1. Copyright ©2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 5-1 Recruiting and Selecting Employees Chapter 5

2. Copyright ©2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall Chapter 5 Overview  Matching labor supply and labor demand  Advantages/disadvantages of internal vs. external recruiting  Selection tools and their legal defensibility  Legal constraints of the hiring process 5-2

3. Copyright ©2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall HR Supply and Demand 5-3

4. Copyright ©2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall The Hiring Process Three components in hiring process: 5-4

5. Copyright ©2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall Recruitment 5-5  Sources of recruiting  Current employees (ILM)  Referrals from current employees  Former employees  Former military  Customers

6. Copyright ©2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall Recruitment  Sources of recruiting (continued)  Print and radio advertisements  Internet advertising and career sites  Employment agencies  Temporary workers  College recruiting  Social Media 5-6

7. Copyright ©2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall Recruitment  Internal vs. External Recruiting  External—fresh perspectives  Learning Curve  Internal—less costly  Signals opportunity to workforce  Already acclimated to org. culture 5-7  Evaluating recruiting sources  Cost per hire  Time to fill  Effectiveness [quality of candidate; quality of recruiters and process (Rynes)]

8. Copyright ©2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall Selection Tools  Letters of recommendation  Poor predictors of job performance  Application/biodata forms  Ability tests  *Cognitive [and Physical] ability tests  Work Samples [or probation period]  Honesty tests  Psychological tests 5-8

9. Copyright ©2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall Selection Tools Personality tests: The Big FIVE  Extroversion  Agreeableness  *Conscientiousness  Emotional stability  Openness to experience _____________________________ *most highly validated empirically as predictor of performance across wide range of jobs [along with cognitive ability] 5-9

10. Copyright ©2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall HR Faculty Application [6-25-15] Review of top 2 predictors of job performance How would you rate this candidate?! 5-10

11. Copyright ©2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall Selection Tools  Interviews  Structured Interviews [legally defensible]  Malos research on same [JAP] 5-11

12. Copyright ©2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall Selection Tools  Assessment centers  Used for upper managerial positions or other critical jobs [expensive]  In-basket exercises, leaderless group activities, other devices 5-12  Drug tests  Reference checks  Background checks [CA legal req’s  Handwriting analysis

13. Copyright ©2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall Selection—Applicant Reactions 5-13  Applicant reactions to selection devices  Prefer job simulations and interviews  Dislike personality and cognitive ability tests [but among most valid!]  Manager reaction to selection systems  Little research  Prefer devices that are quick, easy to administer and easy to interpret  Dislike excessive HR interference

14. Copyright ©2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall Legal Issues in Staffing  Discrimination Defenses:  Legitimate, non-discriminatory practices [Disparate treatment]  Valid selection tools [Adverse impact] 5-14  Affirmative Action obligations  Negligent Hiring  Investigate past work-related behavior via references and background checks [duty of due care, due diligence]

15. Copyright ©2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall Use of Social Media in Staffing Six states--California, Delaware, Illinois, Maryland, Michigan and New Jersey-- enacted legislation in 2012 that prohibits requesting or requiring an employee, student or applicant to disclose a user name or password for a personal social media account. California, Illinois, Maryland, and Michigan laws apply to employers. California, Delaware, Michigan and New Jersey have laws that apply to academic institutions. In all, fourteen states introduced legislation in 2012 that would restrict employers from requesting access to social networking usernames and passwords of applicants, students or employees. California A.B. 1844 Status: September 27, 2012. Signed by Governor. Chapter 618. Prohibits an employer from requiring or requesting an employee or applicant for employment to disclose a user name or password for the purpose of accessing personal social media to access personal social media in the presence of the employer, or to divulge any personal social media. Prohibits an employer from discharging, disciplining, threatening to discharge or discipline, or otherwise retaliating against an employee or applicant for not complying with a request or demand by a violating employer. A.B. 1844 5-15

16. Copyright ©2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall Use of Social Media in Staffing 5-16 [See Case 3, text at page 178] Six states--California, Delaware, Illinois, Maryland, Michigan and New Jersey--enacted legislation in 2012 that prohibits requesting or requiring an employee, student or applicant to disclose a user name or password for a personal social media account.

17. Copyright ©2012 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall Use of Social Media in Staffing (cont’d) 5-17 California A.B. 1844 [2012] A.B. 1844 -Prohibits an employer from requiring or requesting an employee or applicant for employment to disclose a user name or password for the purpose of accessing personal social media in the presence of the employer, or to divulge any personal social media. -Prohibits an employer from discharging, disciplining, threatening to discharge or discipline, or otherwise retaliating against an employee or applicant for not complying with a request or demand by a violating employer.