Date post: | 28-May-2017 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | qaiser-abbas |
View: | 217 times |
Download: | 1 times |
Chapter 8
Recruitment and Selection
Olivia Kyriakidou
Intended Learning Outcomes
After reading this chapter, you should be able to:
1. Describe the personnel selection system and its component parts
2. Understand the role played by the rational and objective staffing technologies,
including job analysis and recruitment and selection methods
3. Critically assess the concern with the selection-performance relationship that
underlines the personnel staffing agenda
4. Come to terms with the fact that employees are not simple ‘human resources’
that can be selected, recruited, controlled and processed, but human beings
characterised by agency, subjectivity and reflexivity
5. Consider the international implications of recruitment and selection, analyse
the different selection methods for expatriates and develop effective methods
in selecting expatriate managers.
6. Understand the necessity of studying recruitment and selection from a critical
perspective exploring, in particular, their ethical dimensions
7. Identify future theoretical and practical challenges in the field of recruitment
and selection research.
Introduction
Recruitment and selection are seminal topics within human resource management,
ensuring that organisations have the necessary human skills, knowledge and
capabilities that will enable the organisation to continue into the future. Recent
recognition of the strategic potential of recruitment and selection to enhance
organisational performance put a lot of emphasis on getting the ‘right person’ for a
post (see also Chapter 2). Selecting the ‘right person’, means that the personnel
recruitment and selection agenda should be dominated by a concern with
formalisation, enshrined in its language of ‘objectivity’, ‘reliability’, and ‘validity’,
and a technology and method which attempts to maximise ‘decision-making
accuracy’, as well as a concern with the selection-performance relationship. In most
HRM practice, performance is conceptualised in strict economic terms excluding
consideration of issues of fairness and acceptability to whatever individuals, groups or
authorities that might take an interest in selection decisions. Moreover, formalisation
refers to the use of formal methods which are supposed to aid an objective, fair and
rational selection decision, guarding at the same time against inefficiency and
discrimination through the use of scientifically validated techniques. This agenda
prescribes practices which, if followed properly, should guarantee the ‘truth’ of
selection decisions producing a better match between the individual and the
organisation at the point of selection and should remove ethical uneasiness from
personnel decision-making (see also Chapter 5).
Underpinning this assumption is the idea that the information identified as central or
critical to good selection decisions can be understood as relatively neutral. By neutral
it is meant that the content of knowledge, skills and ability profiles is treated as
largely reflecting the reality of the role of the person. However, there is a considerable
danger of managers having too much faith in the neutrality and the predictive powers
of selection techniques and procedures that tend to ignore the amount of human
interpretation and intuition involved in all staffing activities. A more critical way of
thinking indicates that selection processes should not exclude broader moral, social
and political considerations (Janssens & Steyaert, 2009) embedded on a pluralist
approach that stresses the existence of divergent interests within organisations as well
as the role of human agency, subjectivity and reflexivity on the enactment of certain
types of personnel selection technologies.
Such a critical way of thinking is further strengthened by research studies exploring
the international dimensions of personnel selection. For instance, it has been reported
that consistent with the national culture, organizations in the USA typically have
cultures that emphasise individual achievement, competition and rationality (Stone &
Stone-Romero, 2004). As a result, the ideal job applicant in organizations is one who
is individualistic and achievement oriented (Syed, 2004). In such situations,
individuals who come from collectivist societies could be disadvantaged during the
processes of personnel recruitment and selection. Similarly, Bevelander (1999)
highlights the fact that in many countries, a lot of monotonous jobs that used to
involve low or unskilled labour are increasingly replaced by jobs that require higher
communicative and social abilities as well as culture-specific social competence and
language skills. Such an orientation, however, towards specific social skills mainly
possessed by the native-born may lead to personnel recruitment and selection
practices which are not sensitive to the cultural diversity of the labour force.
The structure of this chapter is as follows. In the first section we explore the classical
theories and current research that underpin the three basic elements of a personnel
selection system: a) studying the job to be performed, b) recruiting a pool of
applicants for the job, and c) selecting the ‘best’ from the applicant pool. Such an
exploration will be enriched by international considerations and implications for
recruitment and selection, with a special focus on expatriate managers. Finally, we
adopt a critical perspective which tries to reveal the ethical issues that underpin
personnel staffing and problematise the currently strong relationship between
selection practices and performance.
Stages of recruitment and selection
Most recruitment and selection procedures involve several stages that occur over time.
The process usually includes a job analysis (see also Chapter 7) that results in job
description and personnel specification in order to uncover all the qualities that are
necessary to perform the job successfully, an initial recognition of the need for new
staff (see also Chapter 6), recruitment advertising, followed by pre-screening
applicants, and final selection decisions and induction of new employees into the
organisation. This systems view is generally based on the traditional predictivist
perspective on selection, which views the job as a given and stable entity into which
the most suitable candidate needs to be recruited. Person-job fit is therefore of
primary importance. Figure 1 illustrates the whole process and is reasonably self-
explanatory in terms of the critical objectives and key activities at each phase.
Figure 1
The recruitment and selection process
Critical objectives
To attract a suitablequality and quantity ofapplicants
To reduce applicantnumbers to manageableproportions
To conduct in-depthassessments and reachsuitability decisions
To facilitate transitioninto new work role
Key activities
Recognition of the need for new HRs
Job analysis: Job description, person specification
Recruitment of applicants: advertisements, agencies
Candidate decision-making
Pre-screening techniques
Organisational and candidate decision-making
Candidate assessment techniques: interview,Work sample, psychometric tests, assessment centre
Organisational and candidate decision-making
Offer of employment: Reference/testimonial, terms and conditions
Candidate decision-making
Induction procedures: placement, training needs analysis,review and appraisal
Validation
Phase IRecruitment
Phase IIPre-screening
Phase IIIAssessment
Phase IVInduction
The advantage of taking such a ‘systems view’ of selection is that it provides a
holistic overview of the entire process underlying two pertinent issues: bilateral
decision-making and validation feedback loops. First, decisions are made by both the
recruiter and the candidate at several points in the process, supporting the
constructivist perspective that both parties consider possible employment options and
make decisions over whether to accept a working relationship with each other.
