Human Resource Management Recruitment & Selection Lecture Tessa Owens Module Leader

HRM Learning Outcomes To be able to produce job descriptions and specifications and distinguish between them. Understand the importance of effective Recruitment and Selection Analyse some of the methods used in this field in the UK and elsewhere Identify the requirements of an interview, typical interviewer errors and how to avoid them Examine the need for feedback and evaluation of this process The learning outcomes for this module are intended to help you understand the importance of R&S and discover some of the methods used in this field. I hope that through this process you will be able to Identifying errors that interviewers make is also important and more particularly how to avoid those errors yourself! Finally we’ll examine the need to evaluate this process.

Job Description This is a written description of the job containing the title, reporting relationships, purpose and main tasks and duties Not all jds have the same information. If you have a jd look at it now and see how your jd differs from this, what additional information is included and why do you think it is. We’’l be discussing jds in class on within the forums and so having your own jd to hand and being able to discuss it will be useful! If you don’t have a jd look in core texts where you’ll find useful examples!

Purposes of Job Descriptions to assist in the evaluation of the job to illustrate the job and its many duties as a training tool for new incumbents to be used to determine appraisal criteria to be the basis of the contract of employment to provide the information required to produce person specifications There are many purposes for job descriptions Evaluate – how much to pay the job Training tool – sit down with manager Appraisal – come back to it JD used to determine contract of employment Helps with js.

Job Specifications A job (or person, or personnel) specification sets out the education, qualifications, training, experience, personal attributes and competences a job holder requires to perform the job satisfactorily. Within this some requirements may be described as essential/desirable/ or ‘contra’ So what’s a JS? Definition Further broken down by essential or desirable categories. So – a jd describes the job whereas a JS describes the person who could do the job.

Models of Job Specifications See Rodger (1952) Seven Point Plan Physical make-up Attainments General intelligence Special aptitudes Interests Disposition Circumstances Munro-Fraser (1954) Five fold grading system. Impact on others Acquired qualifications Innate abilities Motivation Adjustment You’ll see here 2 models of JSs – very similar and focussing on the elements of ‘the person’ which should be considered in a person specification – so for example the qualifications you’d expect them to have and their experience. Others are now more controversial and potentially discriminatory such as ‘physical makeup’ or ‘impact on others’ which essentially describe how someone looks – fraught with difficulties.

Shortlisting An assessment matrix Categorise candidates as probable, possible or unsuitable, by comparing c.v against pre determined criteria. An assessment matrix can aid objectivity. Qualifications Experience Evidence of leadership ability Evidence of reliability Candidate 1 8/10 2/10 0/10 4/10 Candidate 2 9/10 7/10 Candidate 3 10/10 The Assessment matrix shown here gives an example of how candidates for a job can be numerically scored against each element of the person specification. Categories used here are Quals., Experience, leadership ability and reliability. Just EGS use here to illustrate. In this example …….. Assists more objective scoring

“cloak for improper discrimination” (p.189) Subjective? Watson (1994) believed that the use of person specification frameworks may provide a “cloak for improper discrimination” (p.189) Why might this be true? Some writers in this field however consider that writing person specification may be a cloak for improper discrimination. This is an area of real concern and I’ll be posing this question in the Forums for you and your colleagues to consider. Why do you think JS may allow organisations to discriminate.

Selection Methods Many methods of selection exist: Application forms / C.Vs Initial telephone interviews (CIPD 2001, cited Beardwell et al 2004) One-to-one interviews Panel interviews Psychometric tests Assessment Centres Testing ‘In tray’ exercise Presentation Trial Project This slides shows the many ways in which orgs can select individuals for different posts Go through list

What are the strengths and weaknesses of the selection methods used? Activity What are the strengths and weaknesses of the selection methods used? This activity will appear in the forums. So make some notes now of what you consider to be the strengths and weaknesses of each.

Making the ‘right’ choice The cost of the selection process itself, including the use of various selection instruments The future cost of inducting and training staff The cost of turnover if the selected staff are not retained. R&S process is very costly Management and admin time, expenses, selection instruments such as psychometric tests. New employees are expensive – your established staff need to take time off the job to induct and train new staff so there is a loss of productivity within the organisation, which is all wasted if that new member of staff is not retained.

Reliable &Valid Selection? Reliability and Validity are 2 statistical concepts which are important in selection Reliability – refers to the extent to which a selection technique achieves consistency in what it is measuring over repeated use, e.g. what matters is how an individual is being measured not by who. Validity – refers to the extent to which a selection technique actually measures what it sets out to measure. For example where the selection methods adopted have been used before, did the organisation get ‘the right’ employees? Read first line. Is the selection method reliable? Can it be used again and again by lots of different people and get consistent results? Is the selection method valid? Did it measure what you wanted it to measure. EG if you had a method of selction which you used to get you new leaders in the org – has it worked in the past?

