Saif Khan

10/03/2016
6th Period
Track Hours Reflection #2 (9-16)
Hours 9 10: For the first two hours of my second set of track work, I read a meta-analysis
that analyzed over 70 studies concerning employees beliefs about how much an
organization cares about their contributions. The article is titled, Perceived Organizational
Support: A Review of the Literature and is in total 17 pages. The reason this article took me
two hours to read was because this is an article that covers a wide range of subtopics within
the field of perceived organizational support. The article includes everything from the
organizational support theory to the antecedents of POS. It also details the methodology and
gives in depth analysis on how and why certain results were agreed upon. Additionally, the
article included tables which studied characteristics and construct measures which took me
a while to analyze because it included statistics from every study compiled in the metaanalysis and had eight categories of numerical data that I had to analyze and compare with
the others. This was probably the most important article I read on POS because it gave me a
far greater understanding of the way in which I/O psychologists conduct their research and
come to conclusions. The article mostly reviewed the antecedents to POS including, the
concept of fairness and supervisor support. However, it showed how the authors only used
studies that measured at least three of the same variables and had very little self bias.
Because this meta-analysis showed the way in which they conduct research and isolate
variables it helped me come to terms with why things in I/O psychology are the way they are
and led me to have a far better understanding of the antecedents towards POS and some of
the benefits.

Hours 11 12: The next two hours of my second set of track work came from the Society
for Human Resource Management (SHRM) and the Society for Industrial and Organizational
Psychology (SIOP) white paper series which provides practitioner oriented reviews of

evidence-based practices. This article is titled, Optimizing Perceived Organizational Support

to Enhance Employee Engagement and is 22 pages. This article took me two hours to read
because it discussed eight complex concepts which I had to break down and understand
each. The article also included at least five figures that I had to analyze. And much like my
other reading, this was an example heavy article which made me curious and forced me to
do further research upon the references. This article was an integral component for me to
understand the main tactics that enhance perceived organizational support. One of the
concepts in the article that sparked my interest was beginning organizational support prior
to the start of employment through supportive interviews. Not only did this article help in
preparation for my infographic, it also helped me decide another subset of I/O psychology
that I want to study known as structured interviews.
Hours 13 16: For my last four hours of my second block of track work, I decided to switch
my focus from POS to my next sub topic, structured interviews. In order to build a strong
foundation for my next subtopic and have a reliable source that I can use for my next timed
writing, I decided to read literature upon 20 years of empirical data that has been
accumulated and condensed into eight main subtopics under structured interviews. The
article is titled, The Structured Employment Interview: Narrative and Quantitative Review of
the Research Literature and was a total of 52 pages. The reason this article took me four
hours to read was because it had frequent research questions that it would ask the readers
and I would take time to answer the question in depth. Additionally, there were tables that I
had to analyze including one on structural components of an interview and their
effectiveness. I decided to slowly read this article rather than skim through it quickly
because this is my foundation for my next sub topic. Also, this article made me become very
interested in this sub topic because it gives me a better understanding of both personnel
psychology and I/O psychology.

Source D

Rhoades, Linda, and Robert Eisenberger. "Perceived Organizational Support: A Review

of the Literature." Journal of Applied Psychology 87.4 (2002): 698-714. Web. 25 Sept.

2016.
The article is a meta-analysis that reviews over 70 studies regarding POS. Also, both
of the authors, Linda Rhoades and Robert Eisenberger, are professors from the

University of Delaware.
My mentor, Mr. Presson, sent me this article.
The intended audience of this article are the upper level managers and supervisors.
Because of the norm of reciprocity, employees have the moral obligation to favorably
give back to the organization. And after looking at the meta-analysis there are three
main things which employees want to receive: fairness, supervisor support, and
organizational rewards. These three concepts are the main ways in which employers
can increase perceived organizational support. Additionally, the methodology of the
article was that it used articles with at least three of the same antecedents or
variables. Also, when POS increases, employees become more dedicated to the

organization and involved. It is shown through displaying positive job attitudes.

Quotes:
o Positive affectivity might lead to expansive and friendly behaviors, which
would cause the employee to make a favorable impression on others and
would result in more effective working relationships with coworkers and
o

supervisors.
POS should increase performance of standard job activities and actions
favorable to the organization that go beyond assigned responsibilities.

According to George and Brief (1992), such extra role activities include aiding
fellow employees, taking actions that protect the organization from risk,
offering constructive suggestions, and gaining knowledge and skills that are
o

beneficial to the organization.

Because supervisors act as agents of the organization, having responsibility
for directing and evaluating subordinates performance, employees view their
supervisors favorable or unfavorable orientation toward them as indicative of
the organizations support (Eisenberger et al., 1986; Levinson, 1965).
Additionally, employees understand that supervisors evaluations of
subordinates are often conveyed to upper management, further contributing
to employees association of supervisor support with POS.

Source E

Eisenberger, Robert, Glenn P. Malone, and William D. Presson. "Optimizing Perceived

Organizational Support to Enhance Employee Engagement." SHRM-SIOP Science of

HR Series (2016): 1-22. Web. 28 Sept. 2016.

