Classic and contemporary methods for analyzing construct validity are compared and contrasted through reanalyses of data from the organizational research literature to establish a basis for assessing the validity of measures used in organizational research. Campbell and Fiske's (1959) criteria are found to be lacking, particularly in their assumptions, diagnostic information, and power. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) is shown to overcome most limitations inherent in Campbell and Fiske's procedures. Nevertheless, two potential shortcomings are identified with the CFA method: the confounding of random error with measure-specific variance and the inability to test for interactions between traits and methods. Three alternative methods are presented for addressing the former issue, and the direct product model is described as a solution to the latter. The techniques considered herein go farther than currently used procedures for enhancing our ability to ascertain the validity of variables commonly studied in organizational research.