonal dimensions of justice. Moreover, results suggest that consideration and structure have multiplicative effects on employee CWB. We find the highest levels of CWB among employees of supervisors who exhibit high structure and low consideration. Interestingly, results also suggest that the effects of structure on CWB may be curvilinear (u‐shaped) such that moderate levels of structure are associated with the lowest levels of CWB. We discuss implications for future consideration and structure research as well as managerial practice. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

The present study proposes and tests a model that examines the relationship between leadership style, trust, employee interpretations of managerial explanations, and justice perceptions. Using a critical incident methodology, 203 working adults were asked to recall a recent situation in which a request or proposal made to their manager was denied. Results provide strong support for the theoretical model. Namely, the effect of leadership style on explanation perceptions was indirect through employees' level of trust in their manager. Specifically, employees who felt their manager was transformational reported a higher degree of trust and more favourable reactions to managerial explanations.

The resurgence of personality tests in selection has sparked interest in factors that may increase the utility and acceptability of these tests. Following a justice framework, the present study explores two possible methods for improving the psychometric properties and test-taker perceptions of a widely used measure of personality, the NEO-Five Factor Inventory. The first manipulation altered respondents' frame-of-reference (FOR) by adding ''at-work'' tags to the personality test. The second provided information about the validity and appropriateness of the personality test for selection. Under the controlled setting of a laboratory experiment, participants (n 5 345) were randomly assigned to one of the conditions in the following between-subjects design: 2 (FOR: work specific vs. generic) Â 2 (information: validity vs. control). The FOR manipulation produced consistent effects on the personality test responses, but in contrast to recent claims, produced no effect on test perceptions. Alternatively, the information manipulation primarily influenced job-relatedness perceptions, but had a modest negative effect on the psychometric properties of the personality test. These results show some possibilities, and difficulties, for enhancing perceptions of personality tests. They also have important implications for justice theory because they suggest that interactions among the procedural justice rules may yield unexpected and contradictory effects.

In this article, the authors integrate the theory of work adjustment (Dawis, England, & Lofquist, 1964) and the stressor emotion model of counterproductive work behaviors (CWBs; Spector & Fox, 2005) to examine workplace frustration as an intervening mechanism that mediates relations between person-environment (P-E) fit and CWBs. Moreover, we adopt a multifoci perspective to estimate effects for multiple fit, frustration, and CWB foci. We examine the nature of relations between fit, frustration, and CWB for like foci (target similar effects), as well as cross-foci effects. Study 1 examines proposed effects in a sample of 447 employee-coworker dyads. Study 2 uses a 3-wave survey design and tests effects in a sample of 669 employees. Results from both studies suggest that (a) frustration mediates the effects of P-E fit on CWBs and (b) the most consistent effects were observed among the variables with matching foci. Implications for research and practice are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record