Intro -- Title Page -- Copyright -- Contents -- Preface -- Prologue -- The Beginning -- The Wild West, 1988-1995 -- The Second Wave, from Boom to Bust, 1996-2000 -- New Century, Same Problems, 2000-2008 -- The Rising, 2008-Present -- Booming in the Burbs -- Hauling Medals and Firing Up Competition -- Of Brewers, Brewers Guilds, Beer Geeks and Beer Fests -- The Future -- Selected Bibliography -- About the Author.
Zugriffsoptionen:
Die folgenden Links führen aus den jeweiligen lokalen Bibliotheken zum Volltext:
This paper determines the effectiveness of a learning process model in the prediction of team performance. The team performance of 19 teams was objectively measured by using a "first past the post" criterion after completion of a demanding exercise. Performance scores were predicted by means of Honey and Mumford's learning styles questionnaire. Results indicated that a model based on team learning is predictive of team success and that team members' scores should be averaged to best predict performance. In comparison, Belbin's team role questionnaire was not predictive of team performance.
Purpose – Maverickism is the tendency of an individual to be socially competent, creative, goal focussed, risk-taking and disruptive. Previous research with the five-factor model (FFM) shows that individuals high in maverickism exhibit both functional and dysfunctional tendencies. The purpose of this paper is to compare and contrast the descriptive FFM with the process-oriented hybrid model of learning in personality (HMLP), in the prediction of maverickism.
Design/methodology/approach – Employing a cross-sectional design with 490 full-time workers the authors use the NEO-International Personality Item Pool and the Learning Styles Profiler to examine differences in the FFM and HMLP in the prediction of maverickism.
Findings – Results with the FFM, identify extraversion, openness and (low) agreeableness as significant predictors of maverickism. All factors of the HMLP (except conscientious learning) significantly predict maverickism. Hierarchal regression analysis shows that the HMLP accounts for an additional 21 percent of variance in maverickism over and above that of the FFM.
Research limitations/implications – The authors have tested and built theory by identifying not only what predicts maverickism, but also how the learning processes of the HMLP interrelate to predict maverickism.
Practical implications – Managers interested in developing the maverick potential of their employees will find this study useful because it identifies what to look for in maverick workers.
Social implications – Individuals high in maverickism have the potential for radical innovation. Understanding how to identify and develop these individuals may lead to larger societal benefits.
Originality/value – The authors are the first to use the HMLP to test maverickism. The research highlights the importance of both personality and learning processes in maverickism.
PurposeThis study seeks to investigate human resource practitioners' attitudes and beliefs about work related psychological tests. The purpose was to look at the structure and correlates of those beliefs.Design/methodology/approachIn all, 255 practitioners from human resource and related disciplines completed a 64‐item questionnaire on their attitudes to, and beliefs about, work‐related psychological tests.FindingsOverall, the participants were positive about the validity and hence usefulness of tests. Factor analysis suggested that attitudes to tests fell into four easily identifiable factors (Test complexity, Practical application, Bias, and Usefulness of psychological tests). It was found that all four factors were predicted by age or educational qualifications or both.Research limitations/implicationsThe study had a restricted sample of test users. It would be interesting to test a bigger and more representative sample of those in HR, training and coaching and get more specific details on which tests they used, why those particular tests and how they used the data they provide.Originality/valueThe aim of this study is to investigate whether practitioners generally find psychological tests in general useful, what aspects of psychological tests are most valued and what aspects are least liked. It also set out to determine whether the perceived scepticism toward, or enthusiasm for, psychological tests could be predicted by test user experience, and test user academic qualifications. Whist some survey studies have been interested in expert opinion, this study looked at practitioners from HR and related disciplines.
AbstractObjective: The aim of this article is to define and validate the "system is broken" index. The index measures anti‐establishment attitudes cross‐nationally.Methods: Using survey data from 25 countries, we test the reliability of the system is broken index and then demonstrate its convergent and divergent validity.Results: The results reveal that the system is broken index is a reliable and valid measure capturing perceptions that the political system, in any given country, is broken and is not working for the average person. The index predicts related attitudes (nativism and populism) and provides stable estimates of anti‐establishment attitudes over time.Conclusions: The system is broken index helps to predict the conditions that give rise to anti‐establishment candidates and populist movements. Tracking the measure across three decades provides unique insights into the challenges confronting contemporary politics, including the rise of populism movements.
ObjectiveIn this article, we describe the development of a Nativism Index and evaluate its validity in the U.S. context, a global sample, and over time. Our overall objective is to establish the Nativism Index as a valid and reliable measure of nativism for use in subsequent research.MethodUsing survey data from Ipsos Public Affairs in the United States and from the Ipsos Global Advisor for our global sample, we test the convergent and discriminate validity and reliability of the Nativism Index.ResultsThe Nativism Index is correlated with but clearly distinct from related concepts, including populism, authoritarianism, and fear of others. The Nativism Index is also predictive of support for Donald Trump in the United States and UKIP in the United Kingdom.ConclusionOverall, our findings suggest that the Nativism Index represents a robust measure with strong internal consistency and high convergent and divergent validity in both U.S. and global samples.
