What is I-O?

The effectiveness of the Angoff judgmental method for establishing cutoff scores rests on the judges’ ability to accurately conceptualize a "minimally competent person" (MCP). This symposium offers descriptive and empirical findings related to situational factors which may affect the accuracy of Angoff estimates by influencing judges’ conceptions of a MCP.

Richard J. Klimoski, George Mason University, Chair
Kara L. Schmitt, Michigan Department of Commerce & Industry Service, Standard Setting Practices for
            Credentialing Examinations
J. Peter Hudson, PepsiCo, Relationship Between Judge Test Performance and Angoff Estimates
Lisa M. Donahue, George Mason University, Donald M. Truxillo, Portland State University, Lisa Finkelstein,
            Northern Illinois University, Effects of Expertise and Frame-of Reference-Training of Angoff Ratings
Donald M. Truxillo, Portland State University, Lisa M. Donahue, George Mason University, Item Content Effects
            on Angoff Estimates and Judge Confidence Ratings
Lori B. Zukin, George Mason University, Mike McLenegan, Pittman & Associates, L.C., Shane Pittman, Pittman &
            Associates, L.C., Mental Models of Minimal Competence: Can They Be Shared?
Nambury S. Raju, Illinois Institute of Technology, Discussant

Practical significance deals with whether the results of experiments are useful in the real world. Practical significance definitions differ across I-O practitioners and academics. This symposium presents practitioner and academic perspectives on practical significance; methods for assessing practical significance; and ways of integrating academic and practitioner perspectives on practical significance.

Daniel J. Svyantek, University of Akron, Chair
Vicki V. Vandaveer, The Vandaveer Group, Quality, Effectiveness and Value: A Practitioner Perspective on
            Practical Significance
Karla K. Stuebing, FSD Data Services, Evaluating Significance: How We Got Here and Where We’re Going
Philip L. Roth, Clemson University, Philip Bobko, Gettysburg College, Allen I. Huffcutt, Bradley University,
            Evaluating HRM Interventions with Single and Multi-Attribute Utility Analysis
Daniel J. Svyantek, University of Akron, Client-based Hypothesis Testing: New Perspectives on an Old Friend
Kenneth R. Pederson, The Dow Chemical Company, Discussant
Richard D. Arvey, University of Minnesota, Discussant

This symposium presents a cross-section of contemporary research about women’s careers, ranging from organizational factors affecting advancement to the impact of nonwork roles. The studies utilized diverse methodologies including surveys, interviews, laboratory research, and longitudinal analyses, each of which adds a unique perspective to our understanding of women’s careers.

Karen S. Lyness, Baruch College, CUNY, Chair
Donna E. Thompson, Baruch College, CUNY, Karen S. Lyness, Baruch College, CUNY, Getting to the Top:
            Barriers and Facilitators of Executives’ Advancement
Madeline E. Heilman, New York University, William S. Battle, New York University, Victoria S. Barocas-Alcott,
            New York University, Penalties for Sex-Role Violation in Job Choice and Work Effectiveness
Karen S. Lyness, Baruch College, CUNY, Donna E. Thompson, Baruch College, CUNY, What Predicts Success?
            Career Development of Matched Samples of Female and Male Managers
Michael K. Judiesch, Baruch College, CUNY, Karen S. Lyness, Baruch College, CUNY, Left Behind? Impact of
            Leaves of Absence on the Performance Outcomes of Female Managers
Marian N. Ruderman, Center for Creative Leadership, Kate Panzer, Center for Creative Leadership, Personal and
            Work Lives: Overlapping Spheres
Belle Rose Ragins, Marquette University, Discussant

The fakability of noncognitive instruments continues to plague personnel selection. Four studies illustrate the merits of investigating the effects of faking using various research strategies and measurement tools. These studies also demonstrate the importance of conceptually and empirically separating the effects of overt faking and social desirability.

