Reference no: EM132332374
Assignment - Determine the research designs and the internal and external validity threats for four (4) concise Human Resource Case scenarios.
Scenario I -
A benefits administrator is interested in determining whether the company's employees prefer Health Maintenance Organizations (HMO), Preferred Provider Organization (PPO), or Point of Service (POS) medical programs. The administrator first asks all 200 of the company's employees to rate their overall? satisfaction with employee benefits on a 1-7 scale. A total of 77 employees respond to the survey. Then, using the personnel records, she looks up the type of plan each employee is enrolled in:
- 35 of the 77 employees are enrolled in the HMO program.
- 28 of the 77 employees are enrolled in the PPO program.
- 14 of the 77 employees are enrolled in the POS program.
The administrator finds that employees enrolled in the HMO rated their overall? satisfaction with their benefits higher than the employees enrolled in the PPO or POS programs. She concludes that employees prefer the HMO program and decides to eliminate the other medical plans.
Please describe the following:
1. The study's design
2. The predictor(s) [independent variable(s)]
3. Outcome(s) [dependent variable(s)]
4. Threats to internal and external validity (and a justification for each; this does not need to be exhaustive, just mention the threats most likely? to impact the conclusions)
5. Describe whether you think the conclusions that the researcher came to are accurate and justify your conclusion.
Scenario II -
In response to a published article discussing the trend toward flexible work schedules, the CEO of a retail organization wanted to evaluate whether her company should adopt a flexible work schedule policy. The article cited higher employee satisfaction and no loss in productivity. The CEO randomly assigned employees to different work schedules. Some employees were assigned regular hours (i.e., 9am-5pm Mon-Fri), while other employees were assigned flexible hours (i.e., working whenever is best for them so long as they worked 40 hours a week). After six months, employees were asked to respond to a job satisfaction survey on a 1-7 scale. In addition, the managers were asked to rate the job performance of their direct reports, also on a 1-7 scale.
Please describe the following:
1. The CEO's hypothesis
2. The predictor(s) [independent variable(s)]
3. Outcome(s) [dependent variable(s)]
4. Threats to internal and external validity (and a justification for each; this does not need to be exhaustive, just mention the threats most likely? to impact the study)
5. Any ethical or fairness concerns about the study
Scenario III -
The HR Director at a company is interested in determining what employee characteristics relate to high sales performance. Due to the importance of interacting with customers she suspects that sales associates who are higher in the personality trait Agreeableness? will have higher sales numbers. However, she also believes that having experience on the job may impact the nature of the relationship between Agreeableness and sales numbers. To examine this relationship she has a sample of 200 current sales associates complete an Agreeableness measure (with scores ranging from 0-100), obtains tenure information (in months), and collects sales numbers (in dollars) for the current quarter. She finds that higher Agreeableness scores are positively related to sales numbers for low tenure employees (0-2 years). However, Agreeableness is not related to sales numbers for higher tenure employees (2+ years). Based on these results the HR Director decides to implement the use of the Agreeableness measure for hiring decisions for new sales associates and promotion decisions for experienced sales associates (2+ years).
Please describe the following:
1. The design used by the researcher.
2. The predictor(s) [independent variable(s)].
3. Outcome(s) [dependent variable(s)].
4. The moderator variable.
5. Describe whether you think the conclusions that HR Director came to are accurate and justify your conclusion.
Scenario IV -
A Learning & Development researcher wants to know if in-class leadership training is more effective than online training, and if online training is more effective than no training. She expects the results of her proposed study to generalize to leaders at all levels in her organization. She randomly samples from mid-level managers with 3-5 years of experience, and obtains a sample of 99 mid-level managers with an average tenure of 4.1 years on the job. She then randomly assigns 33 managers to receive in-class leadership training, 33 managers to receive online leadership training, and 33 managers to receive no leadership training. Three months after the training, she administers a 360-degree feedback survey measuring leadership behaviors to the direct reports, peers, and supervisors of the 99 managers. As she expected, managers who received in-class training received significantly higher 360 ratings than managers who received online training, and managers who received online training received significantly higher 360 ratings than managers who received no training. Based on these results, she recommended that the in-class leadership training should be optional for all managers and senior leaders, and that online training should be mandatory for all new managers who decide not to attend the in-class training.
Please describe the following:
1. The researcher's hypothesis/hypotheses
2. The researcher's population of interest
3. The researcher's sample
4. Threats to internal and external validity (and a justification for each; this does not need to be exhaustive, just mention the threats most likely? to impact the study)
5. Describe whether you think the conclusions that the researcher came to are accurate and justify your conclusion.