Abstract

Impression management (IM) is pervasive in interview and job performance settings. We meta-analytically examine IM by self- and other-focused tactics to establish base rates of tactic usage, to understand the impact of tactics on interview and job performance ratings, and to examine the moderating effects of research design. Our results suggest IM is used more frequently in the interview rather than job performance settings. Self-focused tactics are more effective in the interview rather than in job performance settings, and other-focused tactics are more effective in job performance settings rather than in the interview. We explore several research design moderators including research fidelity, rater, and participants. IM has a somewhat stronger impact on interview ratings in lab settings than field settings. IM also has a stronger impact on interview ratings when the target of IM is also the rater of performance than when the rater of performance is an observer. Finally, labor market participants use IM more frequently and more effectively than students in interview settings. Our research has implications for understanding how different IM tactics function in interview and job performance settings and the effects of research design on IM frequency and impact.

Highlights

  • Impression management (IM) is ubiquitous throughout the interview and during employment

  • We argue that the relationship between IM tactics and ratings will be stronger for those currently engaged in the labor market rather than students

  • We find support for hypothesis 3a as self-focused tactics have a significant impact on interview ratings and no significant impact on performance ratings

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Impression management (IM) is ubiquitous throughout the interview and during employment. Candidates and employees strive to put their best foot forward to impress employers (e.g., Barrick et al, 2009). IM is defined as conscious or unconscious, deceptive or authentic, goal directed behavior. Individuals behave or display props in an attempt to control the impressions others form of them in social interactions (e.g., Schlenker, 1980; Gardner and Martinko, 1988; Leary and Kowalski, 1990; Bozeman and Kacmar, 1997; Bolino et al, 2008, 2016). Single studies cannot assess the full magnitude of the relationship between IM tactics and ratings. The current paper positions a meta-analytical investigation of IM on interview and job performance ratings

Methods
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call