Developing a Hiring System OK, Enough Assessing: Who Do We Hire??!!

Performance-Based Hiring: Summary

Common Decision-Making Errors Switching to non-performance factors Reverting to “intuition” or “gut feel” Aggregating across all attributes Succumbing to the “Tyranny of the Best” Rating by method

Who Do You Hire??

Limitations of Traditional Approach “Big Business” Model Large samples that allow use of statistical analysis Resources to use experts for cutoff scores, etc. Assumption that you’re hiring lots of people from even larger applicant pools Focus on tools not attributes

A Better Approach: Focus on Attributes For each candidate, rate each attribute on each tool Desirable Acceptable Unacceptable For example, Consider Lee:

A Better Approach: Focus on Attributes For each candidate, Rate each attribute on each tool Develop composite attribute rating Combining scores from multiple assessors Combining scores across different tools A “judgmental synthesis” of data For example, Consider Lee:

A Better Approach: Focus on Attributes For each candidate, Rate each attribute on each tool Develop composite attribute rating Create a Decision Table combining the composite ratings for all applicants

Sample Decision Table

A Better Approach: Focus on Attributes For each candidate, Rate each attribute on each tool Develop composite attribute rating Create a Decision Table combining the composite ratings for all applicants Use Decision Table to make final decisions Categorical Numerical

Categorical Decision Approach Eliminate applicants with unacceptable qualifications Then hire candidates with as many desirable ratings as possible Finally, hire as needed from applicants with “acceptable” ratings Optional: “weight” attributes by importance

Using the Decision Table 1: More Positions than Applicants

Using the Decision Table 2: : More Applicants than Positions

Numerical Decision Approach Eliminate applicants with unacceptable qualifications Convert ratings to a common scale Obtained score/maximum possible score Example: Attribute—Dependability Interview: 3.5 on a five point scale Personality Test: 8/10 Converted scores? Weight by importance of attribute and measure to develop composite score Weighted converted score = converted score X importance of attribute X importance of measure

Numerical Decision Approach

Summary: Decision-Making Focus on critical requirements Focus on performance attribute ratings Not overall evaluations of applicant or tool Eliminate candidates with unacceptable composite ratings on any critical attribute Then choose those who are most qualified: Make offers first to candidates with highest numbers of desirable ratings