Search results

What does it mean to be a “smart” negotiator? Few scholars have paid much attention to this question, a puzzling omission given copious research suggesting that cognitive ability (the type of intelligence commonly measured by psychometric tests) predicts individual performance in many related contexts. In addition to cognitive ability, other definitions of intelligence (e.g., emotional intelligence) have been proposed that theoretically could influence negotiation outcomes. Aiming to stimulate renewed attention to the role of intelligence in negotiation, we develop theoretical propositions linking multiple forms of intelligence to information acquisition, decision making, and tactical choices in bargaining contexts. We outline measurement issues relevant to empirical work on this topic, and discuss implications for negotiation teaching and practice.

Recently, we (Judiesch, Schmidt, & Mount, 1992) concluded that the Schmidt et al. (1979) SDy estimation procedure results in downwardly biased estimates of utility. This conclusion led us to propose a modification of the Schmidt et al. method that involves estimating SDy as the product of estimates of the coefficient of variation (SDy/ Y) and an objective estimate of the average value of employee output (Y). The present article reviews the rationale underlying our conclusion that this modification of the Schmidt et al. method of estimating SDy results in more accurate estimates of SDy, and hence, utility.

This paper comprises a theoretical study of factors influencing the utility of organisational downsizing. Companies downsize in order to adapt to lower demand or as a means to improving efficiency, i e to improve their performance/cost ratio. With perfect information and no legal or ethical restrictions, management would remove employees with the lowest utility. This information is normally lacking and downsizing is instead based on a headcount or on total salary cost reduction. The efficiency of such measures will then be a function of the correlation between salary and utility. Different downsizing outcomes are calculated on the basis of different assumptions; some of these outcomes increase efficiency while others would probably lead to continued decline. Many companies are subject to legal restrictions such as Last In First Out tenure requirements. This leads on to an analysis of relationships among utility, salary and period of employment. Break‐even analyses are computed showing on what terms it would be worthwhilefor management to offer longterm employees early retirement.

This paper provides a quantitative review of the literature on the repercussions of idiosyncratic information on firms’ cost of equity (CoE) capital. In total, I review the results of 113 unique studies examining the CoE effects of information Quantity, Precision and Asymmetry. My results suggest that the association between firm-specific information and CoE is subject to moderate effects. First, the link between Quantity and CoE is moderated by disclosure types and country-level factors in that firms in comparatively weakly regulated countries tend to enjoy up to four times greater CoE benefits from more expansive disclosure—depending on the type of disclosure—than firms in strongly regulated markets. Second, a negative relationship between Precision and CoE is only significant in studies using non-accrual quality proxies for Precision and risk factor-based (RFB)/valuation model-based (VMB) proxies for CoE. Third, almost all VMB studies confirm the positive association between Asymmetry and CoE, but there is notable variation in the conclusions reached when ex post CoE measurers are used.

An alternative method of utility analysis based on tenure, rather than dollar value performance, is presented. The standard deviation of employees' tenure with an organisation becomes the individual differences parameter, rather than SDy, and mean dollar value performance (Y) provides the scaling onto dollars. Results suggest that the new model produces utility estimates that are not significantly different from the classic Brogden‐Cronbach‐Gleser model.

This paper examines both theoretically and empirically the application of utility theory to downsizing decisions. It is shown that residual efficiency after downsizing can differ greatly, depending on whether a company uses a headcount, utility or payroll reduction and that the correlations among employee age/period of job tenure, individual utility and salary all contribute to these differences. Companies are often restricted by legal and ethical considerations when deciding who will leave during downsizing. Using the above conceptual framework it is shown that companies can determine a financial break‐even point where it would be worthwhile to offer some categories of employees a severance package in order to have freedom of action during downsizing. Data are used from an empirical study of a large financial services company to illustrate the practical application of the model. It is concluded that only limited amounts of information in addition to that normally available to HR managers is required in order to apply the models developed in this study and that utility theory can make a valuable contribution to decision‐making in the downsizing process.

This study examines the role of personality and work experience in predicting two measures of job performance: Proficiency on the job tasks assigned to employees (task performance) and discretionary behaviors (e.g., helping) that may or may not be performed by employees (contextual performance). The two types of performance measures were shown to have different patterns of association with work experience and personality dimensions, such that personality was more predictive of contextual performance, while job experience was more predictive of task‐based performance. Noticeably, conscientiousness did not predict task‐based performance. Implications and limitations of the present study, as well as directions for future research, are discussed.

In the public sector, Training and Experience (T & E) exams assess prior experience and are one of the most often used methods for selecting job applicants. This study uses a KSA approach, where raters judge the quality of job relevant prior experience, not its duration or quantity. It was hypothesized that an additional rater and a consensus meeting between raters would increase reliability and validity.

T & E and supervisory ratings were obtained over a 12-year period for 166 candidates seeking promotion to a budget analyst position. Validity was measured by the correlation between T & E scores and supervisory ratings. Consensus was required only for T & E scores differing by a specific amount (hybrid consensus).

Intraclass reliability was 0.73, 0.84, and 0.95 in the one-rater, two-rater, and hybrid consensus conditions with each coefficient greater than the next (p < 0.05) showing the benefit of multiple raters and consensus for reliability. Validity was significant at 0.21, 0.26, and 0.251 for each rating condition, respectively (two-tail test; p < 0.01). Validity was greater in the two-rater condition than in the one-rater condition (one-tail test; p < 0.05). Consensus did not improve validity beyond that of two raters. For consensus T & Es (n=76), two raters improved validity (one-tail test; p < 0.05), moving from 0.112 to 0.231 but not reliability; consensus improved reliability (two-tail test; p < 0.05) but not validity.

There has been a vacuum in T & E research for close to 20 years. Validity data are difficult to obtain but critical for meta-analysis. T & Es showed validity. Use of two raters improved validity but consensus did not increase the gain.

We investigated the role of task and relationship conflict as mediators of the relationship between information sharing and group performance. We suggest that, in addition to the commonly studied effect of conflict on information sharing, the reverse causal direction is theoretically likely and relevant in today's business climate. Specifically, we hypothesize that information sharing will reduce both task and relationship conflict with beneficial effects on team performance in established groups. We also explore boundary conditions to these conflict‐reducing effects of information sharing, suggesting that the lower a group's task interdependence, the more information sharing reduces task conflict, and the lower a group's average general mental ability, the more information sharing reduces relationship conflict. Analysis of data from 38 groups supported our expectations, revealing the expected negative relationships between information sharing and both task and relationship conflict, as well as the expected moderating effects of task interdependence and general mental ability.

This paper presents the case for personnel systems based on maximizing the differential information gathered about individual abilities and their match to jobs. In the context of assignment to multiple jobs, such systems are shown to be more effective than those based on the currently dominant paradigm of maximizing predictive validity. The latter paradigm favours the measurement of general cognitive ability over multiple specific aptitudes. Recent differential approaches use computer simulation modelling of alternative hypothetical systems to evaluate potential efficiency. The paper reviews the theoretical background on the structure of human abilities which has led to these contrasting approaches to personnel system design, and presents evidence, based on the US Army selection and classification system, in support of the alternative approach. Individual test/aptitude profiles improve the efficiency of personnel selection and classification as well as academic, vocational and career counselling. They also provide a broader, potentially fairer definition of talent than a unidimensional indicator of cognitive ability, and a foundation for the design of learning and decision environments around learner and user profiles.