Andrea F. Snell, University of Akron, Chair
Richard L. Frei, University of Akron, Andrea F. Snell, University of Akron, Michael A. McDaniel, University of
            Akron, Richard L. Griffith, Florida Institute of Technology, Using a Within Subjects Design to Identify
            Differences Between Social Desirability and Faking
Neil D. Christiansen, Central Michigan University, Shari Edelstein, Florida Institute of Technology, William D.
            Fleming, Florida Institute of Technology, Reconsidering Forced-Choice Scales for Applicant
            Personality Assessment
Jeffrey A. Smith, Virginia Tech, Neil M. A. Hauenstein, Virginia Tech, Roseanne J. Foti, Virginia Tech, Timothy
            Hansen, Personnel Decisions International, An Examination of Test-Taking Attitudes and Response
            Distortion on a Personality Test
Richard L. Griffith, Florida Institute of Technology, Andrea F. Snell, University of Akron, Richard L. Frei,
            University of Akron, Michael A. McDaniel, University of Akron, Stacey Confer, Florida Institute of
            Technology, Modeling Social Desirability as a Method Bias Effect
Garnett S. Stokes, University of Georgia, Discussant

This symposium focuses on the self-starting, proactive behaviors and orientations that are required for effective performance in modern organizations. Drawing on diverse theoretical perspectives, the papers describe and conceptualize proactivity-related concepts; investigate their personal and situational determinants; and report on their functionality in terms of performance and learning.

Steve W. J. Kozlowski, Michigan State University, Co-Chair
Sharon Parker, University of Sheffield, Co-Chair
Michael Frese, University of Amsterdam, Co-Chair
Doris Fay, University of Amsterdam, Michael Frese, University of Amsterdam, The Nature of Personal
            Initiative: Self-Starting Orientation and Proactivity
Paul Tesluk, Tulane University, Charlotte R. Gerstner, Xerox Corporation, What Makes for Responsive and
            Proactive Teams? Keys to Team Effectiveness
Sharon Parker, University of Sheffield, Seeing Another Viewpoint: The Importance of Perspective-Taking for
            Proactive Performance.
Steve W. J. Kozlowski, Michigan State University, Rebecca J. Toney, Michigan State University, Daniel A.
            Weissbein, Michigan State University, Morell E. Mullins, Michigan State University, Kenneth G.
            Brown,Michigan State University, Bradford S. Bell, Michigan State University, Training Adaptive
            Performance
Stephan J. Motowidlo, University of Florida, Discussant

The construct of goal orientation is receiving a great deal of attention in the feedback and motivation literatures. This symposium examines the role of goal orientation in the self-regulatory process, performance outcomes associated with goal orientation profiles, and continues the critical evaluation of instruments for the measurement of goal orientation as a stable individual difference.

Richard P. DeShon, Michigan State University, Chair
Sandra L. Fisher, Personnel Decision Research Institutes, Richard P. DeShon, Michigan State University, The
            Role of Goal Orientation and Interest in a Self-Regulation Framework
Don VandeWalle, Southern Methodist University, Steven Brown, Southern Methodist University, William Cron,
            Southern Methodist University, John Slocum, Southern Methodist University, Wanting to Look Good
            Isn’t Enough: Goal Orientation, Self-Regulation and Sales Performance
Joan F. Brett, Southern Methodist University, Don VandeWalle, Southern Methodist University, Goal
            Orientation and Specific Goal Content as Predictors of Performance Outcomes in a Training Program
Quinetta M. Roberson, University of Maryland, Neta Moye, University of Maryland, Edwin A. Locke, University
            of Maryland, Understanding the Complexity of Goal Orientation: Performance Implications Beyond
             the Two Factor Model
Carolyn M. Jagacinski, Purdue University, Discussant

The Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing, in draft form, has aroused much interest in I-O psychology. This symposium evaluates the draft Standards from three different perspectives. Emphasized are the limited scientific focus of the Standards, the problems they cause for research and practice, and the role they may play in education.

James L. Farr, Pennsylvania State University, Chair
Robert M. Guion, Bowling Green State University, Needed Changes in Focus of the Standards
Nancy T. Tippins, GTE Telephone Operations, A Practitioner’s Perspective of the Standards
Neal W. Schmitt, Michigan State University, Use of the Standards in Education of Psychometrics
Mary L. Tenopyr, AT&T, Discussant

A growing body of research suggests that team performance is enhanced when team members share mental models of their task, goals, roles, and teammate-specific characteristics. This session brings together recent research that adds to our understanding of how shared mental models develop and impact performance.

