Implementing evidence-based assessment and selection in organizations: A review and an agenda for future research

IF 3.9 1区心理学 Q2 MANAGEMENT

Organizational Psychology Review Pub Date : 2020-12-24 DOI:10.1177/2041386620983419

Marvin Neumann, A. Niessen, Rob R. Meijer

{"title":"Implementing evidence-based assessment and selection in organizations: A review and an agenda for future research","authors":"Marvin Neumann, A. Niessen, Rob R. Meijer","doi":"10.1177/2041386620983419","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In personnel- and educational selection, a substantial gap exists between research and practice, since evidence-based assessment instruments and decision-making procedures are underutilized. We provide an overview of studies that investigated interventions to encourage the use of evidence-based assessment methods, or factors related to their use. The most promising studies were grounded in self-determination theory. Training and autonomy in the design of evidence-based assessment methods were positively related to their use, while negative stakeholder perceptions decreased practitioners’ intentions to use evidence-based assessment methods. Use of evidence-based decision-making procedures was positively related to access to such procedures, information to use it, and autonomy over the procedure, but negatively related to receiving outcome feedback. A review of the professional selection literature showed that the implementation of evidence-based assessment was hardly discussed. We conclude with an agenda for future research on encouraging evidence-based assessment practice.","PeriodicalId":46914,"journal":{"name":"Organizational Psychology Review","volume":"11 1","pages":"205 - 239"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/2041386620983419","citationCount":"14","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Organizational Psychology Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/2041386620983419","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 14

Abstract

In personnel- and educational selection, a substantial gap exists between research and practice, since evidence-based assessment instruments and decision-making procedures are underutilized. We provide an overview of studies that investigated interventions to encourage the use of evidence-based assessment methods, or factors related to their use. The most promising studies were grounded in self-determination theory. Training and autonomy in the design of evidence-based assessment methods were positively related to their use, while negative stakeholder perceptions decreased practitioners’ intentions to use evidence-based assessment methods. Use of evidence-based decision-making procedures was positively related to access to such procedures, information to use it, and autonomy over the procedure, but negatively related to receiving outcome feedback. A review of the professional selection literature showed that the implementation of evidence-based assessment was hardly discussed. We conclude with an agenda for future research on encouraging evidence-based assessment practice.

查看原文本刊更多论文

在组织中实施基于证据的评估和选择:回顾和未来研究的议程

在人事和教育选择方面，研究与实践之间存在很大差距，因为基于证据的评估工具和决策程序没有得到充分利用。我们概述了调查干预措施的研究，以鼓励使用循证评估方法，或与使用相关的因素。最有希望的研究是基于自我决定理论的。基于证据的评估方法设计中的培训和自主权与它们的使用正相关，而负面的利益相关者感知降低了从业人员使用基于证据的评估方法的意图。循证决策程序的使用与获得此类程序、使用该程序的信息和程序自主权呈正相关，但与接收结果反馈呈负相关。对专业选择文献的回顾表明，循证评估的实施很少被讨论。最后，我们提出了鼓励循证评估实践的未来研究议程。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Organizational Psychology Review Multiple-

CiteScore

10.00

自引率

1.60%

发文量

期刊介绍： Organizational Psychology Review is a quarterly, peer-reviewed scholarly journal published by SAGE in partnership with the European Association of Work and Organizational Psychology. Organizational Psychology Review’s unique aim is to publish original conceptual work and meta-analyses in the field of organizational psychology (broadly defined to include applied psychology, industrial psychology, occupational psychology, organizational behavior, personnel psychology, and work psychology).Articles accepted for publication in Organizational Psychology Review will have the potential to have a major impact on research and practice in organizational psychology. They will offer analyses worth citing, worth following up on in primary research, and worth considering as a basis for applied managerial practice. As such, these should be contributions that move beyond straight forward reviews of the existing literature by developing new theory and insights. At the same time, however, they should be well-grounded in the state of the art and the empirical knowledge base, providing a good mix of a firm empirical and theoretical basis and exciting new ideas.