The trouble with interviews Research suggests that traditional interviews don’t appear to be reliable or valid! ‘Pre-selection’ can take place where implicit discrimination is formed (on the grounds of gender, race, educational qualifications etc) First impressions – and early decisions, which the interviewer may then look to support with their questioning. Stereotyping – interviewers with little skill can quickly label individuals BUT research suggests that traditional interviews are reliable or valid! Interviewers can pre-select (gender/race) First impressions – supported by questioning Stereotyping – poorly skilled interviewers label

Trouble with interviews 2 ‘The contrast effect’ – interviewers are influenced by the order in which applicants are interviewed. An ‘average’ candidate following a ‘poor’ candidate can appear to be better than they are. Interviewers may compare applicants against each other rather than objective criteria. Attraction – interviewers may be biased towards applicants they ‘like’. Contrast effect – order in which interviewed – average candidate that follows a poor candidate can seem better than they are. Use assessment criteria for job in order to be objective! Attraction a problem – more disposed to recruit some one you like!

International Selection Methods % use of popular selection methods Interviews still most popular – from 97% (France) to 84% (Israel) References and Recommendations – from 74% (UK) to 23% (Germany) Others include: Graphology (France 52%, Netherlands 24%) Astrology (France 6%, Israel 1%) This slide lists popular methods of selection Interviews and taking references are most popular in all countries – but as you can see there are some more unusual methods used in some countries.

Activity – Common interviewer errors What do you think are the common interviewer errors which occur? What would you do to overcome them? These questions will be raised in your forums. You may like to stop this recording now and note down the errors interviewers make which you are currently aware of.

Poor Interviewer Skills Not having a structure Welcome, introductions, description of process, questions, follow-up questions, discussion, summary, what happens next……………..etc! Asking multiple, leading, embarrassing, provocative questions Poor listening skills – this is as important as questioning skill! Interviewer may have poor recall of information discussed, or may have difficulty interpreting what they were told and what that means for whether the applicant can do the job on offer. So make notes! and/or use a Scoring System to help make more objective evaluations. This slide illustrates some common interviewer errors. Structure Poor questioning Poor Listening Make notes – recall Use a scoring system

Training for interviewers Will typically include Questioning techniques Understanding of Equal Opportunities legislation. You should research (see Learnwise for resources): Sex and Race discrimination Disability discrimination Age discrimination Employment of people with criminal records Human Rights Act 1998, e.g. questioning someone on what they do in their leisure time could infringe their right to privacy. Training interviewers is therefore very important.

Questioning Techniques Closed Questions Leading Questions Open Questions Probing questions Two types of questions have been shown to improve the validity and reliability of interviews: Situational questions Patterned behaviour description questions Training would also consider questioning technique and consider:

Reliable & Valid Questions Arvey and Champion (1982) found that panel interviews were more reliable and valid when conducted by a panel and based on job analysis and information. Latham et al (1980) found situational interviews reliable and valid where interview questions are derived from systematic job analysis based on a critical incident technique, i.e. what an applicant would do in a variety of situations. Panel Interviews are found to more reliable and valid because more people are helping to make the decision. Latham found situational interviews to be reliable and valid because the interviewee was being asked about specific incidents that they may have to cope with in their new job

Reliable &Valid Questions 2 Pulakos and Schmitt (1995) compared situational questioning against experience-based or behavioural questions. They found behavioural questions to be more predicatively valid as the behavioural question is asking “What have you done in a similar situation?” compared to “What would you do in the situation?” Questioning is very important when considering the reliability and validy of an interview. Pulakos and Schmitt found that the phrasing of the question was very important and that behavioural questions were more predictively valid ………….

Evaluation Once the recruitment and selection event is complete an evaluation should be conducted. Unless this evaluation occurs then the organisation will not fully understand whether the methods they are currently using to select someone for employment are worthwhile and whether these methods are getting them the sort of people they need for their organisation’s long term health and sustainability. Again discuss evaluation models in Forums

Bibliography Armstrong, M (1999) A handbook of Human Resource Management Practice 7th edition, Kogan Page Arvey, R D & Champion, J E (1982) The employment interview: a summary of recent research. Personnel Psychology, 35, 281-322. Beardwell, I & Holden, L, Clayton, T (2004) Human Resource Management 4th edition, Pitman Publishing Bratton, J & Gold, J (2003) Human Resource Management: Theory and Practice 3rd Edition, Palgrave. Carling, C (1995) How to run a Voluntary Group How to books, Plymouth Carter, S & Jones, D (2000) Enterprise and Small Business Principles Practice and Policy Financial Times , Prentice Hall Foot, M & Hook, C (1999) Introducing Human Resource Management 2nd edition, Longman Herriot, P Manning, W E G & Kidd, J M (1997) The content of the psychological contract. British Journal of Management, 8(2):151-62 Legge, K (1995) Human Resource Management. Rhetorics and Realities Macmillan Business Pulakos, E D & Schmitt, N (1995) Experience- based and situational questions: studies of validity. Personnel Psychology, 48, 289-309. Scott, M et al (1989) Management and Industrial Relations in small firms Research Paper No. 70, London: Dept of Employment Sparrow, P & Hiltrop, J M (1994) European Human Resource Management in Transition. New York: Prentice Hall Torrington, D & Hall, L (1998) Human Resource Management 4th Edition, Prentice Hall Watson, T (1994) Recruitment and selection. In Sisson, K (ed.), Personnel Management. Oxford: Blackwell.