Selection therefore serves as an opportunity for information exchange and the
development of mutual expectations and obligations. Hence, from this perspective,
selection aims to ensure not only person-job fit but also person-organisation fit (that
is, the fit between the applicant’s values and organisational culture) and person-team
fit (that is, the fit between the applicant’s skills and attitudes and the climate of the
immediate working group).
Second, the systems view highlights the importance of the validation feedback loop.
In larger scale selection processes, where numerous recruitment decisions are reached
over a period of time, the crucial question from the organisation’s perspective is:
‘How accurate are these decisions in selecting individuals who subsequently turn out
to be effective job performers?’ This question has driven much of the research from
the psychometric perspective. Validation feedback loops recycle information on the
effectiveness of selection decisions into the selection process at different stages in
order to modify and improve the procedure.
Job analysis
The traditional role of job analysis is to provide a fixed starting point for all
subsequent steps in the selection process. Job analysis refers to one or more
procedures designed to collect information about the tasks people perform and the
skills they require to do the jobs effectively. It is a process for describing what is done
in any job, not the best way to do it, nor what it is worth to have the job done. Job
analysis traditionally seeks for the following information:
Work activities, including both individual behaviours and job outcomes
Machines, tools, equipment and work aids used
Job-related tangibles and intangibles, such as materials processed and
knowledge applied, respectively
Standards of work performance
Job context
Personnel requirements, such as education, experience, aptitudes and so forth.
The end product of job analysis is often a job description, which is a factual statement
of the tasks, responsibilities, and working conditions of a particular job. Box 1
presents an example of a job description for a first-level supervisor post. The job
description should also include elements of contextual performance, as there is still
the tendency to focus upon specific, discrete tasks and ignore contextual aspects such
as maintaining morale, courtesy and other citizenship behaviours (Viswesvaran &
Ones, 2000). There may also be a person specification, which details the knowledge,
skills, abilities, experiences and attributes or attitudes required to perform the job
effectively.
However, Hough and Oswald (2000) indicate that, in recognition of the increasingly
rapid changes that are taking place in the workplace, job analysis should focus on
tasks and the cross-functional skills of workers, including information on personality,
cognitive, behavioural and situational variables, rather than on more static aspects of
jobs. Moreover, in many selection situations, the requirement to understand the job is
made particularly complex and difficult, because the job in question is likely to be
radically different in ways that are very difficult to predict within as little as 5 or
maybe 10 years. Finally, at the managerial / professional level someone may be
employed to fulfil objectives or agendas as opposed to specific tasks. In such
instances, Cascio (1995) says that what can often remain is something more ‘person-
like’ than ‘job-like’, insofar as the job (as a set of objectives or agendas) is
idiosyncratically defined and enacted.
The recruitment process
In most reviews of recruitment research, authors (e.g., Rynes & Cable, 2003) have
offered organising models of the recruitment process. Figure 2 presents a model
developed by Breaugh et al. (2008). Given the detailed nature of the model, we will
Box 1
Job analysis: First-Level Supervisor – Department of Operations
Performance dimensions and task statements:
Organising work; assigning work; monitoring work; managing consequences; counselling, efficiency review, and discipline; setting an example; employee development.
KSAOs and definitions:
Organising; analysis and decision making; planning; communication (oral and written; delegation; work habits; carefulness; interpersonal skill; job knowledge; organisational knowledge; toughness; integrity; development of other; listening.
Predictor Measures
Multiple-choice in-basket exercise
(assume role of new supervisor and work through in-basket on desk)
Structured panel interview
(predetermined questions about past experiences relevant to the KSAOs)
Presentation exercise
(make presentation to a simulated work group about change in their work hours)
Writing sample
(prepare a written reprimand for a fictitious employee)
Training and experience evaluation exercise
(give examples of training and work achievements relevant to certain KSAOs)
not provide a thorough discussion of all of its contents. However, a key part of Figure
2, the box labelled ‘Intervening Job Applicant Variables’, does merit elaboration.
Although some of these variables (e.g., what makes a position attractive) have
received attention, many other variables (e.g., attracting applicant attention, applicant
self-insight) have received almost no attention from recruitment researchers (Breaugh
et al., 2008). A consideration of the job applicant variables portrayed in Figure 2
should play a central role in how an employer plans its recruitment process. For
example, if an employer is interested in attracting the attention of individuals who are
not currently looking for jobs, many commonly used (and commonly studied)
recruitment methods (e.g., newspaper advertisements, job fairs) may not be
particularly effective. Similarly, if an organisation hopes to improve
person–job/organisation fit by providing realistic information during the recruitment
process, applicant self-insight is important to consider (without such insight, even
having received the information, an applicant may not be able to evaluate whether the
position described represents a good fit). Research (see Breaugh et al., 2008; Rynes &
Cable, 2003) has found that many job applicants: (a) have an incomplete and/or
inaccurate understanding of what a job opening involves, (b) are not sure what they
want from a position, (c) do not have a self-insight with regard to their knowledge,
skills, and abilities, and (d) cannot accurately predict how they will react to the
demands of a new position.