Kimberly A. Smith-Jentsch, Naval Air Warfare Center, Chair
Laura Pape, Wright State University, Laura Pape, Wright State University, The Effects of Trust and
            Perspective-Taking on Team Members Schema Similarity
Jill Schmidt, University of Colorado at Denver, Alicia J. Winckler, HR Avantis, Kurt Kraiger, University of
            Colorado at Denver, Kimberly A. Smith-Jentsch, Naval Air Warfare Center, Shared Goal Structures as
            Indicators of Team Effectiveness
Tonia S. Heffner, University of Tennessee - Chattanooga, John E. Mathieu, Pennsylvania State University, Gerald
            F. Goodwin, Pennsylvania State University, Team Training: The Impact on Shared Mental Models and
            Performance
Kimberly A. Smith-Jentsch, Naval Air Warfare Center, Gwendolyn Campbell, Naval Air Warfare Center, Katrina
            Ricci, Naval Air Warfare Center, J. Robin Harrison, Naval Air Warfare Center, Training Mental Models
            Through Structured Post-Exercise Debriefs
Janis Cannon-Bowers, Naval Air Warfare Center, Discussant

What are the links between organizational behavior and ultimate outcomes such as company performance, hospital health care, and organizational innovation? In this symposium, presenters will examine outcome measurement methods such as ProMES and "balanced scorecard" while exploring whether management practices, climate, and attitudes predict ultimate outcomes.

Michael West, Institute of Work Psychology, Co-Chair
Robert D. Pritchard, Texas A & M University, Co-Chair
Malcolm Patterson, London School of Economics, Michael West, Institute of Work Psychology, The
            Relationship Between Human Resource Management, Employee Attitudes and Company Financial
            Performance
Peter Ramstad, Personnel Decisions International, HR Activities and Outcomes
John P. Campbell, University of Minnesota, Discussant

Mentor–protg relationships are common for employees in organizations, but are also seen in graduate programs and internships. The panel will explore the advantages, disadvantages, and outcomes associated with mentoring in each setting. Differences between mentored and nonmentored persons as well as gender issues will be discussed.

Clive Fullagar, Kansas State University, Chair
Richard J. Fogg, Kansas State University, Panelist
Craig V. King, Kansas State University, Panelist
Gayle Baugh, University of West Florida, Panelist
Ellen A. Fagenson-Eland, George Mason University, Panelist
T.R. Lin, Los Angeles Unified School District, Panelist
Kenneth S. Shultz, California State University-San Bernardino, Panelist

Speakers will describe the legal status of affirmative action and distinguish it from related concepts. The specific actions employed by organizations are of key importance. Speakers will describe and recommend procedures for developing successful programs. Affirmative action in The Netherlands will be described to provide another view.

David A. Kravitz, Rice University, Chair
Mark Keppler, California State University, The Legal Plight of Affirmative Action in Employment: Are We
            "Throwing Out the Baby with Bath Water?"
Sandi Dinger, SUNY-Binghamton, William Spangler, SUNY-Binghamton, Aqeel Tirmizi, SUNY-Binghamton, From
            Affirmative Action to Diversity Management: Creating a Sustainable Competitive Advantage by
            Effectively Managing Diverse Human Resources
Sharon Abraham, Oakland University, Cami Zawacki, Grand Rapids Community College, Individualized
            Divisional Diversity Plans = Affirmative Action Accountability
Dennis Doverspike, University of Akron, AA in Action in a University Environment: How Would You Do it
            Differently?
Remko Verheul, Freelance Journalist, Jaap Terpstra, Hogeschool van Amsterdam, Affirmative Action in the
            Netherlands: Is it Effective?

More and more employees rely on computer-mediated communication to get their work done. This symposium examines research on the social implications of this type of communication. In particular, the papers focus on the effects of computer-mediated communication on work groups, social interaction, and negotiation behavior.

