Job Experience and the law of Diminishing Returns

The lack of a specific length of experience is a death blow to anyone looking for work in this job market. For reasons not apparent to industrial-organizational (I/O) psychologists, hiring managers or recruiters believe there is an extensive positive correlation between X amount of experience and task performance; thus, they hold that the more experience an individual has, the better that person will perform. Organizational decision-makers are so obsessed with the number of years of experience that they often overlook the section of a resume that deals with education and credentials. Empirical data partly agrees with them. In these sections, the reader will learn about the reasons scientific evidence is not consistent with the viewpoints of those companies. At the same time, this author poses an important question: how much experience is too much? Before the journey begins, however, it is important to define job experience (JE).

What is job Experience?

As with several other constructs in I/O psychology, professionals have no unanimity about how JE should be defined. Researchers have noticed this lack of consistency in the interpretation and measurement of JE and have called for more research into the nature of the work experience construct (Quinones et al., 1995). Depending on the position to be filled, a qualitative or quantitative approach might be used to define the term. Various practitioners seem more attracted to the latter method. Others suggest that JE’s definition depends on both quantitative and qualitative methods. For example, Telusk et al. describe JE as consisting of qualitative and quantitative elements that exist at levels of different specifications, are interrelated, and grow progressively (1998).

Although there are many ways to define JE, employers are more interested in the quantitative approach in most cases. So, most studies have measured the construct in terms of years in a job, organization, or position (Telusk et al., 1998). Proponents of this method argue that the longer the tenure, the better the performance. Tenure is the number of years spent in a job, company, or position. This quantitative definition is a time-based perspective. Thus, the quantitative approach has two facets: “the length of time spent on a job” (1998, p.334), which represents tenure. The second is “the number of times a task has been performed” (p.334).

But the qualitative approach leads to a different take on the matter. Although such an approach has received less attention from professionals, it is essential to a comprehensive definition of JE. Based on this approach, JE is about a challenging job in which the prospective employee has multiple opportunities to learn and develop. Finding a concise, qualitative explanation of JE has been challenging despite combing the literature. However, Telusk et al. did a laudable job providing context to the definition of JE from a qualitative standpoint. They assert that the qualitative nature of JE is about task difficulty and job complexity (1998). Therefore, people with experience in challenging positions perform better in subsequent positions. This reasoning distinguishes between a physical and a mental challenge. It goes without saying that the obstacles faced by the job seeker should be relevant to the position sought.

       How Much Experience is too Much?

Corporations are aggressively looking for candidates with several years of experience. As mentioned earlier, this fixation is based on the idea that more years of experience equals better performance. Companies are mistaken for engaging in such a practice, and it can be shown the evidence does not fully support them in this endeavor. This is so for various reasons, but the most important one is that experience is an intricate construct. It is complex because it is not static. A quote from Orison Swett Marden captures the fluidity of experience by saying that “we are part of all we have met. Everything we have seen, heard, felt, or thought has had its hand in molding us, shaping us” (Telusk et al.,1998, p.334). Experience constantly evolves. Moreover, while doing our job, our minds are frequently absent from the task at hand (Syed, 2010). We mainly go through the motions, which is why dozens of studies have shown that length of time in many occupations is only weakly related to performance (Syed, 2010). Practitioners have not yet agreed on what experience is, and no theory of experience can be identified. As a result, scholars are working hard to define the notion, but no consensus has been reached.

While no conclusive definition of work experience is in sight, corporations are indiscriminately using quantitative measures to sift through the job market to find candidates they believe to have enough experience based on years. In so doing, talents are being passed over, and the time to hire is being extended. While reviewing over 150 job ads for this piece, this author saw that the average number of years for someone to become a manager in various positions was five years. It is not clear how the companies reviewed came up with this number. It must be assumed that they performed a job analysis, which revealed that five years of experience or more should be the cutoff. Assuming they all conducted a job analysis to determine the cited years of experience, how can that be true for different types of work? This author is not minimizing the importance of experience. As has been empirically shown, there is a positive correlation between experience and job performance. However, the crux of this article is about how much experience is too much. As is inherent in life, too much of anything is problematic. At some point, the benefits one gains lose their effect. 

According to many researchers, the useful effect of JE on performance is limited to the degree of complication of the job. McDaniel et al.’s comprehensive research reveals that experience can better predict performance in a low-complexity job (1988). One can rely on education for high-complexity tasks to predict performance where experience is lacking (1988). At this point, a definition of job complexity is needed to help the reader understand what this author is trying to convey. Hunter and Hunter defined job complexity as the intellectual difficulty the occupation requires. This definition can be expanded to include not only the number of complex tasks that should be completed but also the degree to which these tasks are not monotonous, the degree to which the objectives are difficult to describe, the number of opportunities to use discretion to reach conclusions, and the degree to which problem-solving procedures are inconsistent (Salgado, 2017). For example, Salgado believes engineers, pilots, and lawyers are high-complexity jobs (2017). On the other hand, maintenance personnel, soldiers, and unskilled workers are considered low-complexity jobs (2017). 

Having defined job complexity, it is safe to say that the data contradicts the view that an extensive length of experience can be a litmus test across the board. It also shows that the effect of work experience on performance wanes as the number of years increases. Using a sample of over 16,000 participants, McDaniel et al. identified a threshold beyond which the value of experience diminishes; hence, the Law of Diminishing Returns. McDaniel et al. discovered that the relationship between experience and performance was superior in low-complexity samples, where the average experience level is three years. Still, as the years increase, there is much less correlation (1988). Therefore, empirical evidence agrees with companies that experience is a good predictor of productive work behavior when the job is low in complexity. However, the evidence parts ways with them by invalidating that more experience is better, and experience can predict performance for any job. For high-complexity jobs, education can be a substitute. To define JE, more research is necessary. There is an urgent need for a settled definition of JE and a theory capable of integrating all of its constituent parts to provide a comprehensive definition. However, scientific evidence currently refutes the idea that the longer the experience, the better the performance.

References