Figure 2
A model of the recruitment process
Recruitment ObjectivesFilling ‘X’ number of positionsType of applicant sought:• education• knowledge, skills, ability• work experience• interests• diversityTime frameNumber of applicantsJob performance of new hiresNew hire retentions rateJob satisfaction of new hires
Strategy DevelopmentWhom to recruit?Where to recruit?Timing of activities?How to reach targeted
individualsWhat message to
communicate?Whom to use as recruiters?Nature of site visit?Nature of job offer?Budget considerations?
Recruitment ActivitiesMethods usedInformation conveyed:• completeness• realism• timelinessRecruiters usedHosting the site visitExtending the job offer
Intervening JobApplicant VariablesApplicant attentionMessage credibilityApplicant interest:• position attractiveness• expectancy of job offer• alternative opportunities• person-job / organisation fitAccuracy of expectationsApplicant self-insightApplicant decision-making
process
RecruitmentResults
Recruiting methods
External recruitment
Having done a thorough job analysis and produced an accurate job description,
including a realistic person specification, the organisation is now ready to start
recruiting potential applicants. With regard to the term external recruitment, it could
be defined as encompassing an employer’s actions that are intended to: a) bring a job
opening to the attention of potential job candidates who do not currently work for the
organisation, b) influence whether these individuals apply for the opening, c) affect
whether they maintain interest in the position until a job offer is extended, and d)
influence whether a job offer is accepted.
External recruitment sources
The type of recruitment method(s) (Table 1) an employer uses may make a difference.
The two most common explanations for why this might happen (Zottoli & Wanous,
2000) have been labeled the ‘realistic information’ hypothesis and the ‘individual
difference’ hypothesis. Simply stated, the realistic information hypothesis suggests
that individuals recruited via certain methods such as employee referrals have a more
accurate understanding of what a position involves. The individual difference
hypothesis posits that different recruitment methods may bring a job opening to the
attention of different types of individuals who vary on important attributes (e.g.,
ability, work ethic).
Table 1
External recruitment sources
Employee referrals Advantages: low cost/hire, high quality hires, decreased hiring time, opportunities to strengthen the bond with current employees. Employees carefully pre-screen applicants due to the activation of a reputation protection mechanism, they provide ‘difficult to obtain information, coaching and press their referrals to perform.
Job advertisements Ads with more information result in job openings being viewed as more attractive and more credible, increasing applicant interest and resulting in better person-organisation fit. The inclusion of pictures of minorities seems to increase the attraction of diverse applicants to the organisation
Internet / employer’s web site
They generate a large number of applicants at relatively low cost and their effectiveness depends upon the employer’s visibility and reputation, as well as aesthetics, the content and the function of the web site. A potential limitation is that a firm may be inundated with applications from individuals who are not good candidates for the positions. As a way to address this issue, given its interactive capability, a web site could provide feedback concerning person-job/organisational fit to potential applicants.
Universities, colleges and placement offices
They are source of people with specialised skills for professional positions. The choice of colleges and universities might depend on past experiences with students at the school, the quality of recent hires, offer acceptance rates and skills, experience and training in the desired areas, ranking of school quality and costs of recruiting at a particular school.
Co-ops, internships and job fairs
They are part-time working arrangements which allow the organisation to obtain services from a part-time employee for a short period of time, but they also allow the organisation the opportunity to assess the person for a full-time position after graduation.
Employment agencies and executive search firms
A source of nonexempt and lower-level exempt employees is employment agencies. For higher-level positions, executive search firms, or “headhunters” may be used. Care must be exercised in selecting an employment agency as many agencies might flood the organisation with CVs without careful screening and may misrepresent the organisation to the candidate and the candidate to the organisation if they are only concerned with a quick placement and pay no regard to the costs of poor future relationships with clients.
Recruiter effect. Chapman et al. (2005) found that individuals who viewed a recruiter
as having been personable, trustworthy, informative, and/or competent were more
attracted to a position with the recruiter’s organisation. A recruiter’s behaviour can be
very important as the way they treat an applicant may be viewed as a signal of how
the person would be treated if hired. Rynes et al. (1991) have found that recruiters
were “associated with changes in many job seekers’ assessment of fit over time – 16
of 41 individuals mentioned recruiters or other corporate representatives as reasons
for deciding that an initially favored company was no longer a good fit, whereas an
identical number mentioned recruiters as a reason for changing an initial impression
of poor fit into a positive one” (p. 59). Finally, Breaugh et al (2008) underline the
importance of different types of recruiters because a) they vary in the amount of job-
related information they possess, b) they differ in terms of their credibility in the eyes
of recruits, and c) they signal different things to job candidates.
Finally, with regard to the relative importance of recruitment vis-à-vis position
characteristics, conventional wisdom is that position attributes such as pay, job tasks,
and work hours are more important to job applicants than such recruitment variables
as the content of a job advertisement, the design of a company’s employment web
site, or a recruiter’s behaviour. Comparisons of the relative impact of recruitment
variables and position attributes have resulted in some individuals questioning
whether the manner in which an employer recruits is important. In this context, two
factors should be considered. First, if an employer does a poor job of recruiting, it
may not bring job openings to the attention of the type of persons it seeks to recruit.
Secondly, even if a position is brought to the attention of targeted individuals, poor
treatment during the recruitment process may result in individuals withdrawing as job
candidates before an employer has had a chance to even present a job offer (Boswell
et al., 2003).
Internal recruitment
The objective of the internal recruitment process is to identify and attract applicants
from among individuals already holding jobs with the organisation (Table 2). Many
organisations have recognized that careful management of their existing employee
base may be a cost-effective way to fill upper-level managerial and professional
vacancies.
