Two recent reviews have attempted to summarize findings quantitatively regarding assessment center (AC) construct-related validity (i.e., Lance, Lambert, Gewin, Lievens, & Conway, 2004; Lievens & Conway, 2001). Unlike these previous studies, which reanalyzed individual multitrait-multimethod (MTMM) matrices from previously published research, the authors recoded and combined past matrices into a single MTMM matrix. This matrix, comprised of 6 dimensions each measured by 6 exercises, was then analyzed, providing a more generalizable set of results. Both dimensions and exercises were found to contribute substantially to AC ratings. Specific dimensions (i.e., communication, influencing others, organizing and planning, and problem solving) appeared more construct valid than others (i.e., consideration/awareness of others and drive). Implications for AC design and practice are discussed.

This meta-analysis examines the relationship between workaholism and numerous work behaviors and outcomes in an attempt to a) derive a consensus regarding the current state of our understanding of this construct, and b) clarify the impact that the compulsion to work may have on an individual's life. Overall, based on data from 44 studies, results indicate that there is a considerable amount of variability between workaholism and work-related outcomes. Specifically, the two most established and reputable measures of workaholism, the Work Addiction Risk Test (WART) and the Workaholism Battery (WorkBat), appear to focus on uniquely different aspects of workaholism and were subsequently found to be differentially related to various work criteria. These findings suggest that a consistent definition and operationalization of workaholism is explicitly needed before further progress can be made.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract