Chapter 8 The Selection Process McGraw-Hill/Irwin Copyright © 2009 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.

External Candidates McGraw-Hill/Irwin Copyright © 2009 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.

Logic of Prediction: Past Performance Predicts Future Performance Not specific enough to make selection decisions Job titles Number of years of experience What counts is the specific types of experiences required and the level of success at each

Assessment Methods by Applicant Flow Stage 9-4

Resumes and Cover Letters Information provided is controlled by applicant Information needs to be verified by other predictors to ensure accuracy and completeness Major issues Large number received by organizations Falsification and misrepresentation of information

Overview of Application Blanks What areas are covered? Education Training Job experience Key advantage -- Organization dictates information provided Major issue -- Information requested should Be critical to job success and Reflect KSAOs relevant to job

Reference Checks Approach involves verifying applicant’s background via contact with Prior immediate supervisor(s) or coworkers, or HR department of current of previous companies What are the possible problems? Same as problems with letters of recommendation Reluctance of companies to provide requested information due to legal concerns

Fair Credit Reporting Act (1970) Purpose Regulates organization’s acquisition and use of consumer reports on job applicants Required compliance Before obtaining a report, organization must Give applicant notice in writing a report may be obtained Obtain written authorization from applicant If an “adverse action” is taken, organization must Notify (written, oral, electronic) applicant of adverse action Provide information of consumer reporting agency to applicant Provide notice of applicant’s rights to applicant Enforcement Enforced by Federal Trade Commission Noncompliance may result in fines up to $1,000

EEOC’s Enforcement Guidance on Criminal Records (2012) For arrest and conviction records in employment decisions Inquiring about arrest and/or conviction records, while not per se unlawful, can lead to potential discrimination issues if not handled properly. Blanket policies may result in: Disparate impact Disparate treatment Race and national origin Determinations should be made on an individual case-by-case basis

EEOC’s Enforcement Guidance on Criminal Records (2012) Generally prohibits decisions based on arrests/convictions that are not job related and consistent with business necessity – criteria: Nature of the crime; and Time elapsed since it occurred; and Its relation to the nature of the job had or sought. Employers need to Give notice to applicant or employee that they have been screened out because of criminal conviction; Provide with opportunity to demonstrate that exclusion should not be applied due to their particular circumstances; and Consider whether the additional information provided warrants an exception to the exclusion and shows that the policy as applied is not job related and consistent with business necessity.

Use of Criminal Records - California Don’t ask applicants to disclose information About an arrest or detention that did not result in conviction. Relating to a referral to or participation in a criminal diversion program (a work education program as part of probation). About convictions for most marijuana possession offenses more than two years old. You can’t seek the information from any other source, nor use it as a factor in hiring, promoting, training, or termination. You can ask employees and applicants about any arrest for which the employee or applicant is out on bail or out on their own recognizance pending trial. Certain exceptions exist for peace officers, health care employees, and people with access to drugs and medication.

Initial Interview Characteristics Video and computer interviews Begins process of necessary differentiation Purpose -- Screen out most obvious cases of person / job mismatches Limitation -- Most expensive method of initial assessment Video and computer interviews Offers cost savings

Evaluation of Initial Interview Guidelines to enhance usefulness Ask questions assessing most basic KSAOs Stick to basic, fundamental questions suitable for making rough cuts rather than subjective questions Keep interviews brief Ask same questions of all applicants

Discretionary Assessment Methods Used to separate people who receive job offers from list of finalists (assumes each finalist is considered fully qualified for position) Often very subjective, relying heavily on intuition of decision maker Factors other than KSAOs are evaluated Assess person/organization match Assess motivation level Assess people on relevant organizational citizenship behaviors

Contingent Assessment Methods “We offer you this job contingent upon ….” Might involve confirmation of Drug test results Medical exam results Background check results

Internal Candidates McGraw-Hill/Irwin Copyright © 2009 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.

Logic of Prediction: Past Performance Predicts Future Performance Advantages of internal over external selection Greater depth and relevance of data available on internal candidates Greater emphasis can be placed on samples and criteria rather than signs

Skills Inventory Use skills inventory for data on employees List of KSAOs held by each employee Records a small number of skills listed in generic categories, such as education, experience, and supervisory training received

Substantive Assessment Methods Seniority and experience Job knowledge tests Performance appraisals Promotability ratings Assessment centers Interviews

Overview of Seniority and Experience Definitions Seniority Length of service with organization, department, or job Experience Not only length of service but also kinds of activities an employee has undertaken Why so widely used? Direct experience in a job content area reflects an accumulated stock of KSAOs necessary to perform job Information is easily and cheaply obtained Protects employee from unfair treatment and favoritism Promoting senior or experienced employees is socially acceptable -- viewed as rewarding loyalty

Evaluation of Seniority and Experience Employees typically expect promotions will go to most senior or experienced employee Relationship to job performance Seniority is unrelated to job performance Experience is moderately related to job performance, especially in the short run Experience is superior because it is: a more valid method than seniority more likely to be content valid when past or present jobs are similar to the future job Experience is unlikely to remedy initial performance difficulties of low-ability employees is better suited to predict short-term rather than long-term potential

Job Knowledge Tests Job knowledge includes elements of both ability and seniority Measured by a paper-and-pencil test or a computer Holds great promise as a predictor of job performance Reflects an assessment of what was learned with experience Also captures cognitive ability

Performance Appraisal A possible predictor of future job performance is past job performance collected by a performance appraisal process Advantages Readily available Probably capture both ability and motivation Weaknesses Potential lack of a direct correspondence between requirements of current job and requirements of position applied for

Principles of Promotion “Peter Principle” - 1969 Employees tend to be promoted until they reach a position at which they cannot work competently. “Dilbert Principle” – 1990’s Companies tend to systematically promote their least-competent employees to management (generally middle management), in order to limit the amount of damage they are capable of doing.

Discretionary Assessment Methods Narrows list of finalists to those who will receive job offers Decisions often made on basis of Organizational citizenship behavior Differences from external selection Previous finalists not receiving job offers do not simply disappear