Table 2
Internal recruitment sources
Job postings It spells out the duties and requirements of the job, shows how applicants can apply and its content should be based on the job description and should clearly define the KSAOs needed to perform the job. The main
characteristics that lead to high satisfaction by users include the adequacy of job descriptions and job notification procedures, the treatment received during the interview, the helpfulness of counselling and the provision of constructive feedback, and the fairness of the job posting system.
Intranet and intraplacement
It informs employees quickly for job postings and prospects inside the organisation. Some companies include an online career centre where employees can also gain access to information about KSAOs needed for positions that might interest them.
Talent management system
It monitors and tracks the utilization of employee skills and abilities throughout the organisation
Career development centres
They provide employees with opportunities to take interest inventories, assess their personal career goals, and discuss with representatives across the organisation. In this way, employees learn about themselves, have a chance to explain the career options within the organisation and develop methods to structure internal career paths that match the interests of their employees.
Replacement and succession plans
Succession plans are organised by position and list the skills needed for the prospective position.
Realistic job previews
A realistic job preview (provided through work simulations and work tours among
others) requires that employers should provide recruits with candid information
concerning the pleasant but also the unpleasant aspects of the job as a way to address
inaccurate job expectations and decrease turnover.
Three important job applicant-related variables (i.e., anchoring and adjustment,
inability to predict how one will react to events in the future, and a lack of self-sight)
need to be highlighted in the context of realistic job previews (RJPs). Concerning
anchoring and adjustment, research in social psychology (see Kruglanski & Sleeth-
Keppler, 2007) has found that, having formed an initial attitude concerning a topic,
individuals typically do not sufficiently adjust this attitude after receiving additional
relevant information. This suggests that providing an RJP to an applicant who already
has an opinion of what a position with an employer involves may not result in an
adequate adjustment of this initial opinion.
Moreover, Dunning (2007) has shown that people who are asked to predict how they
will react to a future state of events with which they lack experience typically are
unable to make accurate predictions. This inability to predict one’s reactions means
that, even if an organisation provides descriptive information about what a job
involves, an RJP recipient may have difficulty anticipating how he or she will react to
various aspects of the new job. This inability to predict one’s reactions can at least
partially be overcome if an RJP includes information that is both descriptive (i.e.,
factual) and judgmental (i.e., addresses the reactions other employees have to the job
attributes) (Breaugh et al., 2008).
The effectiveness of an RJP can also be limited by a lack of applicant self-insight
concerning one’s abilities or what one wants in a job. Schmeichel and Vohs (2009)
indicate that individuals frequently lack self-insight and typically have an inflated
view of their abilities. Finally, RJPs could be used not only for entry-level hiring, but
also for internal recruitment. For example, a study by Caligiuri and Phillips (2003)
described how an employer successfully used an RJP to help current employees make
decisions concerning overseas assignments. Templer, Tay, and Chandrasekar (2006)
also documented the effectiveness of an RJP in facilitating cross-cultural adjustment
for employees transferred to non-U.S. assignments.
Personnel selection methods
Application forms, curricula vitae and references
CVs and application forms are used as a straightforward way of giving a standardized
synopsis of the applicant’s history in order to pre-screen applicants and generate a
shortlist to be invited to the next stage. To facilitate effective pre-screening decision-
making, an application form should ideally be designed according to the selection
criteria and a systematic screening process adhered to. However, research into
graduate recruitment suggests that the typical process is far from systematic (Knights
& Raffo, 1990), and this can clearly impact negatively on the selection process in the
longer term. Moreover, there is evidence that suggests that the inclusion of
competency statements in CVs (e.g., ‘I am highly motivated with a proven track
record in achieving goals and targets’) increased the probability of producing an
invitation to an interview (Earl, Bright & Adams, 1998). Although application forms
are very popular in the UK, there are cultural differences across Europe with standard
application documents being more popular in Germany and curricula vitae being more
prevalent in Denmark (Shackleton & Newell, 1997).
References involve the assessment of an individual by a third party; for example, the
applicant’s previous employer. The use of references is more common in the UK,
Ireland and Belgium than in France, Sweden, the Netherlands and Portugal
(Shackleton & Newell, 1997). References may involve either an open-ended format or
a structured format with questions developed from selection criteria. References may
serve at least two purposes: first, to confirm the accuracy of information provided by
the applicant; second, to obtain information on the applicant’s previous work
experience and performance. However, references suffer from problems of restriction
of range, low predictive validity, low inter-rated reliability, low criterion-related and
leniency, with few applicants given negative evaluations, suggesting that not too
much reliance should be placed upon their content (Shackleton & Newell, 1997).
Their validity could be improved when references are sought on a criterion-specific
basis (Smith & George, 1992) or by structuring references in the form of systematic
ratings of ‘personality’ (Mount, Barrick, & Strauss, 1994). References are therefore
rarely used in the decision-making process, but are more likely to be used merely as a
final check before any job offer is made.
Selection interviews
The use of interviews as selection technique continues unabated. In organisations
around the world, selection interviews continue to be one of the most frequently used
methods to assess candidates for employment (Wilk & Cappelli, 2003). McDaniel,
Whetzel, Schmidt and Maurer (1994: 599) define the interview as a ‘procedure
designed to predict future job performance on the basis of applicants’ oral responses
to oral enquiries’. Guion (1998), however, cautions against this generic definition
because it assumes that interviews are monolithic entities like tests. Beyond
everything else, we should keep in mind that the selection interview is a social
interaction where the interviewer and applicant exchange and process the information
gathered from each other.
The clearest boundary can be drawn between the traditional unstructured (measuring
for example social skills and aspects of personality) and more structured forms of
interview (measuring for example cognitive ability, tacit or job knowledge).
