Evaluación del desempeño en la Administración Pública del Principado de AsturiasAnálisis de las propiedades psicométricas

  1. Salgado Velo, Jesús Fernando
  2. Cabal Cifuentes, Ángel Luis
Zeitschrift:
Revista de psicología del trabajo y de las organizaciones = Journal of work and organizational psychology

ISSN: 1576-5962

Datum der Publikation: 2011

Ausgabe: 27

Nummer: 2

Seiten: 75-91

Art: Artikel

DOI: 10.5093/TR2011V27N2A1 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openOpen Access editor

Andere Publikationen in: Revista de psicología del trabajo y de las organizaciones = Journal of work and organizational psychology

Ziele für nachhaltige Entwicklung

Zusammenfassung

This article presents the results of three independent studies on the development and psychome- tric properties of the method of evaluating the performance of employees of Public Administration of the Principality of Asturias. Study 1 describes the development and selection of competencies to be assessed. For each of the three major dimensions of job performance, five competencies were identified that should be evaluated. Study 2 describes how we developed behaviorally-anchored rating scales for measuring competencies of task performance, contextual performance, and organizational performance. Study 3 examined reliability, construct validity and concurrent validity of performance appraisals. The results showed high reliability coefficients for both the dimensions and the overall performance assessment. An exploratory principal component analysis indicated the presence of two factors in which loaded (a) the evaluations of the immediate superiors and (b) external objective criteria, respectively. A confirmatory factor analysis showed that performance can be represented by a hierarchical model. Finally, external criteria and the ratings of managers showed to be correlated. The implications of the findings are commented on in the discussion.

