Yes Virginia, thereis an objective reality in job analysis

Abstract

We fundamentally disagree with Sanchez and Levine (this issue) on several issues. Terminologically, we are troubled by their failure to differentiate between the descriptive process of rating verifiable work characteristics (i.e., job analysis) versus the subjective process of inferring worker ability and ‘other’ (AO) requirements (i.e., job specification). Although ‘consequential validity’ is crucial for evaluating job specifications, it is largely irrelevant for assessing properly conducted job analyses. Ontologically, we reject their relativist view that an objective reality does not exist when describing work activities. When verifiable descriptors are rated using sound rating scales, independent judges can definitively assess position rating accuracy; such a review constitutes all the ‘validity’ evidence needed for the job analysis per se. We discuss a number of additional concerns, including the way in which practitioners deal with true cross‐position ratings variability, and the role of holistic inferences. Copyright © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Considering Age Diversity in Recruitment and Selection: An Expanded Work Lifespan View of Age Management

“…Several distinctions can be drawn with respect to the form job analysis takes (e.g., work vs. worker oriented analysis, decomposed vs. holistic judgements regarding job elements/tasks vs. duties, etc., see Doverspike and Arthur 2012 ). Th e jury is still out regarding the relative value and utility of decomposed versus holistic judgements in job analysis (e.g., Shippman et al 2000 ;Harvey and Wilson 2000 ). Moreover, there is still debate in the literature regarding the relative value of work versus worker-oriented approaches to job analysis (e.g.…”

Choosing a Career Based Personality Matching: A Case Study of King Abdulaziz University

“…Employee selection processes have especially focused on achieving person-job fit (Werbel & Gilliland, 1999) which is the congruence between the abilities of a person and the demands of a job (Edwards, 1991;Kristof, 1996). During the past decade or so, several authors have recognized that the practitioner involved in personnel selection and those involved in scientific studies of this discipline have Harvey (1991) and Harvey and Wilson (2000) recommend that the traits and abilities of workers should be left out of selection processes. According to them, personal traits do not meet the requirements of verifiable and replicable job analysis data.…”

An Examination of the Validity and Incremental Value of Needed-at-Entry Ratings for a Customer Service Job

“…Second, I-O psychologists who are not members of the organisation would have no incentive to rate the KSAOs in a particular way, which may not be true of job experts (Harvey & Wilson, 2000). Lastly, a precedent exists for using I-O psychologists (i.e.…”

“…Interestingly, concerns about obtaining job analysis information from job experts have tended to center on the use of job incumbents (Harvey & Wilson, 2000;Morgeson & Campion, 1997). For example, it is thought that incumbents may be more motivated (than managers and job analysts) to provide elevated ratings because incumbents are more likely to benefit from providing inordinately high ratings (e.g.…”