Traditionally, interviews are used merely to form a global impression about applicant
job suitability including whether they would ‘fit in’, rather than asking them job-
related questions. By contrast, structured interviews involve a series of job-related
questions with pre-determined answers consistently applied across all interviews for a
particular job (that is, standardisation of questions, question sequence, interview
length, evaluation, and so on). Probably the most consistent finding in interview
research is that interviewer judgments based on structured interviews are more
predictive of job performance than those from unstructured interviews (Dipboye,
Wooten and Halverson, 2004).
The two main ways of structuring interviews are situational interviewing and
behaviour description interviewing. The situational interview (Latham & Saari, 1984),
that assumes that intentions and behaviours are related, tries to elicit from candidates
how they would respond to particular work situations. The situational questions can
be developed using the critical incident technique of job analysis that tries to identify
the behaviours critical to effective performance on the job. This is then translated into
a question about a hypothetical but job-relevant situation. A scoring guide is
developed for evaluating an interviewee’s response to each question by providing
exemplars of behavioural responses to that question. An example of a situational
interview (Box 2) taken from Latham and Saari (1984: 571) is as follows:
Box 2
Example of a situational interview
For the past week you have been consistently getting the jobs that are the most time-
consuming (for example, poor handwriting, complex statistical work). You know it’s
nobody’s fault because you have been taking the jobs in priority order. You have just
picked your fourth job of the day and it’s another ‘loser’. What would you do?
Interviewees offer unstructured responses that are then scored against benchmark
answers. The benchmark answers for the example question are 1 = Thumb through the
pile and take another job (poor); 3 = Complain but do the job anyway (average); 5 =
Take the job without complaining and do it (good).
The behavioural description interview is a variant of the situational interview (Janz,
1982). However, whether the situational interview invites applicants to respond to
questions in the light of how they might behave, the behavioural interview requires
examination of how the applicant actually behaved in the past when encountering
similar incidents (assuming that past behaviour predicts future behaviour).
Interestingly, panel interviews, also referred to as board interviews or team
interviews, involving multiple raters of the same set of applicants, are another means
of adding structure and are expected to result in increased reliability and validity than
comparably structured one-to-one interviews, despite their considerably higher
administrative costs (Conway, Jako, & Goodman, 1995). However, the relational
demography and the racial composition of the interview panel may affect judgments
in ways consistent with similarity – attraction and social identity theories showing
same-race biases (McFarland, Ryan, Sacco & Krista, 2004; Buckley, Jackson, Bolino,
Veres & Field, 2007). Moreover, Herriott (2003) has suggested that the process of
discussion among individual raters can substantially distort the consensual score
through conformity and polarization effects implying that it is perhaps better to obtain
individual ratings from panel members before discussion.
Despite the evidence showing that interviews containing high levels of structure can
be valid predictors, surveys show that managers, HR professionals, and organisations
infrequently use them and most HR professionals reported using interviews with a
moderate degree of structure as it affords them more autonomy and ownership
(Lievens & De Paepe, 2004). The use of less structured interviews is related with
interviewers’ concerns about a) having discretion in how the interview is conducted,
b) losing the informal, personal contact with the applicant, and c) the time demands in
developing structured interviews (Lievens & De Paepe, 2004). There is also the
tendency for operational and HR personnel to use ‘satisficing’ versus maximising
selection practices. Finally, when interviewers are required to justify the procedures
they followed in making their ratings – procedure accountability – are more likely to
use structured interview procedures and make better judgments (Brtek & Motowildo,
2002).
In practice, there is tension between increasing structure (that is, to enhance validity)
and avoiding adverse reaction. Whilst the unstructured interview may be charged with
being overly personal, the highly structured interview may create adverse reaction
because it is perceived as ‘depersonalising’. Overall, applicants demonstrate a distinct
preference for the unstructured over the structured interview (Hough & Oswald,
2000). Also, the less structured the interview, the more symbolic opportunity there is
for the applicant to get a feel for the organisation and its culture (via the interviewer),
enabling more realistic acceptance decisions (Anderson, 2001). Box 3 highlights the
dilemmas behind the use of highly structured interview formats.
Applicant factors and characteristics
Recent research has found effects in relation to subtle discrimination. Frazer and
Wiersma (2001) found that one week after conducting interviews, interviewers
recalled African-American applicants as having given less intelligent answers
compared to White applicants. Similarly, Purkiss, Perrewe, Gillespie, Mayes and
Ferris (2006) observed that those applicants with both an ethnic name and
corresponding accent received the least favourable interviewer ratings, whereas
applicants with a Hispanic name but no accent were evaluated most favourably. This
result provides support for expectancy violation theory (Jussim, Coleman, & Learch,
1987). The applicants with Hispanic names were likely expected to speak with an
accent. When they did not, thus violating expectations, they were viewed more
positively. Finally, there is evidence suggesting the existence of selection biases
against overweight applicants, especially when interviewers perceive the applicants’
obesity as controllable (Kutcher & Bragger, 2004), and Bragger and his colleagues
(2002) indicate that pregnancy discrimination claims are the fastest growing type of
employment discrimination charge.
Biodata
The use of biodata for employee selection has a long history and many researchers
(e.g., Ployhart, Schneider & Schmitt, 2006) have concluded that biodata is one of the
best selection devices for predicting employee performance and turnover. Biodata
forms typically assess factual and sometimes also attitudinal factors that seek
biographical information, or descriptions of individuals’ life histories using a
retrospective, quasi-longitudinal, self-report format and should be defined only in
terms of an applicant’s past behaviour and experience (Mael, 1991). These past
Box 3
Does your company need a highly structured interview format?
