Examining regional variability in work ethic within Mexico: Individual difference or shared value.

Despite the acceptance of work ethic as an important individual difference, little research has examined the extent to which work ethic may reflect shared environmental or socio-economic factors. This research addresses this concern by examining the influence of geographic proximity on the work ethic experienced by 254 employees from Mexico, working in 11 different cities in the Northern, Central and Southern regions of the country. Using a sequence of complementary analyses to assess the main source of variance on seven dimensions of work ethic, our results indicate that work ethic is most appropriately considered at the individual level.

Gender and perceptions of leadership effectiveness: a meta-analysis of contextual moderators.

Despite evidence that men are typically perceived as more appropriate and effective than women in leadership positions, a recent debate has emerged in the popular press and academic literature over the potential existence of a female leadership advantage. This meta-analysis addresses this debate by quantitatively summarizing gender differences in perceptions of leadership effectiveness across 99 independent samples from 95 studies. Results show that when all leadership contexts are considered, men and women do not differ in perceived leadership effectiveness. Yet, when other-ratings only are examined, women are rated as significantly more effective than men. In contrast, when self-ratings only are examined, men rate themselves as significantly more effective than women rate themselves. Additionally, this synthesis examines the influence of contextual moderators developed from role congruity theory (Eagly & Karau, 2002). Our findings help to extend role congruity theory by demonstrating how it can be supplemented based on other theories in the literature, as well as how the theory can be applied to both female and male leaders. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2014 APA, all rights reserved).

Does human capital matter? A meta-analysis of the relationship between human capital and firm performance.

Theory at both the micro and macro level predicts that investments in superior human capital generate better firm-level performance. However, human capital takes time and money to develop or acquire, which potentially offsets its positive benefits. Indeed, extant tests appear equivocal regarding its impact. To clarify what is known, we meta-analyzed effects drawn from 66 studies of the human capital-firm performance relationship and investigated 3 moderators suggested by resource-based theory. We found that human capital relates strongly to performance, especially when the human capital in question is not readily tradable in labor markets and when researchers use operational performance measures that are not subject to profit appropriation. Our results suggest that managers should invest in programs that increase and retain firm-specific human capital.

In the eyes of the beholder: A non-self-report measure of workplace deviance.

Because employees may be reluctant to admit to performing deviant acts, the authors of this study reexamined the commonly used self-report measure of workplace deviance developed by R. J. Bennett and S. L. Robinson (2000). Specifically, the self-report measure was modified into a non-self-report measure based on multiple other-reported assessments to address methodological concerns with self-reported information regarding deviant workplace behaviors. The authors assessed the psychometric properties of this new measure by first conducting an exploratory factor analysis, which indicated a 3-factor structure (production deviance, property deviance, and personal aggression). Subsequent confirmatory factor analysis on a different sample verified these findings. Taken together, the results suggest that the content and psychometric qualities of this non-self-report measure of workplace deviance closely represent S. L. Robinson and R. J. Bennett's (1995) original typology of workplace deviance. The potential usefulness of this measure in organizational studies is discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2009 APA, all rights reserved).

El impacto de la diversidad de valores en los equipos sobre las variables de proceso y el desempeño de la tarea / Impact of value diversity among team members on team process and task performance

Este estudio analiza el impacto de la diversidad de valores entre los integrantes de los equipos sobre un conjunto de variables de proceso, así como sobre dos tareas con diferentesdemandas de interacción social. En particular, se analiza el efecto de la diversidad de valores sobre el conflicto en la tarea y en las relaciones, la cohesión y la autoeficacia grupal. Utilizando un simulador de trabajo en equipo y una muestra de 22 equipos de entre cinco y siete individuos,se comprobó que la diversidad en valores en un equipo, influye de forma directa sobre las variables de proceso y sobre la tarea que demanda baja interacción social, mientras que cuandola tarea requiere alta interacción social, la relación entre la diversidad de valores sobre el desempeño, se ve mediada por las variables de proceso. Se proponen algunas acciones quepermitirían poner en práctica los resultados de esta investigación en el contexto organizacional.

This study investigates the impact of value diversity among team members on team process and performance criteria on two tasks of differing social interaction demands. Specifically, thecriteria of interest included task conflict, relationship conflict, cohesion, and team efficacy and task performance on two tasks demanding different levels of social interaction. Utilizing a teamwork simulator and a sample comprised of 22 teams of five to seven individuals, it was demonstrated that value diversity directly impacts both task performance and process criteria on the task demanding low social interaction. Meanwhile, in the task requiring high social interaction, value diversity related to task performance via the mediating effects of team processes. Some specific actions are proposed in order to apply the results of this research in the daily context of organizations.

Further evidence for the validity of assessment center dimensions: a meta-analysis of the incremental criterion-related validity of dimension ratings.

This study investigates the incremental variance in job performance explained by assessment center (AC) dimensions over and above personality and cognitive ability. The authors extend previous research by using meta-analysis to examine the relationships between AC dimensions, personality, cognitive ability, and job performance. The results indicate that the 7 summary AC dimensions postulated by W. Arthur, Jr., E. A. Day, T. L. McNelly, & P. S. Edens (2003) are distinguishable from popular individual difference constructs and explain a sizeable proportion of variance in job performance beyond cognitive ability and personality.

Expanding the criterion domain? A quantitative review of the OCB literature.

The authors investigate the construct validity of the organizational citizenship behavior (OCB)-task performance distinction by providing a quantitative review of the OCB literature. The authors extend previous meta-analytic reviews of the OCB literature by (a) using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to investigate the dimensionality of OCB, (b) using CFA to examine the distinction between OCB and task performance, and (c) examining the relationship between a latent OCB factor and task performance and attitudinal variables. Results support a single factor model of OCB that is distinct from, albeit strongly related to, task performance. In addition, results show that OCB consistently relates more strongly to attitudes than does task performance and shares a modest amount of variance with attitudinal correlates beyond task performance.

A meta-analytic evaluation of the impact of dimension and exercise factors on assessment center ratings.

Two recent reviews have attempted to summarize findings quantitatively regarding assessment center (AC) construct-related validity (i.e., Lance, Lambert, Gewin, Lievens, & Conway, 2004; Lievens & Conway, 2001). Unlike these previous studies, which reanalyzed individual multitrait-multimethod (MTMM) matrices from previously published research, the authors recoded and combined past matrices into a single MTMM matrix. This matrix, comprised of 6 dimensions each measured by 6 exercises, was then analyzed, providing a more generalizable set of results. Both dimensions and exercises were found to contribute substantially to AC ratings. Specific dimensions (i.e., communication, influencing others, organizing and planning, and problem solving) appeared more construct valid than others (i.e., consideration/awareness of others and drive). Implications for AC design and practice are discussed.

Assessing measurement equivalence across rating sources: a multitrait-multirater approach.

Research examining the structure of multisource performance ratings has demonstrated that ratings are a direct function of both who is doing the rating (rating source) as well as what is being rated (performance dimension). A separate line of research has focused on the extent to which performance ratings are equivalent across sources. To date no research has examined the measurement equivalence of multisource ratings within the context of both dimension and rating source direct effects on ratings. We examine the impact of both performance dimension and rating source as well as the degree of measurement equivalence across sources. Results indicate that (a) the impact of the underlying performance dimension is the same across rating sources, (b) the impact of rating source is substantial and only slightly smaller than the impact of the underlying performance dimension, and (c) the impact of rating source differs substantially depending on the source.