Mike McDaniel <
MAMcDani@SATURN.VCU.EDU> wrote:
>Some have speculated that intelligence
is not always positively correlated
with job performance.<
That is what our 20,000 clients find for some, but not all, of their jobs.
I suppose some of us may prefer to rely on research and theory, but some
employers prefer to rely on their own success.
>There is no peer-reviewed published research to support this view. <
How many employers actually rely on peer-reviewed published research?
When an employer tests all their employees in a job classification and all
their top performers score lower in mental abilities than the non-top
performers who have higher mental abilities it doesn't take a rocket
scientist to understand what the results mean.
>Intelligence is a consistent predictor
of job performance for all jobs.<
But for how long? Does the research really indicate that people in the top
15% of mental abilities will always be better short-term and long-term
employees than people who are not in the top 15%?
>It has a higher correlation for job performance in
more cognitively complex jobs and a lower
correlation for less cognitively complex jobs.<
Yes, for more cognitively complex jobs having the requisite mental
abilities is critical but what does that say for the same people in less
cognitively complex jobs? It is as if you are making the case that employee
motivation is unrelated to the challenge of the job. Do we really believe
that high mental ability employees will stay motivated for a long time no
matter how unchallenged they are by the job? There is more to success than
mental horsepower and it is a good thing since there are only a limited
supply of people who are at the high end.
>I suggest that those who claim that intelligence
is not a good predictor of job performance provide
citations to peer reviewed research to
support their assertions.<
Why? You haven't yet answered the most compelling questions from my earlier
post: "...are all the traits common to all successful employees in all jobs
in all industries working for all bosses in all companies? If the answer is
no, is the research all that helpful? Can people be successful without
having all of these traits? If the answer is yes, which people, which
traits, which jobs?"
If you cannot answer my questions, what good is the research? Employers
need to know which job applicants are most likely to become successful
employees. So far we have been advised to rely on research that was 85
years in the making, yet our experience over the 30 years clearly
demonstrates that high mental ability employees do not always out perform
lower mental ability employees.
>The advancement of knowledge in the area
of personnel screening is not well served
by anecdotes and testimonials.<
You may argue that point, but employers seem to be more convinced by their
own success than by peer-reviewed articles. Could it be that once an
advancement is made, prior research becomes less significant?
Bob