Staffing Activities: Selection

Staffing Activities: Selection

Chapter 10:

Internal Selection

McGraw-Hill/Irwin

Copyright © 2012 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.

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, internal

Employment:
Decision making, final match

Staffing Organizations Model

10-*

10-*

Chapter Outline

  • Preliminary Issues
  • Logic of Prediction
  • Types of Predictors
  • Selection Plan
  • Initial Assessment Methods
  • Talent Management/ Succession Systems
  • Peer Assessments
  • Self-Assessments
  • Managerial Sponsorship
  • Informal Discussions and Recommendations
  • Choice of Methods
  • Substantive Assessment Methods
  • Seniority and Experience
  • Job Knowledge Tests
  • Performance Appraisal
  • Promotability Ratings
  • Assessment Centers
  • Interview Simulations
  • Promotion Panels and Review Boards
  • Choice of Methods
  • Discretionary Assessment Methods
  • Legal Issues

10-*

Learning Objectives for This Chapter

  • Compare how the logic of prediction applies to internal vs. external selection decisions
  • Evaluate the relative advantages and disadvantages of the five initial assessment methods used in internal selection
  • Consider the merits and pitfalls of using seniority and experience for internal selection decisions
  • Describe the main features of assessment centers
  • Understand the advantages and disadvantages of using assessment centers for internal selection decisions
  • Evaluate the relative advantages and disadvantages of the seven substantive assessment methods used in internal selection

10-*

Discussion Questions for This Chapter

  • Explain how internal selection decisions differ from external selection decisions.
  • What are the differences among peer ratings, peer nominations, and peer rankings?
  • Explain the theory behind assessment centers.
  • Describe the three different types of interview simulations.
  • Evaluate the effectiveness of seniority, assessment centers, and job knowledge as substantive internal selection procedures.
  • What steps should be taken by an organization that is committed to shattering the glass ceiling?

10-*

Preliminary Issues

  • Logic of prediction
  • indicators of internal applicants’ degree of success in past situations should be predictive of their likely success in new situations
  • Types of predictors
  • there is usually greater depth and relevance to the data available on internal candidates relative to external selection
  • Selection plan
  • important for internal selection to avoid the problems of favoritism and gut instinct that can be especially prevalent in internal selection

10-*

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

*

10-*

Discussion Questions

  • Explain how internal selection decisions differ from external selection decisions.

10-*

Talent Management/Succession Systems

  • Keep ongoing records of skills, talents, and capabilities of employees
  • Primary goal is to facilitate internal selection systems through up-to-date, accurate records on employees
  • Potential uses
  • Performance management
  • Recruitment needs analysis
  • Employee development
  • Compensation and career management

10-*

Peer Assessments

  • Methods include peer ratings, peer nominations, peer rankings
  • Strengths
  • Rely on raters who presumably are knowledgeable of applicants’ KSAOs
  • Peers more likely to view decisions as fair due to their input
  • Weaknesses
  • May encourage friendship bias
  • Criteria involved in assessments are not always clear

10-*

Ex. 10.1: Peer Assessment Methods

10-*

Initial Assessment Methods

  • Self-assessments
  • Job incumbents asked to evaluate own skills to determine promotability
  • Exh. 10.2: Self-Assessment Form
  • Managerial sponsorship
  • Higher-ups given considerable influence in promotion decisions
  • Exh. 10.3: Employee Advocates
  • Informal discussions and recommendations
  • May be suspect in terms of relevance to actual job performance

10-*

Exhibit 10.4 Choice of Initial Assessment Methods

10-*

Discussion Questions

  • What are the differences among peer ratings, peer nominations, and peer rankings?

