Differentiating performance components across military occupations is critical to developing assessments and other applications for matching people to occupations in the military. However, identifying occupation-specific performance components is challenging and resource intensive. The current paper summarizes different methods the services use to define and identify occupation-specific performance components. The paper concludes with recommendations and future directions for advancing the military's needs for information and data on occupation-specific performance components.

The influence of work interests on employee behavior is often misunderstood. Accordingly, the potential of work interest measures to improve "high stakes" employee decision-making has been grossly underestimated. One organization that has taken work interests seriously however, is the U.S. military. The purpose of this article is threefold: (a) to summarize the rich history of military-sponsored research on work interests for employee selection and classification, (b) to highlight recent advances in work interest measurement from military-sponsored research, and (c) to outline the way forward for advancing work interest theory and measurement.

Imagine you have just received your Ph.D. in industrial–organizational (I–O) psychology and applied for a job at a consulting firm as a personnel selection specialist. As part of the screening process, you complete a work sample and a structured interview to assess elements of your declarative knowledge (DK) and procedural knowledge and skill (PKS)—primary determinants of job performance (Campbell, McCloy, Oppler, & Sager, 1993). For the work sample, you must determine how a network intrusion occurred using snapshots of a computer system taken over the last several days and a report of recent network traffic from the host’s Internet service provider. For the structured interview, you are asked to discuss (a) a situation in which you had to recover data from a hard drive that was corrupted for an unknown reason and pinpoint the source of that corruption, (b) the actions you took in response, and (c) the results of your actions. For both assessments, judges rate your responses on behaviorally anchored rating scales designed to reflect your skill at executing—and

For many organizations, internal executive development programs represent the best and most viable solution to meeting their executive talent needs. Although considerable time and resources are spent on executive development programs, many of these initiatives produce mixed results. This review examines the best practices that differentiate successful from unsuccessful programs.

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.

: Faced with a difficult recruiting environment, the Army moved to increase the cap on recruiting bonuses from its current maximum of $20k to $40K. To understand the personnel management implications of raising the bonus cap, the current study estimated its projected impact on Army accessions, specifically applicants' job training and term-of-service (TOS) choices. Using an empirically-based Job Choice Model (JCM), based on actual applicant choice data taken from REQUEST transactions for the first quarter of FY 2005 (n = 18,803), we estimated the model and then simulated applicants' MOS-TOS choices under the existing bonus cap of $20k and a raised bonus cap of $40K. Results of our simulations indicated that the raised bonus cap could increase accessions, particularly among higher quality applicants, to higher priority MOS, about 8-10%, on average, and to longer TOS by roughly 12-17%. At the same time, however, accessions to lower priority MOS are projected to drop about 2%. For Army personnel policy researchers, the methodology, estimates and results of the Job Choice Modeling (JCM) could be used in future efforts to model the impact of bonus policy on Army applicants' enlistment behavior.

: This report summarizes an effort to identify the attributes needed by Air Force officers to meet the leadership requirements of the 21st century and establish the best and most efficient way to assess those attributes. Specifically, the report examined the effectiveness of current officer selection systems and practices used by the Air Force Reserve Officer Training Corps (AFROTC) and Officer Training School (OTS) programs. The report also examined alternatives to the attributes and measures currently used to seek ways to enhance assessment and selection of officer talent. The findings of the report are mixed. The current selection system has areas of weakness that could be improved. However, it also appears that in some instances viable alternative procedures may not be available. Overall the report recommends adjusting the various selection systems to one overall formal and programmatic system that can be sustained and linked with future needs and deliver a return on investment that will benefit the overall Air Force.

Abstract : To select and classify recruits to entry-level jobs, the Army employs nine Aptitude Area (AA) composites that are derived from the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB). Effective January 2002, the Army adopted an "interim" set of nine AA composites based on empirically estimated weights for a seven ASVAB test battery. Zeidner, Johnson, and colleagues had developed these "Interim" composites as part of ongoing research into improved military classification systems. The purpose of the present study was to independently replicate and document - as a prerequisite for subsequent evaluation - the Zeidner, Johnson, and colleagues' method, and previously reported results, for the 9,17, and 150 composites comprising their proposed classification system. Following Zeidner, Johnson, and colleagues' method, the present study successfully reproduced the 9, 17, and 150 composites. These findings support the operational use of the 9 "interim" composites, as well as the use of the 9/171150 composites in future research and policy analysis evaluating the potential of the proposed two-tiered classification system to substantially improve Army-wide classification and assignment.