RAVEN’S PROGRESSIVE MATRICES

The Raven's Progressive Matrices (RPM) is a non-verbal test of general intelligence that is
widely used in organizations for a variety of purposes, including:

 Recruitment: The RPM can be used to assess the cognitive ability of candidates for
job openings, particularly those that require high levels of abstract reasoning and
problem-solving skills.
 Selection: Once candidates have been shortlisted for a job opening, the RPM can be
used to help select the most suitable candidate for the role.
 Promotion: The RPM can be used to assess the potential of employees for promotion
to more senior or challenging roles.
 Training and development: The RPM can be used to identify employees who may
need additional training or support in order to succeed in their roles.
 Performance management: The RPM can be used to track employee performance over
time and to identify areas where improvement may be needed.
 Improve the overall quality of the workforce: By hiring and promoting employees
with high cognitive ability, organizations can improve the overall quality of their
workforce and their ability to achieve their goals.
 Increase innovation and creativity: Employees with high cognitive ability are more
likely to be able to think outside the box and come up with new and innovative ideas.
 Improve problem-solving and decision-making: Employees with high cognitive
ability are better able to solve complex problems and make sound decisions.
 Enhance productivity and efficiency: Employees with high cognitive ability are able
to learn new skills quickly and to work effectively under pressure.

Here are some specific examples of how organizations are using the Raven's Progressive
Matrices:

 Google: Google uses the RPM to assess the cognitive ability of candidates for
software engineering and other technical roles.
 Microsoft: Microsoft uses the RPM to assess the cognitive ability of candidates for a
variety of roles, including software engineering, product management, and sales.
 McKinsey & Company: McKinsey & Company uses the RPM to assess the cognitive
ability of candidates for its management consulting program.
  Goldman Sachs: Goldman Sachs uses the RPM to assess the cognitive ability of
candidates for its investment banking and other financial roles.
 US Army: The US Army uses the RPM to assess the cognitive ability of recruits and
to identify candidates for officer training programs.

Overall, the RPM is a valuable tool for organizations that are looking to improve the quality
of their workforce, increase innovation and creativity, and enhance productivity and
efficiency.

Research Paper

Title: Psychological predictors of multitasking performance of private sector employees

Researcher: Ushashree, R., Swaminathan, V. D., Vivian, B., & Madhuri, R. (2016)

Aim: The aim of this study was to investigate the psychological predictors of multitasking
performance of private sector employees.

Review of Literature:

The study by Ushashree et al. (2023) examined the psychological predictors of

multitasking performance of private sector employees. The authors reviewed prior research
on the topic and identified four key psychological factors that may influence multitasking
performance: polychronicity, extraversion, intelligence, and neuroticism.

A number of psychological factors have been shown to predict multitasking

performance. One such factor is polychronicity, which is the tendency to prefer to do multiple
things at once. Polychronic individuals are typically more comfortable with interruptions and
are better able to switch between tasks quickly. Another factor that has been shown to predict
multitasking performance is extraversion. Extraverted individuals tend to be more outgoing
and assertive, and they are often better able to handle the demands of a multitasking
environment.

In addition to polychronicity and extraversion, a number of other psychological

factors have been linked to multitasking performance, including intelligence, neuroticism,
and working memory. Intelligence is typically associated with better multitasking
performance, as intelligent individuals are better able to understand and process complex
information. Neuroticism, on the other hand, is typically associated with worse multitasking
performance, as neurotic individuals are more likely to be distracted and anxious. Working
memory is the ability to hold information in mind while performing other tasks. Working
memory has been shown to be a strong predictor of multitasking performance, as it allows
individuals to keep track of multiple tasks and switch between them quickly.

Sample:

The study by Ushashree et al. (2023) had a sample of 200 private sector employees in
India. The participants were aged between 21 and 45 years old and had an average of 5 years
of work experience.

Methodology:

The study used a cross-sectional design. The participants were administered a

questionnaire that measured their polychronicity, extraversion, intelligence, and neuroticism.
They also completed a multitasking task that involved switching between different tasks
quickly.

Questionnaires used:

The following questionnaires were used in the study:

 Time Polychronicity Scale (TPS): This questionnaire measures an individual's

tendency to prefer doing multiple things at the same time.
 Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (EPQ): This questionnaire measures two
personality traits: extraversion and neuroticism.
 Raven's Progressive Matrices (RPM): This is a non-verbal intelligence test that
measures general cognitive ability.
 Multitasking Performance Test (MPT): This test measures the ability to switch
between different tasks quickly.

Conclusion:

The results of the study showed that polychronicity and extraversion were significant
positive predictors of multitasking performance. Intelligence was also a significant predictor,
but in the negative direction. This suggests that people with higher intelligence may be more
likely to overthink tasks and focus on one task at a time. Neuroticism was not a significant
predictor of multitasking performance.

The findings of this study have important implications for understanding the factors
that influence multitasking performance in the private sector. Employers may want to
consider these factors when screening and hiring employees for multitasking roles. They may
also want to provide training and support to employees to help them improve their
multitasking skills.

Limitations:

One limitation of this study is that it was cross-sectional. This means that it is not
possible to determine the direction of causality between the psychological predictors and
multitasking performance. It is possible that multitasking performance influences
psychological factors, such as polychronicity and extraversion, as well as vice versa. Another
limitation is that the study was conducted in India. It is possible that the results may not be
generalizable to other cultures.

Implications for practice:

The findings of the study have several implications for practice. First, organizations
should consider administering psychological tests to employees to assess their polychronicity
and extraversion levels. This information can then be used to select and train employees for
multitasking roles. Second, organizations should provide training to employees on how to
improve their multitasking skills. This training should focus on teaching employees how to
switch between tasks quickly and efficiently. Third, organizations should design work
environments that are conducive to multitasking. This includes providing employees with the
necessary tools and resources, as well as giving them the autonomy to manage their own
time and workload.

References

Raven’s Progressive Matrices (RPM) retrieved from Raven's Progressive Matrices™ (RPM) -
Catalogue - JVR Africa Group

Raven, J. (2003). Raven progressive matrices. In Handbook of nonverbal assessment (pp.

223-237). Boston, MA: Springer US.

Ushashree, R., Swaminathan, V. D., Vivian, B., & Madhuri, R. (2016). Psychological
predictors of multitasking performance of private sector employees. Indian Journal of
Community Psychology, 12(2), 220-226.