Previous research has reported effects of networking, defined as building, maintaining, and using relationships, on career success. However, empirical studies have relied exclusively on concurrent or retrospective designs that rest upon strong assumptions about the causal direction of this relation and depict a static snapshot of the relation at a given point in time. This study provides a dynamic perspective on the effects of networking on career success and reports results of a longitudinal study. Networking was assessed with 6 subscales that resulted from combining measures of the facets of (a) internal versus external networking and (b) building versus maintaining versus using contacts. Objective (salary) and subjective (career satisfaction) measures of career success were obtained for 3 consecutive years. Multilevel analyses showed that networking is related to concurrent salary and that it is related to the growth rate of salary over time. Networking is also related to concurrent career satisfaction. As satisfaction remained stable over time, no effects of networking on the growth of career satisfaction were found. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2009 APA, all rights reserved).

This meta-analysis explores agreement in self- and supervisory ratings of job performance (k = 128 independent samples). It suggests a 3-stage model of the rating process and reviews the empirical evidence for the relevance of each of these 3 stages to an understanding of agreement in ratings. The proposed 3-stage model serves as the guiding rationale for the examination of an extensive set of variables that moderate rater agreement. Results are reported for 2 indicators of rater agreement (correlational and mean-level agreement). Self-supervisor ratings yielded an overall correlation of .22 (rho = .34; k = 115; n = 37,752). Position characteristics and the use of nonjudgmental performance indicators were the main moderators. Leniency in self-ratings is indicated by higher mean levels of self-ratings compared with supervisory ratings. Within Western samples, performance self-ratings showed leniency (d = 0.32, Delta = .49; k = 89; n = 35,417) dependent on contextual features, scale format, and scale content.