Effects of training and information on the accuracy and reliability of job evaluations.

Abstract

Subjects evaluated 23 benchmark jobs on 10 dimensions after either receiving training or no training in job evaluation and after being given only a title, only a job description, or both a title and job description. The amount of information affected primarily the accuracy and reliabi lity of the ratings. Those given both a title and a job description were generally more accurate and reliable in their ratings than those given only a title. Trained subjects demonstrated less leniency and greater dispersion than did those who were untrained. Although training affected primarily the distribution of ratings, the most accurate and reliable subjects tended to be those who received training as well as full information in the form of a job description and title.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 39 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.