Presenteeism refers to decreased productivity or below-normal work quality when physically present at work. It is thought to be responsible for large economic costs. The measurement of such costs frequently involves the use of self-report instruments which have a number of weaknesses; a tendency for people to over-rate their own performances, imprecision in the definition of productivity, and  potential biases inherent to the structure of each testing instrument. Furthermore, the integrity of these instruments has not been demonstrated.
    The objectives of this study were to examine the level of agreement among leading tests of presenteeism and to determine the interrelationship of the two productivity sub-categories, amount and quality. 
   Health care workers from Edmonton, Canada, completed a questionnaire containing the productivity items from eight presenteeism instruments (top figure). Analyses included an examination of test intercorrelations to determine whether either Amount or Quality could be described uniquely. A multi-test multi-construct analysis was performed on the four tests that assessed both Amount and Quality to assess the relative contributions of construct and method variance.
   137 questionnaires were completed. Agreement among tests was positive, but modest. Pearson correlations averaged .32 for Amount and .25 for Quality. Further analysis suggested that agreement was influenced more by method variance than by the productivity constructs the tests were designed to measure. That is, correlations between Amount and Quality were relatively high when measured by the same test, while agreements on the single construct, Amount - which should be much higher, was in fact lower. The same held true for Quality.

Thompson AH, Waye A (online in press). Agreement among the productivity components of eight presenteeism tests in a sample of health care workers. Value in Health.      DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2017.10.014