Skip to main content icon/video/no-internet

Cognitive/Mental Abilities in Work and Organizational Settings

Introduction

Cognitive processing of information is a critical requirement of many jobs in the workplace. There have been many changes in the nature of work and organizations with regard to the amount and nature of information, which must be dealt with by those working in organizations, as well as in the speed with which this information must be processed and applied. Thus the assessment of individual differences in those cognitive abilities relevant to effective performance in the workplace has become especially critical. This entry deals with the definition and organization of cognitive abilities, presents examples of standardized, diagnostic, and reliable measures for assessing these cognitive abilities, and provides examples of jobs and tasks requiring each of these abilities.

Some Definitions

Both Carroll (1993) and Fleishman (1972) define abilities as relatively enduring attributes of an individual's capability for performing a particular range of different tasks; however, these abilities may develop over time and with exposure to multiple situations (Snow & Lohman, 1984).

Recently, the term ‘competencies’ has come into use to describe individual attributes related to quality of work performance (see e.g. McClelland, 1973). A competency has been defined as an ‘underlying characteristic of an individual which is causally related to effective or superior performance in a job’ (Boyatzis, 1982). This definition is, of course, consistent with our definition of ability. However, lists of competencies often contain a mixture of knowledges, skills, abilities, motivation, beliefs, values, and interests.

The distinction between ‘abilities’ and ‘skills’ is often made (see e.g. Fleishman, 1966, 1972); where an ability is a general trait of an individual that is inferred from the relationships among performances of individuals observed across a range of different tasks, skills are more dependent on learning and represent the product of training in particular tasks. The development of a given skill (e.g. airplane piloting) is predicated, in part, on the individual's possession of relevant underlying abilities (e.g. spatial orientation, multi-limb coordination). These underlying abilities are related to the rate of acquisition and final levels of performance that a person can achieve in particular skills (see Ackerman, 1988; Fleishman, 1972).

Fleishman (1982) and Fleishman and Quaintance (1984) have described the different conceptual bases for defining ‘tasks’. Wheaton (1973) proposed that a task reflects an organized set of responses to a specified stimulus situation intended to bring about the attainment of a goal state. This definition of a task is similar to one proposed by Hackman (1968) and McCormick (1976) and, more recently, by Carroll (1993), who defines a task as ‘an activity in which a person engages in order to achieve a specified objective or result’.

Tasks can be described in terms of the abilities required to perform them (Fleishman, 1972). Tasks requiring the same ability or a similar group of abilities would be placed in the same category. The use of empirical information on the relationships among performances of individuals performing different tasks allows us to identify the basic underlying abilities (Fleishman, 1972; Carroll, 1993).

Structure of Human Abilities

Critical questions have concerned the generality of the constructs used to describe individual differences in human abilities. Elsewhere, constructs such as ‘mental abilities’, ‘motor abilities’, ‘problem solving ability’, ‘decision making ability’, and ‘agility’ have turned out to be too broad; the tasks required by such broad categories are too diverse to yield high correlations between performances of these tasks. Factor analyses of the correlations among performances within these domains typically yield somewhat more narrowly defined abilities. Similarly, expressions like ‘athletic ability’ and ‘musical ability’ are often used, but it is known that there are a number of separate constructs that better define several different abilities involved in the tasks comprising these broad activities. However, characterizing an individual as having the ability to ‘lift barbells of a given weight’ or to ‘solve quadratic equations of a given complexity’ yields information that is too specific and not very descriptive of an ability that extends to performance in a variety of tasks requiring the same underlying ability.

...

  • Loading...
locked icon

Sign in to access this content

Get a 30 day FREE TRIAL

  • Watch videos from a variety of sources bringing classroom topics to life
  • Read modern, diverse business cases
  • Explore hundreds of books and reference titles

Sage Recommends

We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.

Loading