chapter nine
DESCRIPTION
CHAPTER NINE. External Selection II. Screen graphics created by: Jana F. Kuzmicki, PhD Troy State University-Florida and Western Region. Organization. Vision and Mission Goals and Objectives. Organization Strategy. HR and Staffing Strategy. Staffing Organizations Model. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
9-1
McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.
CHAPTER NINECHAPTER NINE
External Selection IIExternal Selection II
Screen graphics created by:Jana F. Kuzmicki, PhD
Troy State University-Florida and Western Region
9-2
McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.
Organization StrategyOrganization Strategy HR and Staffing StrategyHR and Staffing Strategy
Staffing Policies and Programs
Staffing System and Retention Management
Support Activities
Legal compliance
Planning
Job analysis
Core Staffing Activities
Recruitment: External, internal
Selection:Measurement, external, internalEmployment:Decision making, final match
OrganizationVision and Mission
Goals and Objectives
Staffing Organizations ModelStaffing Organizations Model
9-3
McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.
Chapter OutlineChapter Outline
Substantive Assessment Methods
Personality Tests Ability Tests Job Knowledge Tests Performance Tests and Work
Samples Integrity Tests Interest, Values, and Preference
Inventories Structured Interview Constructing a Structured
Interview Assessment for Team and
Quality Environments Clinical Assessments Choice of Substantive Methods
Discretionary Assessment Methods
Contingent Assessment Methods
Collection of Assessment Data
Legal Issues
9-4
McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.
Overview of Personality TestsOverview of Personality Tests
Historical role of personality tests in selection Use of MMPI as a selection tool Current role of personality tests in selection
Role of Big Five -- Taxonomy of personality Used to describe behavioral, as opposed to emotional or
cognitive, traits May capture up to 75% of an individual’s personality
Big Five factors Emotional stability Extraversion Openness to experience Agreeableness Conscientiousness
9-5
McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.
Measures of Personality TestsMeasures of Personality Tests
Surveys
Personal Characteristics Inventory (PCI)
Exh. 9.1: Sample Items for PCI
NEO Personality Inventory
Hogan Personality Inventory (HPI)
Projective tests
Interviews
Assessment of reliability and validity
9-6
McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.
Evaluation of Personality Tests:Evaluation of Personality Tests:Validity of the Big FiveValidity of the Big Five
Conscientiousness predicts performance across all occupational groupings
Emotional stability predicts performance in most occupations, especially sales, management, and teaching
Extraversion predicts performance of salespeople Conscientiousness and emotional stability have
emerged as significant predictors of performance Validity of conscientiousness in predicting job
performance --> ŕ = .31
9-7
McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.
Evaluation of Personality Tests:Evaluation of Personality Tests:Role of the Big Five in Selection Role of the Big Five in Selection
Conscientiousness and emotional stability predict job performance for many occupational groupsExh. 9.2: Possible Factors Explaining Importance . . .
Except for emotional stability, the other traits do not predict job performance
Key -- Match traits, both in terms of type and level of generality, to criteria being predicted
LimitationsApplicants may distort their responsesPossibility of applicants “faking good”Applicants’ perceptions
9-8
McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.
Exh. 9.2: Possible Factors Explaining ImportanceExh. 9.2: Possible Factors Explaining Importanceof Conscientiousness in Predicting Job Performanceof Conscientiousness in Predicting Job Performance
9-9
McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.
Overview of Ability TestsOverview of Ability Tests
Definition -- Measures that assess an individual’s capacity to function in a certain way
Two typesAptitude - Assess innate capacity to functionAchievement - Assess learned capacity to function
Between 15% and 20% of organizations use some type of ability test in selection
Four classes of ability testsCognitivePsychomotorPhysicalSensory/perceptual
9-10
McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.
Overview of Cognitive Ability TestsOverview of Cognitive Ability Tests
Definition -- Assess abilities involved in thinking, including perception, memory, reasoning, verbal and mathematical abilities, and expression of ideas
Measures of specific cognitive abilities appearto reflect general intelligence, IQ or “g”
Measures of cognitive abilityEmployee Aptitude Survey - Assesses
10 specific cognitive abilitiesWonderlic Personnel Test - Most widely used test of
general mental ability (12-minute, 50-item test) Exh. 9.4: Sample Cognitive Ability Test Items
9-11
McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.
Evaluation of Cognitive Ability TestsEvaluation of Cognitive Ability Tests
“True” validity --> ŕ = .50 Summary of research findings
Among the most valid methods of selection Appear to generalize across all organizations, all job types,
and all types of applicants Organizations using them enjoy large economic gains
compared to organizations not using them High average validities for many occupations While validity is particularly high for jobs of medium and
high complexity, validity also exists for simple jobs Intelligent employees have greater job knowledge General cognitive ability measures more useful than
measures of specific abilities
9-12
McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.
