Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-c4f8m Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T10:51:20.397Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

How Special Are Executives? How Special Should Executive Selection Be? Observations and Recommendations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 January 2015

Deniz S. Ones  and
Stephan Dilchert
Deniz S. Ones*
Affiliation:
University of Minnesota
Stephan Dilchert*
Affiliation:
Baruch College, CUNY
*
Department of Psychology, University of Minnesota; E-mail: deniz.s.ones-1@tc.umn.edu, Address: Department of Psychology, University of Minnesota, 75 East River Road, Minneapolis, MN 55455
Department of Management, Zicklin School of Business, Baruch College, City University of New York, E-mail: stephan.dilchert@baruch.cuny.edu, Address: Department of Management, Box B9-240, Zicklin School of Business, Baruch College, One Bernard Baruch Way, New York, NY 10010
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Commentaries
Information
Industrial and Organizational Psychology , Volume 2 , Issue 2 , June 2009 , pp. 163 - 170
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology 2009 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Dilchert, S., & Ones, D. S. (2008). Personality and extrinsic career success: Predicting managerial salary at different organizational levels. Zeitschrift für Personalpsychologie, 7, 1–23.Google Scholar
ePredix. (2001). Global personality inventory technical manual. Minneapolis, MN: Author.Google Scholar
Ghiselli, E. E. (1973). The validity of aptitude tests in personnel selection. Personnel Psychology, 26, 461–477.Google Scholar
Hartcourt Assessment Inc. (2006). Watson-Glaser critical thinking appraisal short form—updated normative information. Retrieved November 30, 2008, from www.pearsonassess.com/hai/Images/dotCom/HTC/WG/NormInformationShort.pdf.Google Scholar
Hollenbeck, G. P. (2009). Executive selection— What's right … and what's wrong. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 2, 130–143.Google Scholar
Hough, L. M., Ones, D. S., & Viswesvaran, C. (1998, April). Personality correlates of managerial performance constructs. Poster session presented at the 8th Annual Conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Dallas, TX.Google Scholar
Hunter, J. E. (1981). False premises underlying the 1978 Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures: The myth of test invalidity . Paper presented to the Personnel Testing Council of Metropolitan Washington, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Hunter, J. E., & Schmidt, F. L. (1990). Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting error and bias in research findings. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Judge, T. A., Colbert, A. E., & Ilies, R. (2004). Intelligence and leadership: A quantitative review and test of theoretical propositions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 542–552.10.1037/0021-9010.89.3.542Google Scholar
Management Psychology Group. (2005). Business Check List technical manual. Atlanta, GA: Author.Google Scholar
Ones, D. S., Dilchert, S., Viswesvaran, C., & Judge, T. A. (2007). In support of personality assessment in organizational settings. Personnel Psychology, 60, 995–1027.Google Scholar
Ones, D. S., Dilchert, S., Viswesvaran, C., & Salgado, J. F. (in press). Cognitive abilities. In Farr, J. L. & Tippins, N. (Eds.), Handbook of employee selection. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Ones, D. S., & Viswesvaran, C. (2003). Job-specific applicant pools and national norms for personality scales: Implications for range-restriction corrections in validation research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 570–577.10.1037/0021-9010.88.3.570Google Scholar
Ones, D. S., Viswesvaran, C., & Dilchert, S. (2005). Cognitive ability in personnel selection decisions. In Evers, A., Voskuijl, O., & Anderson, N. (Eds.), Handbook of selection, pp. 143–173. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Ones, D. S., Viswesvaran, C., & Schmidt, F. L. (1993). Comprehensive meta-analysis of integrity test validities: Findings and implications for personnel selection and theories of job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 679–703.Google Scholar
Rubenzer, S. J., Faschingbauer, T. R., & Ones, D. S. (2000). Assessing the U.S. presidents using the revised NEO Personality Inventory. Assessment, 7, 403–420.10.1177/107319110000700408Google Scholar
Sackett, P. R., & Ostgaard, D. J. (1994). Job-specific applicant pools and national norms for cognitive ability tests: Implications for range restriction corrections in validation research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 680–684.Google Scholar
Salgado, J. F., Anderson, N., Moscoso, S., Bertua, C., De Fruyt, F., & Rolland, J. P. (2003). A meta-analytic study of general mental ability validity for different occupations in the European Community. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 1068–1081.Google Scholar
Wonderlic Personnel Test Inc. (1998). Wonderlic Personnel Test and Scholastic Level Exam user's manual. Libertyville, IL: Wonderlic Personnel Test, Inc.Google Scholar