A SITUATIONAL JUDGMENT TEST OF PERSONAL INITIATIVE AND ITS RELATIONSHIP TO PERFORMANCE

By Ronald Bledow, Michael Frese. 2009

201 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management, Social Psychology, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/eba489f858b9c2f9e0e6435df893f1d3e813759a

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

In Social Psychology

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

Proactive Work Behavior: Forward-Thinking and Change-Oriented Action in Organizations (2011, methodology): “A scenario-based, approach to measuring proactive behavior was recently introduced by Bledow and Frese (2009). In the Situational Judgment Test of Personal Initiative (SJT-PI), respondents are asked to reveal their most, as well as least, likely preferences of acting in simulated situations.”
Making Things Happen: A Model of Proactive Motivation (2010, methodology): “…overcome some of the challenges of assessing proactive behavior include the use of interview judgments based on detailed interviews (Frese et al., 1997), using context-specific scenariobased approaches (Parker, Williams, et al., 2006), and using a situational judgment test (Bledow & Frese, 2009).”
Measuring Message Credibility (2016, methodology): “As is customary in formative measurement models, indicators covaried with each other (e.g., Bledow & Frese, 2009; Brown, n.d.; Diamantopoulos & Winklhofer, 2001; Helm, 2005).”
When and Why People Engage in Different Forms of Proactive Behavior: Interactive Effects of Self-construals and Work Characteristics (2017, methodology): “Bledow and Frese (2009) provide more information regarding the situational judgment test of proactive behavior.”
How Does Workplace Helping Behavior Step Up or Slack Off? Integrating Enrichment-Based and Depletion-Based Perspectives (2018, background): “We also controlled for personal initiative because employees with high levels of personal initiative tend to engage in more discretionary behaviors, such as helping (Bledow & Frese, 2009).”
Entrepreneurs’ Improvisational Behavior and Firm Performance: A Study of Dispositional and Environmental Moderators (2013, background): “For example, as pointed out by an anonymous reviewer, personal initiative (Bledow and Frese, 2009) and/or energy (Atwater and Carmeli, 2009) may provide alternative explanations for the hypothesized relationships.”
“I Put in Effort, Therefore I Am Passionate”: Investigating the Path from Effort to Passion in Entrepreneurship (2014, background): “…three-way interaction between 1 The magnitude of the correlation corresponds to correlations between self- and external/objective ratings and to correlations between multimethod measures of a construct (Bledow & Frese, 2009; Bommer, Johnson, Rich, Podsakoff, & MacKenzie, 1995; Fox & Dinur, 1988).”
Recommendations for Creating Better Concept Definitions in the Organizational, Behavioral, and Social Sciences (2016, unknown): “Second, we agree with researchers (Blalock, 1968; Bledow & Frese, 2009; Bollen & Bauldry, 2011; Bollen & Lennox, 1991; Diamantopoulos & Papadopoulos, 2010; Diamantopoulos, Riefler, & Roth, 2008; Judge & Kammeyer-Mueller, 2012; Law & Wong, 1999; Law, Wong, & Mobley, 1998; MacKenzie et al., 2011;…”
Ethical leadership and followers' helping and initiative: The role of demonstrated responsibility and job autonomy (2013, background): “Job design studies show that when followers feel responsibility at work this is likely to stimulate challenging behaviours, such as initiative (cf. Bledow & Frese, 2009; Frese & Fay, 2001; Fuller, Marler, & Hester, 2006; Grant & Ashford, 2008; McAllister et al., 2007; Morisson & Phelps, 1999).”
The State of Research on Situational Judgment Tests: A Content Analysis and Directions for Future Research (2014, background): “Table 2 indicates that the number of SJT items ranges from four (Bledow & Frese, 2009) to 93 (Oswald, Friede, Schmitt, Kim, & Ramsay, 2005) with a mean of 28.77 (Mdn = 30), standard deviation of 18.02, skewness of .87 (SE = .26), and kurtosis of .64 (SE = .52).”
Personal Initiative and Job Performance Evaluations: Role of Political Skill in Opportunity Recognition and Capitalization (2017, background): “Contempt also may escalate if personal initiative is perceived to be exclusively self-serving (Bledow & Frese, 2009).”