Limitations of Cognitive Ability TestsLimitations of Cognitive Ability Tests
Concern over adverse impact and fairness of tests
While cognitive ability tests are equally accurate predictors of job performance for various racial and ethnic groups, blacks and Hispanics score lower on these tests than whitesSuggested approach - Use cognitive ability
tests and monitor adverse impact closely
Applicants’ perceptionsReactions to concrete vs. abstract test items
9-13
McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.
Other Types of Ability TestsOther Types of Ability Tests
Psychomotor ability testsMeasure correlation of thought with bodily movement
Physical abilities testsMeasure muscular strength, cardiovascular
endurance, and movement qualityValidity --> ŕ = .39 to ŕ = .87
Sensory/perceptual abilities testsAssess ability to detect and recognize
environmental stimuli Use of computer testing for abilities
9-14
McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.
Job Knowledge TestsJob Knowledge Tests
Definition -- Directly assess an applicant’s comprehension of job requirements
Two types Assess knowledge of duties involved in a particular job Focus on level of experience with, and knowledge about,
critical job tasks and tools necessary to perform a job Exh. 9.8: Example of an Objective Inventory Questionnaire
Evaluation “True” validity --> ŕ = .45 Higher validities for complex jobs Job knowledge measures add little to prediction of job
performance beyond that provided by cognitive ability tests
9-15
McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.
Performance Tests and Work SamplesPerformance Tests and Work Samples
Definition -- Assess actual performance rather than underlying capacity or disposition
Exh. 9.9 - Examples of Performance Tests and Work Samples
Types of testsPerformance test vs. work sampleMotor vs verbal work samplesHigh- vs. low-fidelity testsComputer interaction performance tests
vs. paper-and-pencil testsSituational judgment tests
9-16
McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.
Evaluation of PerformanceEvaluation of PerformanceTests and Work SamplesTests and Work Samples
Research resultsAverage validity --> ŕ = .54Possess high degree of content validityPerhaps most valid method for many types of jobsWidely accepted by applicantsPossess low degrees of adverse impact
LimitationsCost of realism embedded in work samples is highTied to specific jobs leading to a lack of generalizabilitySafety issuesAssume applicants already possess necessary KSAOs
9-17
McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.
Overview of Integrity TestsOverview of Integrity Tests
Definition -- Attempt to assess an applicant’s honesty and moral character
Two typesClear purpose / overtGeneral purpose / veiled purpose
Exh. 9.10: Sample Integrity Test Questions Use of integrity tests in selection has grown
dramatically during past decade Construct of integrity not well understood
9-18
McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.
Measuring Employee IntegrityMeasuring Employee Integrity
Types of measures
Most common method is paper-and-pencil measures
Polygraph (lie detector) tests
Detect dishonesty in interview process
Paper-and-pencil measures are most feasible for assessing integrity for selection decision
9-19
McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.
Integrity Tests: Research ResultsIntegrity Tests: Research Results
Valid predictors of counterproductive behaviors; validity for clear purpose (ŕ = .55) higher than for general purpose (ŕ = .32)
Both clear and general purpose tests are valid predictors of job performance --> ŕ = .33 and ŕ = .35
Estimates using a predictive validation design and actual detection of theft lowers validity to ŕ = .13
Integrity test scores are related to several Big Five measures
Have no adverse impact against women or minoritiesand are relatively uncorrelated with intelligence
9-20
McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.
Issues Related to Integrity TestsIssues Related to Integrity Tests
Concerns related to useApplicants might fake responsesResearch results related to faking
Objections to integrity tests and applicant reactionsMost fundamental concern is misclassification of truly
honest applicants as being dishonest Exh. 9.11: Integrity Test Results and Theft Detections
Applicants view integrity tests less favorably than most selection practices and more invasive
9-21
McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.
Interest, Values, and Preference InventoriesInterest, Values, and Preference Inventories
Definition -- Involves assessing activities individuals prefer to do both on and off the job
Not often used in selection Types of tests
Strong Vocational Interest Blank (SVIB) Exh. 9.12: Sample Items from Interest Inventory
Myers-Briggs Type Inventory (MBTI) Evaluation
Average validity --> ŕ = .10Role of interest inventories in selection limitedRole in assessing person-organization fit
9-22
McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.
Overview of Structured InterviewOverview of Structured Interview
Characteristics of unstructured interviewRelatively unplanned and “quick and dirty”Questions based on interviewer “hunches” or “pet
questions” to psychologically diagnose applicantConsists of casual, open-ended, or subjective
questionsContains obtuse questionsContains highly speculative questions Interviewer often unprepared
Sources of error in unstructured interview
9-23
McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.
Characteristics of Structured InterviewCharacteristics of Structured Interview
Questions based on job analysis
Same questions asked of each candidate
Response to each question numerically evaluated
Detailed anchored rating scales used to score each response
Detailed notes taken, focusing on interviewees’ behaviors
9-24
McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.
Characteristics of Structured InterviewCharacteristics of Structured Interview (continued)(continued)
Two typesSituational - Assess applicant’s ability to project his /
her behaviors in future situations Experience-based - Assess past behaviors that are
linked to prospective job Patterned Behavior Description Interview
Similarities between situational and experienced-based interviews
Differences between situational and experienced-based interviews
9-25
McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.
