Prediction of 4-year college student performance using cognitive and noncognitive predictors and the impact on demographic status of admitted students.

Over the years, researchers have focused on ways to facilitate creativity in the workplace by looking at individual factors and organizational factors that affect employee creativity (Woodman, Sawyer, & Griffin, ). In many cases, the factors that affect creativity are examined independently. In other words, it is uncommon for researchers to look at the interaction among individual and organizational factors. In this study, it is argued that to get a true understanding of how to maximize creativity in the workplace, organizational researchers must look at the interaction between organizational factors and individual factors that affect employee creativity. More specifically, the current study looked at an individual's perceptions about his or her ability to be creative (i.e., individual factor) and perceptions of requirements for creativity in the workplace (i.e., an organizational factor). The results indicated that individuals who have a high belief about their ability to be creative (an individual factor) were most creative when they also perceived requirements for creativity in the workplace (an organizational factor). Furthermore, individuals who had low perceptions of creative ability were still able to perform creatively when they had high perceptions of requirements for creativity. This suggests that, to maximize creativity, organizations should focus on both individual and organizational factors that affect employee creativity.

Abstract. To follow best practices in creating selection tools, an important phase in job analysis is gathering linkage ratings between knowledge, skills, abilities, and other characteristics (KSAOs) and job tasks. However, the literature provides little guidance on best practices for collecting linkage ratings. Two studies were conducted to contribute to the limited research. Study 1 examined the interrater agreement of different types of raters: job incumbents, managers, or job analysts. Results revealed that job analysts have the highest interrater agreement. Study 2 examined the impact of a frame-of-reference (FOR) training for raters. Results suggested that a brief consensus training session vastly improved agreement among raters. These studies provide more guidance on best practices for obtaining high-quality linkage ratings.