A comparison of global judgment vs. task oriented approaches to job classification

PAUL R. SACKETT, EDWIN T. CORNELIUS, THEODORE J. CARRON

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

20 Scopus citations

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to determine the extent to which direct judgments of similarity by supervisors and incumbents could provide the same job classification results as a more elaborate job analysis procedure involving measures of task overlap among jobs. To accomplish this, 8 foreman jobs in a chemical processing plant were analyzed and compared on 237 task statements. In addition, 15 foremen incumbents and 17 supervisors evaluated the similarities among the same 8 foremen jobs in a paired comparisons rating task. The task‐oriented job analysis required hundreds of man‐hours to complete; the rating task took 15 minutes. Results using hierarchical cluster analysis and multidimensional scaling analysis revealed that the global judgments and the task‐oriented data led to identical conclusions. Also, it was found that incumbent ratings produced the same results as ratings from supervisors. Uses, advantages, and disadvantages of the procedure are outlined.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)791-804
Number of pages14
JournalPersonnel Psychology
Volume34
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - 1981

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'A comparison of global judgment vs. task oriented approaches to job classification'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this