Towards an understanding of the constructs underlying the situational interview and the patterned behavior description interview in predicting typical versus maximum performance

When selecting new employees, organizations can strive to predict both typical and maximum job performance. Variations in the ongoing performance on the job, typical performance, are attributed to differences in both employees' ability and motivation. In contrast, variations in performance during short and highly evaluative situations, maximum performance, are attributed primarily to differences in employees' ability, given that motivation is constrained to be high in these situations. The personnel selection literature has focused extensively on measures of ability to the relative neglect of measures that predict applicants' motivation on the job.

Researchers have argued whether structured interviews, particularly the situational interview (SI) and the patterned behaviour interview (PBDI), assess primarily motivation in the form of intentions and past choices, or facets of ability such as cognitive ability, practical intelligence, or job knowledge. This study addressed this controversial issue in predicting both typical and maximum performance. If the SI and the PBDI measure motivation in the form of intentions or past choices, they should primarily predict typical performance. However, if they measure facets of ability, they should primarily predict maximum performance.

Seventy nine incoming MBA-students received a SI and a PBDI on their teamplaying behaviours before the start of their studies. Peers assessed maximum teamplaying performance at the end of a week-long group project that contributed to the students' grade in one of their courses. Other peers assessed students' typical teamplaying performance at the end of the students' first term. Results revealed that the SI showed predictive validity for both typical ( r = .41, p < .01) and maximum (r = .25, p < .05) performance. The difference between the correlations was marginally significant. The PBDI showed predictive validity for typical performance (r = .34, p < .01), but not for maximum performance (r = .11, n. s.). The difference between these correlations was significant. Practical intelligence and job knowledge mediated the SI's predictive validity for maximum performance, but not the predictive validity of either interviews for typical performance. Practical implications for the use of structured selection interviews to predict typical and maximum performance in business schools and industry are discussed.