The journal is a white paper that provides practitioner oriented reviews of evidencebased research on leading I/O Psychology topics by the Society for Human Resource
Management and Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology. The journal is
written by Robert Eisenberger, a professor at the University of Houston, Glenn P.
Malone and William D. Presson, both doctoral candidates from the University of

Houston.
My mentor, Mr. Presson, sent me this article.
The intended audience of this article are the upper level managers and supervisors.
Todays changing work environment is filled with lack of trust between the employer
and the employee and job uncertainty. Employers fail to realize how important it is to
establish and long lasting bond between themselves and their employees because it
will eventually breed positive discretionary behavior. POS is the way in which an
employee measures their level of importance within the organization. In order to
keep those levels high, the article discusses a few main things that will increase POS.
One of the main things that can increase POS is by implementing a top down process.
The corporation should have training programs for current leaders in order to change
their mentality about lower level employees. The training programs could treat them
how to be supportive. And the article talks about how an organization can begin
organizational support before employment through supportive interviewing.

Quotes:
o Although job interviews often need to deal realistically with unpleasant as
well as favorable aspects of the job to prevent later unpleasant shocks,
interviewers can promote anticipated organizational support by setting
applicants at ease by acting in a courteous, friendly and respectful manner.
Moreover, to display fairness, interviewers should pay careful attention to
what applicants have to say, allow them to have full opportunity to discuss
o

their strengths and answer questions they may have.

Based on the norm of reciprocity (Gouldner, 1960), supervisors who
perceived that they had a supportive workgroup were found to be more
inclined to treat the workgroup more favorably. As a result, subordinates rated
their supervisors as providing more caring leadership. Moreover, the
supported supervisors reported being more satisfied with their jobs and

showed higher levels of performance.

Research suggests three useful ways to promote justice perceptions: (1)
rewards and resources should be distributed fairly across employees and the
rationale for the ways they are distributed should be effectively
communicated; (2) employees should be provided with opportunities for
active involvement in the development and application of organizational
procedures and policies; and (3) supervisors and other representatives of the
organization should treat employees with respect and sensitivity.

Source F

Levashina, Julia, Christopher J. Hartwell, Frederick P. Morgeson, and Michael A.

Campion. "The Structured Employment Interview: Narrative and Quantitative Review
of the Research Literature." Personnel Psychology 67.1 (2013): 241-93. Web. 1 Oct.

2016.
This journal is meta-analytic review and content analysis upon 20 years of research
about the structured interview. This journal is written by Julia Levashina, a professor
Kent State University, Christopher J. Hartwell, a professor at Purdue University,
Frederick P. Morgeson, a professor at Michigan State University, and Michael A.

Campion, another professor at Purdue University.

My mentor, Mr. Presson, sent me this article.
The intended audience of this article are the upper level managers, supervisors, and

people in corporations who conduct interviews for potential employees.

Structure is defined as the ability to standardize questions and objectively evaluate
responses. For example, if unstructured interviews are conducted within the
workforce, it easily opens up the window to personal biases, prejudice, and
stereotypes. During structural interviews there are many types of questions asked
however, two of the main ones include, situational and past behavioral questions.
Situational questions assess job knowledge and candidates ability to set goals. On
the other hand, past behavioral questions reflect the experience a person has within
the workforce. Both of these types of questions have the ability to adequately assess

personality traits and cognitive ability.

Quotes:

Situational(Latham,Saari,Pursell,&Campion,1980)andpastbehavior(Janz,1982)questions
haveemergedasthemostpopulartypesofstructuredinterviewquestions.SQsarebasedongoal
settingtheoryandrelyontheassumptionthatintentionspredictfuturebehavior(Latham,1989;
Locke&Latham,1990).Assuch,SQsaskapplicantstodescribewhattheywoulddoin
hypotheticaljobrelatedsituations.OneofthecoreaspectsofSQsisadilemma,whichrequiresan
applicanttochoosebetweentwoormoreexclusivecoursesofaction,PBQsarebasedonthe
premisethatpastbehaviorpredictsfuturebehavior(Janz,1982).Assuch,PBQsaskapplicantsto

describewhattheydidinpastjobrelatedsituations.
Manyresearchershavearguedthatcontrollingprobingmaybeadefiningelementofstructured
interviews(Dipboyeetal.,2004;Huffcutt&Arthur,1994).Itmayhelptocontrolinterviewer
biasesinconductinginterviewsandcollectinginformationaboutapplicants(Schwab&Heneman,
1969).Yet,manypractitionersandconsultingfirmshavearguedthatprobingmaybeameansof
improvingtheaccuracyofinformationgatheredinaninterview(Schmidt&Conaway,1999;
targetedselection,http://www.ddiworld.com;behavioraldescriptioninterview,
http://www.pdinh.com)becauseitprovidesinterviewerswithanopportunitytodelvedeeperinto

applicantresponsestoseekadditionalexplanations,clarifications,andjustification.
Campionetal.(1997)definedstructureasanyenhancementoftheinterviewthatisintendedto
increasepsychometricpropertiesbyincreasingstandardizationorotherwiseassistingthe
interviewerindeterminingwhatquestionstoaskorhowtoevaluateresponses