Evaluation of Structured InterviewEvaluation of Structured Interview
Average validity of interviews --> ŕ = .26
Structured interviews are more valid (ŕ = .31)than unstructured interviews (ŕ = .23)
Situational interviews are more valid (ŕ = .35) than experience-based interviews (ŕ = .28)
Panel interviews were less valid (ŕ = .22)than individual interviews (ŕ = .31)
9-26
McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.
Future Uses of Structured InterviewFuture Uses of Structured Interview
Issue of employee value While performance is the central aspect of
employee value, it is not the only criterion Other relevant criteria -- Applicant reactions, employee
attendance / retention, “citizenship” behaviors, and fit Valuable in predicting “nonperformance” aspects of applicants
Interviews predict subjective performance better than objective measures of productivity
Key question - Structure interview around what? Serves other goals besides identifying best candidate for job Exh. 9.13: An Alternative Model of the Use of the
Interview in Selection Decisions
9-27
McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.
Exh. 9.13: An Alternative Model of theExh. 9.13: An Alternative Model of theUse of the Interview in Selection DecisionsUse of the Interview in Selection Decisions
9-28
McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.
Constructing a Structured InterviewConstructing a Structured Interview
Consult job requirements matrix Develop the selection plan
Exh. 9.14: Partial Selection Plan for Job of Retail Store Sales Associate
Develop structured interview planExh. 9.15: Structured Interview Questions,
Benchmark Responses, Rating Scale, and Question Weights
Select and train interviewers Evaluate effectiveness
9-29
McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.
Assessment for Quality EnvironmentsAssessment for Quality Environments
Companies with TQM missions oftenseem to ignore selection systems
Issues to be addressed in selection processTypes of skills may differSpecificity of skills may differProcess of making selection decisions may differ
Lack of research on staffing inquality environmentsValidation of selection process is important
9-30
McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.
Assessment for Team EnvironmentsAssessment for Team Environments
Establish steps for selection in team-based environmentsDetermine necessary KSAOs for teamwork
Exh. 9.17: Knowledge, Skill, and Ability (KSA) Requirements for Teamwork
Interpersonal KSAs Self-management KSAs
Example Exh. 9.18: Example Items Assessing Teamwork KSAs
Who should make the hiring decision? Critical to ensure proper context is in place
9-31
McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.
Clinical AssessmentsClinical Assessments
DefinitionMethod where a psychologist makes a judgment about
suitability of a candidate for a job Typically used for selecting people for middle- and
upper-level management positions Judgments based on
InterviewPersonal history formAbility testPersonality test
Feedback to company -- Narrative description of candidate, with or without a recommendation
9-32
McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.
Choice of Substantive Assessment MethodsChoice of Substantive Assessment Methods
Exh. 9.19: Evaluation of SubstantiveAssessment Methods
CriteriaUseCostReliabilityValidityUtilityApplicant reactionsAdverse impact
9-33
McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.
Discretionary Assessment MethodsDiscretionary Assessment Methods
Used to separate people who receive job offersfrom list of finalists
Often very subjective, relying heavily on intuitionof decision maker
Factors other than KSAOs are evaluatedAssess person/organization matchAssess people on relevant organizational
citizenship behaviors Should involve organization’s staffing philosophy
regarding EEO/AA commitments
9-34
McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.
Contingent Assessment MethodsContingent Assessment Methods
Contingent methods not always used
Depends on nature of job and legal mandates
Examples
Valid license
Security clearance check
Drug tests
Medical exams
9-35
McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.
Drug TestingDrug Testing
Characteristics and effectiveness
Types of tests
Administration
Exh. 9.20: Example of anOrganizational Drug Testing Program
Smoking
Evaluation
Recommendations: Effective drug testing program
9-36
McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.
Exh. 9.20: Example of anExh. 9.20: Example of anOrganizational Drug Testing ProgramOrganizational Drug Testing Program
9-37
McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.
Medical ExamsMedical Exams
Identifies potential health risks in job candidates Important to ensure medical exams are required
only when a compelling reason existsEnsures people with disabilities unrelated to job
performance are not screened out Use is strictly regulated by ADA Lack validity as procedures vary by doctor Not always job related Often emphasizes short- rather than long-term health New approach -- Job-related medical standards
9-38
McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.
Legal IssuesLegal Issues
Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures (UGESP)
Selection under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)
Drug testing
9-39
McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.
Legal Issues: Uniform Guidelines on Legal Issues: Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures (UGESP)Employee Selection Procedures (UGESP)
General principles Technical standards Documentation of impact and
validity evidence Definitions Makes substantial demands of a staffing system
Ensures awareness of possibility of adverse impactin employment decisions
If adverse impact is found, mechanisms providedto cope with it
9-40
McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.
Legal Issues: ADA and Drug TestingLegal Issues: ADA and Drug Testing
Selection under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)General principlesAccess to job application processReasonable accommodation
to testingMedical examinationsDrug testingUGESP
Drug testing