David Hill was tiring. Having sat on Speed’s interview panel conducting graduate
‘milk round’ interviews over the past five days at the company’s Athens offices, he
had become so accustomed to the structured format that he could totally recite the
standardised questions asked of all candidates in reverse order if so required. More
to the point, his two line management colleagues on the interview panel had need
strict chairing throughout the interviewing process, as both had pronounced
tendencies to stray away from the structured format. One in particular, John Oliver,
the Director of Speed Production, could not on occasions resist the temptation of
asking candidates questions on their personal and family circumstances. This was
especially unfortunate, David Hill felt, given that the company had paid a firm of
HRM consultants a considerable sum to introduce a highly structured interview
format. Still, he mused to himself, only one more candidate to see today and they
would be finished. He glanced at the clock – 5.00 p.m. – settled back into his chair,
composed himself and enquired of his fellow panel members whether they were
ready for the last interviewee.
Critical Questions:
Was David Hill correct to commission a firm of HRM consultants to develop a
highly structured interview format?
If structure is a ‘good thing’ in terms of improving interview validity and
reliability, can there be situations where structure is disadvantageous?
How should the chair of an interview panel deal with maverick interviewers who
either
Deviate from the standardised format;
Ask personal or intrusive questions?
behaviours and experiences can reflect events that occurred in a work context (e.g.,
quit a job without giving notice), an educational setting (e.g., graduated from college),
a family environment (e.g., travelled considerably growing up), community activities
(e.g., volunteer of a not-for-profit organisation), or other domains (e.g., active in local
politics, religious activities, whether they know people who work for the
organisation). Biodata items are often referred to as ‘hard’ and ‘soft’ items
respectively, in that the former are potentially verifiable whereas the latter are not.
Finally, research suggests that biodata scales can be developed so as to be useful in
different organisations since the biodata items are relevant to a given job (e.g.,
insurance agent, supervisor) regardless of the organisation and Dalessio, Crosby and
McManus, (1996) argue that a biodata scale that has been found to be valid in one
country will have value if used in other countries.
A concern that has been raised with using biodata is adverse impact against members
of protected groups (e.g., Sharf, 1994). Drakeley (1989) also criticises the model for
being derived from work primarily involving ‘classification’ of North American
university students and thus no generalisable to other populations. Given some of the
items that have been used (e.g., age, educational level), this concern seems
appropriate. In particular, biodata items that reflect cognitive ability (e.g., college
grade point average) are likely to result in adverse impact. Given there is not a lot of
research regarding adverse impact, it seems prudent for an organisation to examine
each biodata item it is considering using. Applicants might also be likely to react
negatively to items that are perceived as lacking job relatedness, that are perceived as
fakable, and that are perceived as overly personal in nature.
Psychometric tests
A test can be defined as a standardized measure of aptitude, knowledge, ability or
performance administered and scored using fixed rules, most of them statistical, and
procedures. All psychometric tests are scaled using a fine graded numerical system
and a set of statistical formulae to ensure reliability and validity. Most psychometric
tests are also norm-referenced such that the range and distribution of scores obtained
from many different types of sample provide group-specific norms against which to
compare an individual’s score. The scores for a managerial applicant, for example, are
examined with reference to the most closely matching set of norms (that is,
managerial). Reference to norms can also demonstrate whether the test is
‘transportable’ from one context to another. For example, it is only fairly recently that
UK norms for the well-known and much-used US-developed 16 Personality Factors
Test (16PF) have become available. Finally, there is variation across Europe in
relation to the use of psychometrics, with Britain, Belgium and Portugal making more
substantial use than Germany or Italy (Shackleton & Newell, 1997). Psychometric
tests can be divided into two main categories: cognitive ability tests and personality
tests.
Cognitive ability tests
Since the very earliest research on personnel selection, cognitive ability has been one
of the major methods used to attempt to discriminate between candidates and to
predict subsequent performance. Cognitive ability tests (CATs) can be classified
somewhat arbitrarily as achievement tests, specific aptitude tests, and general mental
ability (GMA) tests. Achievement tests measure skills that have already been acquired
and tap current knowledge or ability in a particular ability domain, usually as a
function of education or training. Aptitude tests look at what one is capable of doing
in the future, usually in specific domains like mechanical aptitude, spatial and
perceptual ability, verbal and numerical aptitude and psychomotor ability. GMA tests,
are designed to give an indication of overall mental capacity indicative of overall
capability for acquiring and using knowledge, passing examinations and succeeding at
work. A variety of questions are included in such tests, including vocabulary,
analogies, similarities, opposites, arithmetic, number extension and general
information. Many meta-analytic studies (e.g., Salgado et al., 2003; Schmidt &
Hunter, 1998) have produced conclusive results concerning not only the validity of
cognitive validity, but also that the core dimension of cognitive ability (general
mental ability, or ‘g’) is the key component in providing predictions of subsequent job
performance.
The idea nonetheless of using only an ability test score to select someone is highly
controversial, underpinned by moral as well as legal debate. For years it has been
consistently argued that ability testing does not produce differentially unfair
predictions for different groups of people. Recently, however, there are findings
suggesting that ability testing is unfair to minority groups, with over 60 percent of
Blacks likely to be incorrectly rejected for a job (Chung-Yan & Cranshaw, 2002).
This finding is set to cast the legal and moral debate into a completely different
landscape and has prompted some to develop latent intelligence tests presented as
work samples (Klingner & Schuler, 2004). They are potentially costly to develop
because they ‘sample’ work pertinent to particular occupational groups or jobs, but
they may signal one constructive way forward on the issue of how to balance
efficiency needs with legal imperatives and psychological concerns.