Maryalice Citera, SUNY at New Paltz, Chair
Jonathon Rhoades, New York University, Interaction and Performance in Computer-Mediated and
            Face-To-Face Work Groups
Maryalice Citera, SUNY at New Paltz, Self-Awareness in Computer-Mediated Communication
Matthew Champagne, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Ying-Chi Wong, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Alice
            F. Stuhlmacher, DePaul University, The Impact of Computer-Mediated Communication Within the
            Negotiation Process
Donald A. Hantula, Temple University, Discussant

In order to deal with change, complexity, and uncertainty, people need to be able to learn from the problems and challenges they encounter in the workplace. How can individuals enhance their ability to learn from experience? This symposium offers research-based frameworks, strategies, and tools for helping individuals learn how to learn.

Cynthia D. McCauley, Center for Creative Leadership, Chair
Morgan W. McCall, University of Southern California, Ability to Learn from Experience: A Selection or
            Development Issue?
Maxine Arnold Dalton, Center for Creative Leadership, Can Adults Learn How to Learn?
Kent Seibert, Wheaton College, Reflection: A Paradoxical Yet Core Learning Skill
Douglas T. Hall, Boston University, David O’Connell, Boston University, Metalearning and the CEO

What makes an effective manager? The main purpose of this symposium is to identify personality characteristics of managers associated with job performance, promotions and managerial ascendancy. The findings can aid in the design of improved identification, selection, placement and development methods for managers.

Ronald C. Page, Consulting Psychologists, Inc., Chair
Leaetta M. Hough, The Dunnette Group, Ltd., Personality Correlates of Managerial Performance Constructs
Gary Behrens, NCS/London House, Scott L. Martin, NCS/London House, Identifying Differences Between
            Managers and Executives
Nathan R. Kuncel, University of Minnesota, John P. Campbell, University of Minnesota, Managerial Potential
            and Performance: Distinguishing Between Performance and Advancement Constructs
Deniz S. Ones, University of Minnesota, Leaetta M. Hough, The Dunnette Group, Ltd., Chockalingam
            Viswesvaran, Florida International University, Validity and Adverse Impact of Personality-Based
            Managerial Potential Scales
Chockalingam Viswesvaran, Florida International University, Deniz S. Ones, University of Minnesota, Leaetta M.
            Hough, The Dunnette Group, Ltd., Construct Validity of Managerial Potential Scales
Joyce C. Hogan, Hogan Assessment Systems, Susan Rybicki, Hogan Assessment Systems, Conceptual Voids in
            the Assessment of Managerial Performance
John W. Boudreau, Cornell University, Discussant

This practitioner forum describes an application of construct validation to support broad implementation of aptitude testing. By applying cluster analysis to PAQ data to identify 11 job families, five test batteries were validated for nearly 250 classifications. Operationalizing constructs, setting cut scores, and assigning jobs to families are also described.

Calvin C. Hoffman, Southern California Gas, Background and Rationale for the Mother of All Selection Systems
E. Kelly Gale, Southern California Gas, A Nontraditional Approach to Validating Selection Systems
Lisa Holden, Southern California Gas, Preparing for Implementation: Solving Technical Problems and
            Creating Future Flexibility

Personality testing continues to increase in popularity despite several serious concerns including decrements in validity with applicant samples, faking, and practical implementation and usage issues. Despite these concerns, research suggests strongly that these constructs are important for predicting job performance. Audience discussion related to these issues will be encouraged.

Wanda J. Campbell, Edison Electric Institute, Chair
Teresa L. Russell, American Institutes for Research, Scott H. Oppler, American Institutes for Research, Norman G.
            Peterson, American Institutes for Research, Comparison of Social Desirability and Validity on a
            Personality/Biodata Measure Across Samples
Ann M. Quigley, US Postal Service, Putting Personality in Your Organization: Neither Pyrrhic Victory nor
            Panacea
Jill K. Wheeler, Bell Atlantic, Practical Considerations and Experiences Related to the Use of Personality
            Testing in Selection
Wanda J. Campbell, Edison Electric Institute, Personality Tests: The Reality?

