We know that cognitive ability is the single best general predictor of job performance. Finding the right fit for your job is more than a matter of knowing whether a candidate can do the job– they’ll also want to do the job. That’s where WonScore’s motivation construct comes in.
Adding motivation to cognitive ability adds incremental predictive validity (Schmidt & Hunter, 1998; Schmidt, Oh, & Schaffer, 2016), which means it increases the predictive power of WonScore when compared to a single assessment alone.
Wonderlic research shows that when an employee’s interests align with the job, they are often more motivated to perform at higher levels. More specifically, we found that employees with higher motivation potential were:
- Almost three times more likely to be actively engaged at work
- Two and a half times more likely to be rated as “top performers” by their supervisors
- Roughly half as likely to leave
When building our motivation model, we really thought about what it means to be motivated at work. Ultimately, we looked to the work of John Holland, who said that when people’s work matches their interests, they’re likely to be more satisfied and stable in their careers while also achieving more (Holland 1996).
Holland’s theory of vocational interests– and the RAISEC model he proposed– are the backbone not only of our motivation construct but also of what the Occupational Information Network (O*NET) uses to link interests to occupations. For every job cataloged in O*NET, occupational interests are identified as part of the profile. Because all of our scoring profiles are linked to occupations in O*NET, we’re able to leverage their data and infer job-relatedness. This not only helps to bolster the legal defensibility of your hiring process, but it also helps us predict how satisfied a candidate will be in your job based on their interests.
As a result, when a candidate’s WonScore motivation fit is strong, that candidate is more likely to want to do the job for which you’re considering them. In turn, it makes them more likely to be the long-term, high achiever you’re looking for in every hire.
Sources
Holland, J. L. (1996). Exploring careers with a typology: What we have learned and some new directions. American Psychologist, 51(4), 397.
Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. (1998). The validity and utility of selection methods in personnel selection: Practical and theoretical implications of 85 years of research findings. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 262-274.
Schmidt, F. L., Oh, I. S., & Shaffer, J. A. (2016). The validity and utility of selection methods in personnel psychology: Practical and theoretical implications of 100 years of research findings.