10-*

Substantive Assessment Methods

  • Seniority and experience
  • Job knowledge tests
  • Performance appraisal
  • Promotability ratings
  • Assessment centers
  • Interview simulations
  • Promotion panels and review boards

10-*

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 capricious treatment and favoritism
  • Promoting senior or experienced employees is socially acceptable — viewed as rewarding loyalty

10-*

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

10-*

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

10-*

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
  • “Peter Principle”

10-*

Performance Appraisal

  • Ex. 10.5: Questions to Ask in Using Performance Appraisal as a Method of Internal Staffing Decisions
  • Is the performance appraisal process reliable and unbiased?
  • Is present job content representative of future job content?
  • Have the KSAOs required for performance in the future job(s) been acquired and demonstrated in the previous job(s)?
  • Is the organizational or job environment stable such that what led to past job success will lead to future job success?

10-*

Promotability Ratings

  • Assessing promotability involves determining an applicant’s potential for higher-level jobs
  • Promotability ratings often conducted along with performance appraisals
  • Useful for both selection and recruitment
  • Caveat
  • When receiving separate evaluations for purposes of appraisal, promotability, and pay, an employee may receive mixed messages

10-*

Overview of Assessment Centers

  • Elaborate method of employee selection
  • Involves using a collection of predictors to forecast success, primarily in higher-level jobs
  • Objective
  • Predict an individual’s behavior and
    effectiveness in critical roles, usually managerial
  • Incorporates multiple methods of assessing multiple KSAOs using multiple assessors

10-*

Ex. 10.7 Assessment Center Rating Form

  • Participants take part in several exercises over multiple days
  • In-basket exercise
  • Leaderless group discussion
  • Case analysis
  • Trained assessors evaluate participants’ performance

10-*

Characteristics of Assessment Centers

  • Participants are usually managers being assessed for higher-level managerial jobs
  • Participants are evaluated by assessors at conclusion of program

10-*

Evaluation of Assessment Centers

  • Validity
  • Average validity  ŕ = .37
  • Validity is higher when
  • Multiple predictors are used
  • Assessors are psychologists rather than managers
  • Peer evaluations are used
  • Possess incremental validity in predicting performance and promotability beyond personality traits and cognitive ability tests
  • Research results
  • “Crown prince/princess” syndrome
  • Participant reactions

10-*

Other Substantive Assessment Methods

  • Interview simulations
  • Role-play: candidate must play work related role with interviewer
  • Fact finding: candidate needs to solicit information to evaluate an incomplete case
  • Oral presentations: candidate must prepare and make an oral presentation on assigned topic
  • Promotion panels and review boards: use multiple raters, which can improve reliability and can broaden commitment to decisions reached

10-*

Exhibit 10.8 Choice of Substantive Assessment Methods

10-*

Discussion Questions

  • Explain the theory behind assessment centers.
  • Describe the three different types of interview simulations.
  • Evaluate the effectiveness of seniority, assessment centers, and job knowledge as substantive internal selection procedures.

10-*

Discretionary Assessment Methods

  • Narrows list of finalists to those who will receive job offers
  • Decisions often made on basis of
  • Organizational citizenship behavior and
  • Staffing philosophy regarding EE0 / AA
  • Differences from external selection
  • Previous finalists not receiving job offers do not simply disappear
  • Multiple assessors generally used

10-*

Legal Issues

  • Uniform Guidelines on Employee
    Selection Procedures (UGESP)
  • Shattering the glass ceiling
  • Employ greater use of selection plans
  • Minimize use of casual, subjective methods and use formal, standardized, job-related assessment methods
  • Implement programs to convey KSAOs necessary for advancement to aspiring employees

10-*

Discussion Questions

  • What steps should be taken by an organization that is committed to shattering the glass ceiling?

10-*

Ethical Issues

  • Issue 1
  • Given that seniority is not a particularly valid predictor of job performance, do you think it’s unethical for a company to use it as a basis for promotion? Why or why not?
  • Issue 2
  • Vincent and Peter are both sales associates, and are up for promotion to sales manager. In the last five years, on a 1=poor to 5=excellent scale, Vincent’s average performance rating was 4.7 and Peter’s was 4.2. In an assessment center that was meant to simulate the job of sales manager, on a 1=very poor to 10=outstanding scale, Vincent’s average score was 8.2 and Peter’s was 9.2. Assuming everything else is equal, who should be promoted? Why?

*


Comments are closed.