Self-Assessment and Planned Change of Placement and Career Services Center

In the 1990s, college and university career services and placement units face many challenges which may influence their success including (a) increased budgetary constraints, (b) changing student demographics, (c) increased availability of computer technologies, (d) new service delivery models, and (e) changing employer recruitment practices. In an effort to address these issues and examine its role within the university (Roth, 1994), the Placement and Career Information Center (PCIC) at Central Michigan University undertook a program of applied research, self-assessment and planned change. The purpose of this article is to briefly report our experiences in conducting this program of applied research. The assessment strategy is presented in the first part of this report. Next, the methods used to collect data and assessment, sampling procedures and response rates are described. Following this, highlights of the assessment results are presented including a summary of some changes already made and those planned for the future. The results of this study are presented in detail in Adams, et at. (1994)

The Employment Interview as a Sociometric Selection Technique

Argues that the employment interview continues to be used because it serves organizational functions other than the prediction of job performance. A review of research on the interview suggests that it is used by organizations as a form of sociometric selection; 3 features of the traditional interview give it a sociometric quality. The use of sociometric techniques to diagnose, restructure, and form new groups can benefit an organization; a faculty job interview process illustrates the group nature of the process. Although the employment interview can allow the organization to experience the benefits associated with sociometric selection, including increased job satisfaction and communication, this type of selection can also be dysfunctional (e.g., by leading to a lack of diversity in the organization)

Managers’ Beliefs About the Glass Ceiling: Interpersonal and Organizational Factors

The glass ceiling refers to the difficulty of women trying to be promoted into the top management levels. The present study examined managers\u27 potential explanations, implicit or explicit, for why women rarely reach the top hierarchical levels in their own organization. Among 685 managers at a large Midwestern insurance company, a model was supported in which beliefs about interpersonal and situational variables in the organization were related to the perception that men and women were treated differently overall, which, in turn, was related to the belief that a glass ceiling existed. The model was not different for male and female managers, but women tended to perceive that each element of the model existed to a greater extent than men did

Type A as a Moderator of Stressors and Job Complexity: A Comparison of Achievement Strivings and Impatience-Irritability

This study examined two components (achievement strivings and impatience-irritability) of the Type A Behavior Pattern as moderators of job stressors and job complexity on health and job satisfaction. It was predicted that achievement strivings would moderate the impact of job stressors and impatience-irritability would impact responses to job complexity. Data from 525 employed adults provided mixed support for the moderator hypotheses. Relations between job stressors and both health and job satisfaction were strongest among employees reporting high levels of achievement strivings. Impatience-irritability had no moderating effect. For job complexity, only one moderator effect was found. Mental demands were positively related to job satisfaction among those reporting low levels of impatience-irritability. Implications of these findings are discussed

A Comparison of Incident-based and Scale Measures of Work Stressors

Occupational stress researchers have often questioned whether scale measures of work-related stressors accurately reflect the day-to-day experiences of employees. As an alternative to such measures, some have suggested the use of qualitative measures. Unfortunately, however, there have been no direct comparisons of these two measurement methods. In the present study, female employees (n = 151) were asked to complete scale measures of three common work stressors, strains, and self-esteem. Stressors were also measured using a qualitative methodology based on critical incidents. Results indicated good convergence between stressors measured by these two methods, although there was some indication that order effects may have led to method bias in the qualitative procedure. Both sets of measures explained a significant amount of variance in strains, although the scale measures explained more. Only the stressors measured by scales were related to self-esteem, suggesting that these may be more influenced by dispositions than qualitative measures. Implications of these findings for occupational stress research are discussed