Relations between measures of typical and maximum job performance.

Sackett, Paul R.; Zedeck, Sheldon; Fogli, Larry

doi:10.1037/0021-9010.73.3.482

Cited by 252 publications

(321 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

296

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Maximum and typical performance criteria reflect somewhat different phenomena (Sackett, et al, 1988 performance" (p. 14). The Navy conducts Operational Training Assessments to determine how well training has'prepared the ship and its crew for deployment.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Factors That Influence Training Effectiveness: A Conceptual Model And Longitudinal Analysis

Tannenbaum¹,

Methieu²,

Cannon‐Bowers³

et al. 1993

PsycEXTRA Dataset

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Factors That Influence Training Effectiveness: A Conceptual Model And Longitudinal Analysis

Tannenbaum¹,

Methieu²,

Cannon‐Bowers³

et al. 1993

PsycEXTRA Dataset

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Granted, work sample performance measures are high fidelity measures of "can-do" aspects of job performance (versus "will-do" aspects, see Borman et al, 1995;Borman, White, Pulakos, & Oppler, 1991;DuBois, Sackett, Zedeck, & Fogli, 1993;Motowidlo, Borman & Schmit, 1997;Motowidlo & VanScotter, 1994;Sackett, Zedeck, & Fogli, 1988). However, they are not without their limitations.…”

Section: Charles E Lancementioning

confidence: 99%

Summer Research Program - 1998 Summer Research Extension Program Volume 1 Armstrong Laboratory

Moore¹

1998

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PubSc report™ bunlen for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing, instructions, searcl the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information^incWng sugg« AUTHOR(S)Gary Moore PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)Research & Development Laboratories (RDL) 5800 Uplander Way Culver City, CA 90230-6608 The United States Air Force Summer Research Program (SRP) is designed to introduce university, college, and technical institute faculty members to Air Force research. This is accomplished by the faculty members, graduate students, and high school students being selected on a nationally advertised competitive basis during the summer intersession period to perforn research at Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) Technical Directorates and Air Force Air Logistics Centers (ALC). AFOSR also offers its research associates (faculty only) an opportunity, under the Summer Research Extension Program (SREP), to continue their AFOSR-sponsored research at their home institutions through the award of research grants. This volume consists of the SREP program background, management information, statistics, a listing of the participants, and the technical report for each participant of the SREP working at the AF Armstrong Laboratory. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)Air SUBJECT TERMS J GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING SF 298The Report Documentation Page (RDP) is used in announcing and cataloging reports. It is important that this information be consistent with the rest of the report, particularly the cover and title page. Instructions for filling in each block of the form follow. It is important to stay within the fines to meet optical scanning requirements. Block 1. Agency Use Only (Leave blank).Block 2. Report Date. Full publication date including day, month, and year, if available (e.g. 1 Jan 88). Must cite at least the year.Block 3. Type of Report and Dates Covered. State whether report is interim, final, etc. If applicable, enter inclusive report dates (e.g. 10Jun87-30Jun88).Block 4. Title and Subtitle. A title is taken from the part of the report that provides the most meaningful and complete information. When a report is prepared in more than one volume, repeat the primary title, add volume number, and include subtitle for the specific volume. On classified documents enter the title classification in parentheses.Block 5. Funding Numbers. To include contract and grant numbers; may include program element number(s), project number(s), task number(s), and work unit number(s). Use the following labels:C -Contract G -Grant PE-Program ElementPR -Project TA ■ Task WU -Work Unit Accession No.Block 6. Author(s). Name(s) of person(s) responsible for writing the report, performing the research, or credited with the content of the report. If editor or compiler, this should follow the name(s). Block 7.Performing Organization Name(s) and Address(es). Self-explanatory.B...

show abstract

“…Further, Sackett, Zedeck, and Fogli (1988) have investigated the commonly used terms of maximal and typical performance and found relatively low correlations between these two performance measurements. One implication is straightforward: when setting performance standards, the Army (and probably most other organizations) need to consider whether these standards should be set on maximal or typical performance (or some combination of the two).…”

Section: Maximal Versus Typical Performancementioning

confidence: 99%

Setting Performance Standards: A Review of Related Literatures and Identification of Future Research Needs

Bobko¹,

Colella²

1991

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Relations between measures of typical and maximum job performance.

Cited by 252 publications

References 4 publications

Factors That Influence Training Effectiveness: A Conceptual Model And Longitudinal Analysis

Factors That Influence Training Effectiveness: A Conceptual Model And Longitudinal Analysis

Summer Research Program - 1998 Summer Research Extension Program Volume 1 Armstrong Laboratory

Setting Performance Standards: A Review of Related Literatures and Identification of Future Research Needs

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About