Skip to main content

Currently Skimming:

Work Samples as Measures of Performance
Pages 27-52

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.


From page 27...
... Their primary purpose is to evaluate what one can do rather than what one knows (Cascio and Phillips, 19791. This paper is a review of the work sample literature, with particular attention paid to the theory underlying work sample testing, the use of work samples as criterion measures, the adverse impact of work samples, and measurement issues associated with such tests.
From page 28...
... To the extent that success in training is felt to be a predictor of eventual performance on the actual job, the work samples used in this manner serve the dual puIpose of measuring current performance and predicting future success. For both of these reasons, the author feels that the predictor/criterion distinction is superficial in the case of work sample testing, and that including certain predictive work samples in this review will be beneficial for an understanding of these types of tests.
From page 29...
... The Gordon and Kleinman study is examined in further detail below. Many of these same points can be made for work samples as criterion measures.
From page 30...
... Verbal work samples fared less well when job proficiency was the criterion, with only 21 percent of the validity coefficients exceeding .50, and 41 percent exceeding .40. However, with success in training as the criterion measure, verbal work samples were superior to motor work samples.
From page 31...
... Sixty-five percent of the verbal work samples reviewed had validity coefficients greater than .40, while only 47 percent of the motor work samples' validities were greater than .40. Asher and Sciarrino (1974)
From page 32...
... Their analyses revealed that work samples, assessment centers, and superior/peer evaluations yielded validities superior to general mental ability tests or special aptitude tests.
From page 33...
... In any case, again it appears that work samples have validities comparable to, and in many cases, superior to other predictors. While their use as criteria has been more limited, these two meta-analytic reviews do report rather impressive average validity coefficients for work samples as criteria.
From page 34...
... It was found that the correlation between the clipboard test and earnings was -.02, between the needle board test and earnings was -.06, and between the hurdles and earnings was -.08, all nonsignificant. The Inskeep findings are somewhat surprising in that the work sample tasks are almost identical to some of the actual job behaviors required of incumbent sewing machine
From page 35...
... comment that since the average cost per trainee for the long electronic switching system course is $25,000, the cost benefit of a valid selection procedure can be substantial. Assessing Trainability Using Work Samples It appears, then, that a work sample can be a valid means of assessing trainability of job candidates.
From page 36...
... The next section begins by examining a study that used a work sample both during training and to evaluate on-thejob performance. This will be followed by a review of studies in which work samples are primarily the criterion measures.
From page 37...
... They suggest that the lower predictive power of the work sample scores over time may be due to basing predictions on specific training scores rather than general abilities. While the job training work samples may be adequate for predicting success at initial job entry, over time
From page 38...
... Physical Ability as a Predictor of Work Sample Performance A work sample was developed to validate selectors for filling steelworking positions on the basis of physical ability (Arnold et al., 1982~. Work samples for entry level positions ire the general labor pool were developed based on job analyses and interviews with managers and incumbent laborers.
From page 39...
... validated five aptitude tests against proficiency measures obtained from a learning assessment program. The learning assessment program is organized into seven levels of training, in ascending order of difficulty, and includes basic electricity, basic telephone, Bell System practices, station circuits, advanced circuits, and trouble location.
From page 40...
... (1975a, 1975b) used work samples to validate 10 tests of intellectual ability and perceptual speed for two occupations, telephone operators and clerks.
From page 41...
... In comparing the two samples, the authors found that a common regression line overpredicts black operator proficiency and underpredicts white operator proficiency for scores below the total sample composite predictor mean. This study, then, found that the paper-and-pencil tests were valid predictors of work sample performance for both white and black operators, and that the possibility of adverse impact is more likely for nonminority than for minority candidates.
From page 42...
... The authors conclude that the composite predictor is highly valid for all samples and that success in clerical work seems best predicted by tests of intellectual ability and perceptual speed and accuracy. Performance Ratings Validated Against Work Samples Using a slight procedural twist, Olson et al.
From page 43...
... It seems to have its greatest value when the participant is being considered for a position very different from the one currently held, since the assessment center allows for the evaluation of skills that may not be available from observation on the current job. Individuals are usually assessed in groups, and the assessment center staff usually consists of trained management personnel, professional psychologists, or both.
From page 44...
... Each of the subjects participated in two leaderless group discussions, about 2 days apart. Three criterion measures were obtained: initiating structure, consideration, and an overall effectiveness rating.
From page 45...
... Assessment centers and work samples that have a pass/fail criterion quite often use this technique. A second type of response format used in work sample evaluations is behavioral recording forms.
From page 46...
... Both work samples were significantly related to the two criterion measures for the two samples of employees. For the two paper-and-pencil predictors, the numerical test was significantly related to the performance appraisal criterion.
From page 47...
... conclude that while the paper-and-pencil predictor showed adverse impact for the minority sample, a job knowledge test carefully constructed from a job analysis eliminated this problem. It should be emphasized again, however, that Kesselman and Lopez chose the personnel classification test prior to a job analysis.
From page 48...
... The authors conclude that work samples based on performance that is critical to success or failure on the job, especially when combined with behavioral recordings, will have little potential for racial bias. One study that did find race and sex bias in a work sample was reported by Hamner et al.
From page 49...
... Work samples appear to be particularly relevant in training situations, as both a measure of training success and as a means of assessing the trainability of individuals prior to a full-length training program. Also of considerable importance is the fact that work sample tests seem to reduce adverse impact, particularly if the ratings concentrate on relevant job tasks.
From page 50...
... However, the direct link between assessment center behaviors and job behaviors might not be as clear as the link between motor work samples, for example, and job behaviors. Nonetheless, work sample evaluations can provide an additional source of criterion data that can be thought of as more objective and standardized than supervisory performance ratings.
From page 51...
... Howard, A 1983 Work samples and simulations in competency evaluations.
From page 52...
... Robertson, I.T., and R.S. Kandola Assessment and 1982 Work sample tests: validity, adverse impact, and applicant reaction.


This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More information on Chapter Skim is available.