Bibliographische Referenzen

  • Aamond, (1999). Applied Industrial/Organizational Psychology (3 a Ediciön). Belmont, CA: Wandsworth Publishing Company.
  • Aguinis, H. (2007). Performance management. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Prentice-Hall.
  • Aitken, L. R. (1980). Content validity and reliability of single items questionnaires. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 40, 955-959.
  • Bateman, D. T. y Organ, D. W. (1983). Job satisfaction and the good soldier: the relationship between affect and employee "citizenship". Academy of Management Journal, 26, 587-595.
  • Bennett, R. J., y Robinson, S. L. (2000). Development of a measure of workplace deviance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 349-360.
  • Bernardin, H. J., LaShells, M. B., Smith, P. C. y Alvares, K. M. (1979). Behavioral expectation scales: Effects of developmental procedures and formats. Journal of Applied Psychology, 61, 75-79.
  • Bernardin, H. J. y Smith, P. C. (1981). A clarification of some issues regarding the development and use of Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scales (BARS). Journal of Applied Psychology, 66, 458-463.
  • Borman, W. C. (2004). The concept of organizational citizenship. Current Direction in Psychological Science, 13, 238-241. (Pubitemid 40024477)
  • Borman, W. C. y Brusch, D. H. (1993). More progress toward a taxonomy of managerial performance requirements. Human Performance, 6, 1-22.
  • Borman, W. C., Bryant, R. H. y Dorio, J. (2010). The measurement of tasl performance as criteria in selection research. En J. L. Farr y N. T. Tippins (Eds.). Handbook of personnel selection (pp. 439-461). New York: Routlege.
  • Borman, W. C., Penner, L. A., Allen, T. D., y Motowidlo, S. (2001). Personality predictors of citizenship performance. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 9, 52-69.
  • Campbell, J. P. (1990). Modeling the performance prediction problem in industrial and organizational psychology. En M. D. Dunnette y L. M. Hough (Eds.). Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology: Vol. 1. (pp. 687-732). 2a ediciön. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologist Press.
  • Campbell, J. P., Gasser, M. B. y Oswald, F. L. (1996). The substantive nature of job performance variability. En K. R. Murphy (Ed). Individual differences and behavior in organizations (pp. 258-299). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass
  • Conway, J. (1999). Distinguishing contextual performance from task performance for managerial jobs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 3-13.
  • Dalal, R. S. (2005). A meta-analysis of the relationship between organizational citizenship behavior and counterproductive work behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 1241-1255. (Pubitemid 43011579)
  • Dorsey, D. W., Cortina, J. M. y Luchman, J. (2010). Adaptive and citizenship-related behaviors at work. En J. L. Farr y N. T. Tippins (Eds.). Handbook of personnel selection (pp. 463-487). New York: Routlege.
  • Fox, S. y Spector, P. E. (2005). Counterproductive work behavior: Investigations of actors and targets. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
  • Gruys, M. L. (2000). The dimensionality of deviant employee behavior in the workplace. Ph. D. dissertation, University of Minnesota. Retrieved August 7, 2008, from Dissertations y Theses: AyI database. (Publication No. AAT 9972966).
  • Gruys, M. L., Stewart, S. M. y Bowling, N. A. (2010). Choosing to report: Characteristics of employees who report the counterproductive work behavior of others. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 18, 439-446.
  • Gruys, M. L. y Sackett, P. R. (2003). Investigating the dimensionality of counterproductive work behavior. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 11, 30-42. (Pubitemid 36598491)
  • Hardigree, A. L. (2006). Meta-analysis of age and job performance relation: is job complexity a moderator? Master Arts Dissertation no publicada, Rice University.
  • Lawshe, C. H. (1975). A quantitative approach to content validity. Personnel Psychology, 28, 563-575.
  • Ley 7/2007, de 12 de abril, del Estatuto Básico del Empleado Público, BOE de 13 de Abril de 2007, pp. 16270-16299.
  • McCloy, R. A., Campbell, J. P. y Cudeck, R. (1994). A confirmatory test of a model of performance determinants. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 493-505.
  • McEvoy, G. M. y Cascio, W. F. (1989). Cumulative evidence of the relationship between employee age and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 11-17.
  • Motowidlo, S., Borman, W. C. y Schmit, M. J. (1997). A theory of individual differences in task and contextual performance. Human Performance, 10, 71-83. (Pubitemid 127530398)
  • Murphy, K. R. (1990). Job performance and productivity. En K. R. Murphy y F. E. Saal (Eds). Psychology in Organizations: Integrating science and practice (pp. 157-176). Hillsadle, N. J.: Erlbaum.
  • Murphy, K. R. (1982). Difficulties in the statistical control of halo. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67, 161-164.
  • Murphy, K. R., Jako, R. A. y Anhalt, R. L. (1993). Nature and consequences of Halo error: a critical analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 218-225.
  • Ng, T. y Feldman, D. C. (2010). Organizational tenure and job performance. Journal of Management, 36, 1220-1250.
  • Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory. (2a Ediciön). New York: McGraw-Hill.
  • Robinson, S. L. y Bennett, R. J. (1995). A typology of deviant workplace behaviors: A multidimensional scaling study. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 555-572.
  • Rotundo, M. y Spector, P. E. (2010). Counterproductive work behavior and withdrawal. En J. L. Farr y N. T. Tippins (Eds.). Handbook of personnel selection (pp. 489-511). New York: Routlege.
  • Sackett, P. R., Berry, C. M., Wiemann, S. A. y Laczo, R. M. (2006). Citizenship and counterproductive work behavior: Clarifying relationships between the two domains. Human Performance, 19, 441-464.
  • Sackett, P. R. y DeVore, C. J. (2001). Counterproductive behaviors at work. In N. Anderson, D. S. Ones, H. Sinangil y C. Viswesvaran (Eds.) Handbook of Industrial, Work, and Organizational Psychology: Vol. 1. (pp 144-164). London, United Kingdom: Sage.
  • Salgado, J. F., Anderson, N. y Hülsheger, U. R. (2010). Employee selection in Europe: Psychotechnics and the forgotten history of modern scientific employee selection. En J. L. Farr y N. T. Tippins (Eds.). Handbook of personnel selection (pp. 921-941). New York: Routlege.
  • Salgado, J. F., Moscoso, S. y Anderson, N. (2011). Personality and counterproductive behaviors at work. En
  • R. Tett y N. Christiansen (Eds). Handbook of personality at work. En prensa.
  • Smith, P. C. y Kendall, L. M. (1963). Retranslation of expectations: An approach to the construction of unambiguous anchors for ratings scales. Journal of Applied Psychology, 47, 149-155.
  • Smith, C. A., Organ, D. W. y Near, J. P. (1983). Organizational citizenship behavior: Its nature and antecedents. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68, 653-663.
  • Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Inc. (1987). Principles for the validation and use of the personnel selection procedures. College Park, MD: Author.
  • Waldman, D. A. y Avolio, B. J. (1986). Meta-analysis of age differences in job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 33-38.
Fuente de los datos: Dialnet