Session 6 1Pratt (2006)

Hiring

I. Major issues in Hiring / SelectingII. “New Recruits” CaseIII. Overview of Selection Mechanisms /

Hiring OptionsIV. Rights

Session 6 2

Hiring: Major Issues

1. Reliability: does the selection technique yield similar results over time (is it consistent)?

2. Validity: does the selection technique accurately measure those aspects of the applicant that are likely to be associated with job performance?

3.

Session 6 3

3 Types of Validity

Criterion-related: how well the selection procedure predicts on-the-job success. Measured via correlations and ranges from -1 to +1 (.5 to .6 is very high). Most often used by EEOC.

Content: how well a selection procedure directly samples the KSAs (knowledge, skills, and abilities) needed to do the job. Normally assessed via experts.

Construct: how well the selection procedure compares to other selection procedures (e.g., company IQ test with scores on standardized tests). Measured via correlations.

Session 6 4Pratt (2006)

SG Cowen: The New Recruits

Session 6 5

SG Cowen: Case Overview

Session 6 6

SG Cowen: Discussion Questions

Session 6 7

SG Cowen: Debrief

Session 6 8

Hiring Options

Option Strengths Weaknesses

Resume / Applications

• provides a wealth of verifiable information (bio data validity .35)• can be inexpensive (depending on level of detail)

Letters ofRec.

• often inflated• reference checks validity is moderate (.26)

• can provide useful information – especially if (a) see patterns across letters; (b) ask for many letters; and/or (c) organizations use their qualified privilege to give accurate information

Interviews To be covered 10/2 – 10/11

Session 6 9

Hiring Options: Selection Tests (Kulik, 2004)

Option

CognitiveAbility (e.g., SAT)

Work Sample

Integrity /Honesty

Personality(“Big 5”)

Cost / Applicant

Criterion-Related

ValidityOther Issues

$5-$100• predicts success on most jobs• does not measure some core job attributes (e.g. EI)•

$50-$500 .44 • may provide realistic job preview• expensive (tailored to each job: content, scoring, and assessing)

• somewhat immune to “presentation” effects• may be tracked on the phone via response latency

To be covered on 9/27

$9-$100 .18

$1-$100 (and more)

.02-.15

Session 6 10

3 Dimensions of Cognitive Tests(Noe, et al., 2006)

1. Verbal comprehension: ability to understand and use written & spoken language

2. Quantitative ability: speed and accuracy in solving arithmetic problems

3. Reasoning ability: capacity to invent solutions to many diverse problems

Session 6 11

Cognitive Tests

Often has adverse impact due to race.

“In the past, differences between the means for blacks and whites meant that an average black would score at the 16th percentile of the distribution of white scores.” (Noe, et al., p. 240).

While racial norming has been banned, “banding” has become more popular. Banding involves treating people with similar scores the same (e.g., 90-100 gets a ‘4’. When scores are tied, preference is given to the minority candidate). Practice is controversial.

Session 6 12

Other Tests

Physical ability tests: can be used to predict performance or predict occupational injuries (strength tests often have adverse impact)

Polygraph tests: severely restricted by the Employee Polygraph Prediction Act (e.g., can use if manufacture controlled substances, do security, etc.)

Graphology (used by 85% of French Companies): low validity (.02)

Management Assessment Centers: often used to assess management potential (& train managers) via a variety of tests and realistic managerial simulations (AT&T)

Session 6 13

Management Assessment Centers:Typical Tasks (Dessler, 2005)

Leaderless group discussion: put group of individuals together and ask them to make a decision. Evaluated on interpersonal skills, leadership, etc.

Management games: problem solving through simulations

Individual presentation: to assess persuasiveness and presentation skills

Objective tests: (e.g. personality, mental ability) Interviews

Session 6 14

Rights

Test takers have rights to privacy under APA standards for educational and psychological testing (but these guide psychologists and are not legally enforceable)

Fair Credit Reporting Act (and others) increases likelihood that applicant can view negative reports and be given the right to dispute them

Session 6 15

Looking Back: Other BHC Lessons

When assessing fit, need to look at job, but also culture and goals

Remember what resumes are good for (and what they cannot tell you).

We “fill in” information that is not there Helps form first impression

Recruiting is a skill (and experts are often the least good at explaining what they do)

Be cautious about similarity between recruits and applicants

Gender (adverse impact) Educational background (may stifle innovation)

Session 6 16

Looking Ahead

Alternatives to selection (9/18)

Hiring for culture fit (9/20)

“Off-roading” – managing culture (9/25)

Biases / barriers to interviewing and hiring (9/27)

Types of interviewing (10/2 & 10/4)

Interviewing skills: negotiation (10/9 & 10/11)

Session 6 17

Any Questions?