No abstract

Although the popular literature on time management claims that engaging in time management behaviors results in increased job performance and satisfaction and fewer job tensions, a theoretical framework and empirical examination are lacking. To address this deficiency, the author proposed and tested a process model of time management. Employees in a variety of jobs completed several scales; supervisors provided performance ratings. Examination of the path coefficients in the model suggested that engaging in some time management behaviors may have beneficial effects on tensions and job satisfaction but not on job performance. Contrary to popular claims, time management training was not found to be effective.There is a voluminous popular literature that lauds the benefits of time management. Examples of some books and magazine articles on the subject are: "Time Is Money, So Use It Productively" (Taylor & Mackenzie, 1986), "Put Time on Your Side" (Emanuel, 1982), and "How To Get Control of Your Time and Your Life" (Lakein, 1973). Surprisingly little empirical research, however, has examined time management. Perhaps it is because time management is typically viewed as a fad and not held in very high esteem by researchers in the field. Nonetheless, many organizations promote efficient use of company time and spend a great deal of money on having their employees learn these time management behaviors. This emphasis on time management stems from the untested popular belief that poor allocation of time not only increases employee stress, but also impairs performance. In the present research, I tested this belief by examining a process model of the effects of time management training on time management behaviors; perceived control of time; and stress responses, job satisfaction, and job performance. Process Model of Time Management Time Management Training Leads to Time Management BehaviorsAccording to Lakein's (1973) description of time management, individuals first determine their needs and wants and then rank them in terms of importance. Specific activities include setting goals to achieve the needs or wants and prioritizing the tasks necessary to accomplish them. The tasks of utmost I thank Gary K. Burger, Robert L. Dipboye, Miles L. Patterson, Carlla S. Smith, and Mark E. Tubbs for invaluable assistance. Thanks are also due Dick Jeanneret, Micheal Bosen, and Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ) Services for the job structure information based on PAQ job data and to Denise Champagne for providing the data for Study 2.1 am also grateful to the anonymous reviewers, whose suggestions greatly improved the quality of the article.Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Therese HofFMacan, Department of Psychology, University of MissouriSt. Louis, 8001 Natural Bridge Road, St. Louis, importance are then matched to the time and resources available by planning, scheduling, and making lists. Lakein also described other time management tips, such as organizing the work space and determining the approach to ...

Manufacturing applicants' perceptions of two selection devices were examined. In Study 1, applicants (n= 3,984) completed cognitive ability tests and a survey of reactions. In Study 2, a subset of applicants from Study 1 (n= 194) participated in an assessment center and completed the survey. Applicants reacted favorably to the procedures but viewed the assessment center as more face valid than the cognitive tests. Applicants who perceived the selection techniques more favorably were also more satisfied with the selection process, the job, and the organization. Although applicants' perceptions of the procedures were related to job acceptance intentions, applicants' liking of the job and organization explained the largest unique variance. In future studies, applicants' job acceptance intentions and attitudes toward the job and organization should be assessed before and after administration of selection devices; not controlling for prior impressions resulted in overestimation of the contribution of applicants' perceptions of selection procedures.

No abstract

No abstract

This quasi-experimental field study examined the effects of a time-management training program on 44 employees' self-reports of time-management behavior control over their time, job satisfaction, and stress responses, and on supervisor's ratings of these employees' job performance. Contrary to expectations, respondents did not report more frequent use of time-management behaviors, more job satisfaction, or less job-induced tension after training, compared with those not receiving training. Job performance did not significantly change after training. The training-group participants' perceptions of control over time, however, increased 4 to 5 months after training, approaching the level maintained by the no-training group. Thus, in general, the assertions made about time management were not supported.

Many interviewers must handle the competing demands of assessment and recruitment when conducting interviews. Both interviewers and applicants in a college placement setting provided their perceptions of each other and the interview process. The present study explored possible mediators and moderators of the relationship of interviewers' preinterview impressions of applicants to their postinterview impressions of the same applicants, as well as the effects on recruiting success. Consistent with a process model of the interview (Dipboye, 1982), preinterview impressions were positively related to postinterview impressions. Several other predictions were not supported, however, and suggestions are made for modifications in the process model and directions for future research.

This chapter reviews the research on the most frequently used of all instruments of employee selection: the interview. When considered as a means of assessing applicant job qualifications, the interview is typically discussed from the interviewer's perspective. We propose in the present chapter that the quality of the interview as a tool of assessment depends on taking into consideration both the interviewer and the applicant perspective. Interviewers attempt to gather information on applicants and select among them. Although it is apparent that structuring the process improves the reliability and validity of their assessments, interviewers must balance the goal of selection with other goals such as recruitment. On the other hand, applicants manage impressions, gather information, and judge the position and the work environment. We discuss the alternative objectives that both interviewer and applicant bring to the interview and how these objectives can clash. We conclude by considering strategies for improving the interview as a means of assessment by dealing with tensions that can exist between and within interviewer and applicant.