Relatively little work on trainee characteristics has focused on understanding the processes by which individual difference characteristics like personality and ability influence learning, training outcomes, and effectiveness. Each of the studies provides findings relevant to understanding how individual differences impact training processes and outcomes. Implications for training design and research are discussed.

John E. Mathieu, Pennsylvania State University, Chair
Stanley M. Gully, George Mason University, Chair
Morell E. Mullins, Michigan State University, Kenneth G. Brown, Michigan State University, Rebecca J. Toney,
            Michigan State University, Daniel A. Weissbein, Michigan State University, Steve W. J. Kozlowski,
            Michigan State University, Individual Differences, Self-Efficacy, and Training Outcomes
Susan Mohammed, Pennsylvania State University, John E. Mathieu, Pennsylvania State University, Bart Bartlett,
            Pennsylvania State University, Greg Loviscky, Pennsylvania State University, Adam S. Rosenberg,
            Pennsylvania State University, Sophia Cho, Pennsylvania State University, Tamara L. Williams,
            Pennsylvania State University, Jonathan Probber, Pennsylvania State University, The Effects of Team
            Composition on Multidimensional Training Outcomes
Stanley M. Gully, George Mason University, Jean Phillips, Rutgers University, Jeffrey M. Beaubien, George
            Mason University, Stephanie C. Payne, George Mason University, Effects of Individual Differences in
            Goal Orientation and Self-Regulatory Tendencies on Learning
Jennifer Hedlund, Yale University, Robert J. Sternberg, Yale University, Joseph Horvath, Yale University, Martin
            Dennis, Yale University, George Forsythe, US Military Academy, Scott Snook, US Military Academy, The
            Acquisition of Tacit Knowledge for Military Leadership: Implications for Training
Eduardo Salas, Naval Air Warfare Center, Discussant

Obtaining complete data sets when conducting field research is important. Missing data reduces power and the ability to generalize results. This discussion will focus on issues surrounding missing data problems in applied research and provide information to the audience regarding various techniques that can be utilized when replacing missing data.

Ronald G. Downey, Kansas State University, Chair
Craig V. King, Kansas State University, Panelist
Richard J. Fogg, Kansas State University, Panelist
Philip L. Roth, Clemson University, Panelist
Fred S. Switzer, Clemson University, Panelist

Cross-cultural research has identified individualism–collectivism as a fundamental cultural and psychological dimension affecting organizationally relevant behaviors. This symposium demonstrates the impact of individualism-collectivism on the societal, organizational, and individual–difference levels on behavior within team settings.

Seymour Adler, Assessment Solutions, Inc., Chair
Miriam Erez, Technion, The Role Played by Individualism/Collectivism in Understanding the Effectiveness of
            Motivational Techniques
Tal Katz, Columbia University, Joel Brockner, Columbia University, Self-Construal as a Moderator of the Effects
            of Managerial Practices on Team Performance
Sumita Raghuram, Fordham University, Self-Construal Diversity and Creativity in Groups
Mary LaGreca, Metropolitan Life Insurance, Richard Skov, Stevens Institute of Technology, Seymour Adler,
            Assessment Solutions, Inc., Ideocentricism–Allocentricism as a Moderator of Productivity in Groups

This symposium examines proposed links between affirmative action, diversity, and identity. Presentations will focus on empirical studies examining the role of gender, racial, and national identity in reactions to affirmative action and diversity initiatives. Discussion will center on the implications of these findings for effective diversity management in organizations.

David V. Day, Pennsylvania State University, Chair
Lesley A. Perkins, University of Georgia, Kecia M. Thomas, University of Georgia, Kecia M. Thomas, University
            of Georgia, Say it with a Picture: Recruiting in a Diverse Workforce
Erika Ringseis, Pennsylvania State University, David V. Day, Pennsylvania State University, American and
            Canadian Endorsement of Special Consideration in Hiring: A Policy-Capturing Study
Marlene E. Turner, San Jose State University, Anthony Pratkanis, University of California, Affirmative Action
            and the Illusory Identification of Incompetency
Donna Chrobot-Mason, Xerox Corporation, Building a Business Case of Diversity at Xerox: From Affirmative
            Action to Empowerment
William Cross, University of Massachusetts, Discussant