Moreover, some maintain that many jobs, especially managerial jobs, presuppose
‘tacit’ knowledge or action-oriented ‘know how’ rather than ability per se (Sternberg
& Wagner, 1995), ‘emotional intelligence’ (ability to perceive, understand and
manage emotion) (Goleman, 1996) and at least some level of commitment (Meyer &
Allen, 1997). Reviews, however, show that tests of tacit knowledge, emotional
intelligence and ‘practical’ intelligence do not produce better predictive or
incremental validities than CATs (Salgado, 1999) indicating that they are just
different ways of referring to ‘job knowledge’ (Schmidt & Hunter, 1993). Finally, the
increased cognitive demands of today’s technologically complex, fast-paced,
consumer oriented economic environment underline the fact that GMA might
seriously matter to performance.
Personality inventories
Personality measures are increasingly being used by managers and human resource
professionals to evaluate the suitability of job applicants for positions across many
levels in an organisation. There are many different types of personality measure, each
assuming a certain number of traits and trait structures. Cattell’s (1965) work led to
the development of the now renowned 16PF, one of the most widely used measure of
personality in the occupational context. A contrary view is provided by the Eysenck
Personality Questionnaire (EPQ; Eysenck, 1982) that assumes a three-factor
personality model: extroversion/introversion, neuroticism/stability, and psychoticism.
The contemporary view is that there are five super-ordinate trait dimensions (the so-
called ‘big five’ or FFM) on which all people can be described (Costa & McCrae,
1990):
Extroversion. The degree to which someone is talkative, sociable, active,
aggressive, and excitable.
Agreeableness. The degree to which someone is trusting, amiable, generous,
tolerant, honest, cooperative, and flexible.
Conscientiousness. The degree to which someone is dependable and
organised and conforms and perseveres on tasks.
Emotional stability. The degree to which someone is secure, calm,
independent, and autonomous.
Openness to experience. The degree to which someone is intellectual,
philosophical, insightful, creative, artistic, and curious.
Box 4 provides some sample items from a personality characteristics inventory
Until quite recently, personality was not a popular personnel selection method.
Schmitt, Gooding, Noe and Kirsch (1984) reported very low validities for the
relationship between personality and job performance and Blinkhorn and Johnson
(1990) argued that using personality tests can delude people into assuming they offer
a comprehensive picture of a person, and also ‘overly objectify’ the person.
Moreover, few would dispute the conclusion that non-work related selection tools are
relatively poor predictors of job success relative to structured interviews and ability
Box 4
Sample items from a personality characteristics inventory
ConscientiousnessI can always be counted on to get the job doneI am a very persistent workerI almost always plan things in advance of work
ExtraversionMeeting new people is enjoyable to meI like to stir up excitement if things get boringI am a “take-charge” type of person
AgreeablenessI like to help others who are down on their luckI usually see the good side of peopleI forgive others easily
Emotional stabilityI can become annoyed at people quite easily (reverse-scored)At times, I don’t care about much of anything (reverse-scored)My feelings tend to be easily hurt (reverse-scored)
Openness to experienceI like to work with difficult concepts and ideasI enjoy trying new and different thingsI tend to enjoy art, music, or literature.
Source: Mount, M.K. & Barrick, M.R. (1995). Manual for Personal Characteristics Inventory.
tests and should be treated with caution (Robertson & Smith, 2001). However,
renewed interest in personality testing and the acceptance of the FFM personality
structure has led to a widespread belief and confidence that personality can play a
significant role to effective personnel selection.
Conscientiousness is considered to be the best predictor of job performance across
various performance criteria, such as team performance, leadership emergence, and
task role behaviour, and occupational groups (Schmidt & Hunter, 1998). Ones and
Viswesvaran (1998) argue that this finding is not surprising really in that the
conscientious person is more likely to spend time on assigned tasks, acquire greater
job knowledge, set goals autonomously and persist in achieving them, go beyond role
requirements and avoid being counterproductive, but advocate the use of some kind of
‘social desirability’ screening measure, to minimise distortion likelihood.
Apart from conscientiousness, the other FFM dimensions vary in their predictive
effects depending on the nature of the performance criterion and occupational group.
For example, agreeableness and openness to experience are related to performance
involving interpersonal skills (Nikolaou, 2003) and conscientiousness and
extraversion predict managerial performance significantly better in jobs categorized
as high in autonomy (Barrick & Mount, 1993). Witt (2002) reported that extraversion
was related to job performance when employees were also high in conscientiousness,
but with employees low in conscientiousness, extraversion was negatively related to
performance. Finally, Mol, Born, Willemsen and Van Der Molen (2005) investigated
relations between expatriate job performance and FFM personality dimensions and
found that extraversion, emotional stability, agreeableness, and conscientiousness
predict job performance.
Finally, regarding the relationship between FFM and not standard performance
criteria, Williams (2004) found that openness to experience was significantly related
to individual creativity while O’Connell, Doverspike, Norris-Watts, and Hattrup
(2001) reported a significant correlation between conscientiousness and organisational
citizenship behaviours. Lin, Chiu, and Hsieh (2001) investigating the relation between
the FFM and customer ratings of service quality, reported significant relations
between openness to experience and assurance behaviours, conscientiousness and
reliability, extraversion and responsiveness, and agreeableness with both empathy and
assurance behaviours. Finally, LePine and Van Dyne (2001) found that
conscientiousness, extraversion, and agreeableness were related more strongly to
change-oriented communications and cooperative behaviour than to task performance
and Lievens, Harrs, Van Keer, and Bisqueret (2003) found that openness to
experience was significantly related to cross cultural training performance in a sample
of European expatriate managers.
