Evaluating a Four Year Sales Selection Program

Summary T he Sales Selection Program evaluated is believed to be typical of those programs using psychological appraisals based on test results, personal history blanks, and an interview by a psychologist as a basis for selection judgments. The company is a mill and warehouse distributor of metals and industrial products employing approximately 160 office and direct‐contact salesmen. Management's goals for the program were: the reduction of turnover, improvement in the quality of the sales force, and the identification of men with potential for advancement. To determine if turnover had been reduced, the number and per cent of new men retained for 3, 12, 18, and 24 months preceding and following the initiation of the program were compared. Using chi square it was found that the reductions under the program were significant for each period. The criterion of Job performance consisted of a rating in Job terms of points which management believed were important to Job success. A reliability coefficient of .79 was obtained by correlating ratings of 76 office salesmen made in two successive years. Pearsonian correlations were computed for a group of 70 to 75 office salesmen, including those selected during the selection program and a group of 34 to 40 men employed prior to installation of the program. For the group not selected on the basis of tests and interviews, significant validity coefficients ranging from .38 to .46, which held up after revalidation the following year, were obtained for the Guilford Zimmerman Aptitude Survey, Part I (Verbal), Part II (Reasoning), and two subscales of the Guilford Zimmerman Temperament Survey called “restraint” and “thoughtfulness.” As the direct‐contact sales group included a number of small Job subgroups, validation procedures were not considered feasible.