This paper addresses the issue of interpreting dollar value utility estimates using the Brogden utility equation. It shows that estimates of the standard deviation of job perfor Mance in dollars (SDy) must be compatible with the effect size measure in order to produce meaningful final utility estimates. With this interpretation of the utility estimates, it is argued that most existing SDy estimation methods would not produce accurate utility estimates of future cash flow.
Arnold, J.D., J.M. Rauschenberger, W.G. Soubel, and R.M. Guion, 1982, Validation and utility of a strength test for selecting steelworkers, Journal of Applied Psychology, 67, 5, October, 588–604.
2.
Bobko, P., R. Karren, and S.P. Kerkar, 1987, Systematic research needs for understanding supervisory‐based estimates of SDy in utility analysis, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 40, 1, August, 69–95.
3.
Boudreau, J.W., 1983a, Economic considerations in estimating the utility of human resource productivity improvement programs, Personnel Psychology, 36, 3, Autumn, 551–576.
4.
Boudreau, J.W., 1983b, Effects of employee flows or utility analysis of human resources productivity improvement programs, Journal of Applied Psychology, 68, 3, August, 396–407.
5.
Boudreau, J.W., 1984, Decision theory contribution to HRM research and practice, Industrial Relations, 23, 2, Spring, 198–217.
6.
Brogden, H.E., 1946, On the interpretation of the correlation coefficient as a measure of predictive efficiency, Journal of Educational Psychology, 37, 65–76.
7.
Brogden, H.E., 1949, When testing pays off, Personnel Psychology, 2, 171–183.
8.
Burke, M.J., and J.T. Frederick, 1984, Two modified procedures for estimating standard deviations in utility analyses, Journal of Applied Psychology, 69, 3, August, 482–489.
9.
Cascio, W.F., and J.R. Morris, 1990, A critical reanalysis of Hunter, Schmidt, and Coggin's (1988) “Problems and pitfalls in using capital budgeting and financial accounting techniques in assessing the utility of personnel programs”Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 4, August, 410–417.
10.
Cascio, W.F., and R.A. Ramos, 1986, Development and application of a new method for assessing job perfor Mance in behavioral/economic terms, Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 1, February, 20–28.
11.
Cronshaw, S.F., and R.A. Alexander, 1991, Why capital budgeting techniques are suited for assessing the utility of personnel programs: a reply to Hunter, Schmidt, and Coggin (1988), Journal of Occupational Psychology, 76, 3, June, 454–457.
12.
DeSimone, R.L., R.A. Alexander, and S.F. Cronshaw, 1986, Accuracy and reliability of SDy estimates in utility analysis, Journal of Occupational Psychology, 59, 2, June, 93–102.
13.
Eaton, N.K., H. Wing, and K.J. Mitchell, 1985, Alternative methods of estimating the dollar value of perfor Mance, Personnel Psychology, 38, 1, Spring, 27–40.
14.
Florin‐Thuma, B.C. and J.W. Boudreau, 1987, Perfor Mance feedback utility in a small organization: effects on organizational outcomes and managerial decision processes, Personnel Psychology, 40, 4, Winter, 693–713.
15.
Goldstein, I.L., 1986, Training in Organizations: Needs Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (Goldstein, CA, Brooks/Cole Publishing Co.) 2nd edition.
16.
Heneman, R.L., 1986, The relationship between supervisory ratings and results‐oriented measures of perfor Mance: a meta‐analysis, Personnel Psychology, 39, 4, Winter, 811–826.
17.
Hunter, J.E., F.L. Schmidt, and T.D. Coggin, 1988, Problems and pitfalls in using capital budgeting and financial accounting techniques in assessing the utility of personnel programs, Journal of Applied Psychology, 73, 3, August, 522–528.
18.
Judiesch, M.K., F.L. Schmidt, and J.E. Hunter, 1993, Has the problem of judgment in utility analysis been solved? Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 6, December, 903–911.
19.
Landy, F.J. and J.L. Farr, 1983, The Measurement of Work Perfor Mance: Methods, Theory, and Applications (Orlando, Florida, Academic Press).
20.
Nathan, B.R. and R.A. Alexander, 1988, A comparison of criteria for test validation: a meta‐analytic investigation, Personnel Psychology, 41, 3, Autumn, 517–535.
21.
Pearlman, K., F.L. Schmidt, and J.E. Hunter, 1980, Validity generalization results for tests used to predict job proficiency and training success in clerical occupations, Journal of Applied Psychology, 65, 4, August, 373–406.
22.
Raju, N.S., M.J. Burke, and J. Normand, 1990, A new approach for utility analysis, Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 1, February, 3–12.
23.
Schmidt, F.L. and J.E. Hunter, 1983, Individual differences in productivity: an empirical test of estimates derived from studies of selection procedure utility, Journal of Applied Psychology, 68, 3, August, 407–414.
24.
Schmidt, F.L., J.E. Hunter, and K. Pearlman, 1982, Assessing the economic impact of personnel programs on workforce productivity, Personnel Psychology, 35, 2, Summer, 333–347.
25.
Schmidt, F.L., J.E. Hunter, R.C. McKenzie, and T.W. Muldrow, 1979, Impact of valid selection procedure on work‐force productivity, Journal of Applied Psychology, 64, 6, December, 609–626.
26.
Schmidt, F.L., J.E. Hunter, A.N. Outerbridge, and M.H. Trattner, 1986, The economic impact of job selection methods on size, productivity, and payroll costs of the Federal work force: an empirically based demonstration, Personnel Psychology, 39, 1, Spring, 1–29.
