The profile of the ‘Good Judge’ in HRM: A systematic review and agenda for future research |
| |
| Institution: | 1. Department of Psychology, Education and Child Studies, Erasmus University Rotterdam, The Netherlands;2. Lee Kong Chian School of Business, Singapore Management University, Singapore;1. College of Business, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, NM 88003, United States;2. College of Business, The University of Texas Permian Basin, Odessa, TX 79762, United States;3. School of Business,The University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS 66045-7585, United States;4. College of Business, The University of Texas Rio Grande Valley, Brownsville, TX 78520, United States;5. School of Business, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC 29208, United States;1. Department of Organization Studies, Tilburg University, Warandelaan 2, 5037 AB Tilburg, Netherlands;2. Business School, Trinity College Dublin, University of Dublin, College Green, Dublin 2, Ireland;3. Department of Organisation and Human Resource Management, ESCP Europe, Heubnerweg 8-10, D-14059 Berlin, Germany;1. Institute for Engaged Aging and Department of Psychology, Clemson University, United States;2. Department of Psychology, Clemson University, United States |
| |
| Abstract: | In light of the pivotal importance of judgments and ratings in human resource management (HRM) settings, a better understanding of the individual differences associated with being a good judge is sorely needed. This review provides an overview of individual difference characteristics that have been associated with the accurate judges in HRM. We review empirical findings over >80 years to identify what we know and do not know about the individual difference correlates of being an accurate judge. Overall, findings suggest that judges' cognitive factors show stronger and more consistent relationships with rating accuracy than personality-related factors. Specific intelligences in the social cognition domain, such as dispositional reasoning (complex understanding of traits, behaviors and a situation's potential to manifest traits into behaviors) show particular promise to help understanding what makes an accurate judge. Importantly, our review also highlights the scarcity of research on HRM context (selection vs. performance appraisal settings) and judges' motivation to distort ratings. To guide future research, we present a model that links assessor constructs to key processes required for accurate judgment and ratings in HRM contexts. The discussion suggests twenty questions for future work in this field. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
