“Validity and Utility of Alternative Predictors of Job Performance”, 1984 (; similar):
Meta-analysis of the cumulative research on various predictors of job performance shows that for entry-level jobs there is no predictor with validity equal to that of ability, which has a mean validity of 0.53.
For selection on the basis of current job performance, the work sample test, with mean validity of 0.54, is slightly better. For federal entry-level jobs, substitution of an alternative predictor would cost from $3.12 billion (198440ya) (job tryout) to $15.89 billion (198440ya) per year (age).
Hiring on ability has a utility of $15.61 billion (198440ya) per year, but affects minority groups adversely. Hiring on ability by quotas would decrease this utility by 5%. A third strategy—using a low cutoff score—would decrease utility by 83%.
Using other predictors in conjunction with ability tests might improve validity and reduce adverse impact, but there is as yet no database for studying this possibility.