Quick Takes
Home
Complete archive of features and news articles, sample policies and procedures, assessments, and surveys.
Network and exchange ideas with other members in the forums or ask an expert in one of the hosted forums.
Access vendor directories, product case studies and showcases.
Read Best in Shows, view our conference calendar, read commentaries and take our news poll.
The Hot List
Blogs
Topic Channels
Comp, Benefits, Rewards
HR Management
Legal Insight
Recruiting and Staffing
Software and Technology
Training and Development
= Member Only
Workforce HR Jobs
Find A Job
Post A Job



Subscribe Now
Workforce Magazine
Subscriber Help
























= Member Only


Quick Takes: March 26, 2008
  

Ambiguity Equals ‘Carelessness,’ Employee Researchers Find


Companies are urged to arm their employees with knowledge to make better decisions about their often-competing job responsibilities.
By Garry Kranz
Comments 0 | Recommend 0

Knowledge Is Power: Employees with “high role ambiguity” in their jobs are apt to make more mistakes, largely because of carelessness and an inability to prioritize job tasks, say a pair of industrial psychologists at DePaul University. Professors Erich C. Dierdorff and Robert S. Rubin studied 203 workers in 73 occupations and uncovered wide variances in how people within the same job view their responsibilities.

Workers’ perceptions about their job requirements and performance have implications for job design, skills evaluation, employee training and performance management. “Not only is an understanding of work role requirements useful to human resource managers, but clarity of one’s role and responsibilities can greatly impact work motivation, satisfaction and performance of individual workers,” write Dierdorff and Rubin, who published their findings in a recent issue of Personnel Psychology.

Their study, which can be downloaded for a fee, examined two aspects of how employees rate their jobs. The first was carelessness, which occurs “when employees are more likely to think certain aspects of their jobs are more important than others, when in fact they are not.” The example used is an employee whose job does not afford interaction with co-workers or customers, yet who lists interpersonal skills as highly important. The employee thus is “being careless in providing an accurate judgment.”

The second aspect, which the authors term “discriminability,” refers to employees being unable to “make the fine-grain distinctions” between the value attached to the numerous skills required for a job.

The findings are a “clear signal that management needs to clarify work roles and provide training” to ensure employees have the knowledge to make the correct decisions, based on corporate goals.


Workforce Management contributing editor Garry Kranz is based in Richmond, Virginia. E-mail editors@workforce.com to comment.


< Previous Article
1 | 2 | 3 | 4
Index: Quick Takes — March 26, 2008

           
E-mail this document Printer-friendly version Write to the Editor Reprint Information

Reproductions and distribution of the above article are strictly prohibited. To order reprints and/or request permission to use the article in full or partial format, please contact our Reprint Sales Manager at (732) 723-0569.


Comments

Guidelines: Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. We will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. You are fully responsible for the content you post.



Related Topics









Copyright © 1995-2009 Crain Communications Inc.
All Rights Reserved. Terms of Use Privacy Statement