and Hunter meta-analytic review) is summarized in the next section of our
chapter. Guidelines for validation research and test use in general are provided
in the SIOP Principles ( 2003 ).
- 2 Validation of Test Use
The manner in which organizations proceed to develop and validate their selection
procedures has followed a relatively well-deWned set of steps that is enshrined in
scientiWc (AERA, APA, and NCME 1999 ; SIOP 2003 ) and legal guidelines (Uniform
Guidelines 1978 ). This process begins with a job analysis that seeks to deWne the
tasks required of job incumbents and the knowledge, skills, abilities, and other
characteristics (KSAOs) required for accomplishing those tasks eVectively. Infor-
mation regarding speciWc organizational objectives or work conditions that inXu-
ence the capability of job incumbents to do their jobs is also sought during the job
analysis. Armed with this information, selection experts develop or select measures
by which they can gauge the eVectiveness of applicants who seek to occupy these
jobs. After the measurement of applicant KSAOs and their subsequent perform-
ance, data regarding KSAOs and job performance measures is correlated to assess
the validity of the procedures. This information is also used to inform the imple-
mentation of the selection procedures and to determine their worth or utility to the
organization. This process has been described in numerous textbooks for decades
(e.g. Guion 1998 ; Ployhart et al. in press; Schmitt and Chan 1998 ), and the
eVectiveness of this decision-making process is well documented.
15.3 Developments in Selection
Decision-Making
.........................................................................................................................................................................................
In this chapter we attempt to describeWve developments during the last several
years that have extended this decision-making model or required adaptations of
this model to new circumstances and concerns. The following list comprises this set
of ‘new’ developments. First, increasing attention has been directed towards
determining the role of selection practices in overall organizational eVectiveness
(e.g. Huselid 1995 ) and the use of selection to further strategic organizational goals
(Boudreau and Ramstad 2003 ). This contrasts with earlier utility models (e.g.
Cascio 2000 ) that aggregated individual impact to assess organizational level
impact. Second, much work and writing on personnel selection has reconsidered
the criteria against which we validate measures of KSAOs. Campbell and his
302 neal schmitt and brian kim