The study of the impact of personality on team behaviour and performance is another
area that has seen renewed activity in recent years. Overall, extraversion appears to be
the best predictor of team performance (Morgeson, Reider, & Campion, 2005), group
interaction styles (Balthazard, Potter, & Warren, 2004), oral communication
(Mohammed & Angell, 2003), emergent leadership (Kickul & Neuman, 2000), task
role behaviour (Stewart, Fulmer, & Barrick, 2005), and leadership task performance
(Mohammed, Mathieu, & Bartlett, 2002). Moreover, conscientiousness and emotional
stability are the two other FFM constructs found to be generally good predictors of
team-related behaviour and performance (Halfhill, Nielsen, Sundstrom &
Weilbaecher, 2005).
Faking and personality assessment. The most pervasive concern HR practitioners
have regarding the use of personality testing in personnel selection is that applicants
may strategically ‘fake’ their responses and thereby gravely reduce the usefulness of
personality scores. However, most of the research concerning the effects of
impression management or intentional or unintentional distortion on the validity of
personality assessment has provided results that indicate that in practical terms, there
are relatively few problems (e.g., Barrick & Mount, 1996). Intentional distortion
could be minimised if applicants are warned of the consequences of such distortion.
Moreover, HR professionals should also consider incorporating the ‘threat of
verification’ in the faking warning, as applicants may respond more honestly when
they believe their responses will be subject to verification. The threat of verification
becomes more real when accompanied by carefully developed letters of reference
which may provide valid assessment of personality. Finally, it may still be valuable to
include ‘social desirability’ scales in personality instruments, even though there is
now considerable evidence that they generally do not improve validity and that
elevated scores on typical social desirability scales may be more a function of valid
personality differences than the motivation to fake (Ellingson, Sackett & Hough,
1999).
Assessment Centres
Assessment centres have recently become popular in the business sector for assessing
suitability across a whole range of jobs mainly measuring general intelligence,
achievement motivation, social competence, self-confidence and dominance. In this
sense, the primary construct measured relates to general mental ability. Assessment
centres are meant to stimulate the job realistically, employ a variety of techniques for
eliciting evidence, assess several applicants at once on several criteria ad involve
several trained assessors. The rationale behind the use of an assessment centre is that
an applicant who can perform a sample of the job satisfactorily probably can perform
the job. How true this is depends on the extent to which the job sample reflects the
whole job. The assessment centre is organised around behavioural dimensions
identified through job analysis and activities are chosen according to their capacity for
creating a situation in which these dimensions can be demonstrated. Across Europe,
there are wide differences in the use of assessment centres for selection; they are more
common, particularly in large organisations, in the UK, Belgium, Denmark and
Germany, and less common in France, Switzerland, Spain and Italy (Shackleton &
Newell, 1997).
The types of activities vary considerably from one assessment centre to another.
Individual activities may include psychological tests, biodata inventories and
personality tests. Candidates may be asked to perform written and oral
communication exercises (such as preparing written and oral reports) and the in-
basket exercise. The in-basket exercise requires the candidate to deal with the kind of
correspondence that usually accumulates while an executive is on vacation. It contains
requests, questions, directives, and various pieces of information that must be handled
within a specified period of time. Dyadic activities include role-playing exercises,
such as how to deal with a troublesome employee or interview an applicant for a job
and group exercises include the leaderless group discussion in which candidates work
together without any assigned roles on some organisational problem.
However, Zedeck and Cascio (1984) suggest that we should question the assessment
centre as a valid selection procedure as there are a lot of questions over the validity
and reliability of the assessment of specific competencies and Lievens and Klimoski
(2001) argue for the necessity to establish the utility and cost-effectiveness of
assessment centres. Finally, assessment centres may operate to maintain the status quo
in managerial jobs. Individuals who might be successful on the job, yet do not
resemble the present employees, can be neglected. Organisational policies and
traditions in hiring and promotion may influence who is successful in the
organisation. If so, then basing assessment centres on current employees will amplify
these effects.
Work samples
Work samples are said to be one of the most appropriate means of selection because
of the ‘point-to-point correspondence’ between the job and the assessment scenario
(Smith & George, 1992). It is an analogous test (as opposed to an analytical test)
designed to replicate the key activities of a job. Work samples are relatively easy to
construct for manual jobs, clerical jobs (for example, typing) or those involving
contact with clients (for example, role play dealing with a complaint). For more
managerial/intellectual type jobs work samples may be built around specific and
identifiable concrete tasks (for example, writing a report, dealing with the in-tray).
They can be used to assess both performance and ‘trainability’ potential.
A prime example of a work sample test is the ‘in-tray’ exercise. One potential
problem with the use of in-tray exercises is the heavy reliance of organisations on
‘off-the-self’ packages. Moreover, just like any other test, a work sample needs to be
carefully constructed and validated. The most valid work samples not only correspond
with a particular task, but also capture some of its contextual features (Robertson &
Kandola, 1982). A basic rule of thumb is to ensure that the work sample is as
‘complex’ and ‘ambiguous’ as the task itself, but the downside here is that the
‘sample’ cannot be ‘transferred’ across jobs (unless jobs are similar). On the other
hand, they provide a good source of ‘realistic job preview’ for the applicant. Porteous
(1997) says that because reliable and valid work samples are time-consuming and
costly to construct, administer and score, they are of most value when used in the last
stages of a selection process.
Integrity and honesty tests
Integrity and honesty tests are used to predict the likelihood that the individual will
engage in counterproductive behaviour such as theft, violence, excessive absenteeism
and dishonesty (Hogan & Brinkmeyer, 1997). Integrity tests are more popular in the
USA than in most European countries, although both US and French applicants have
been found to react somewhat negatively to these tests (Steiner & Gilliland, 1996).
There are three types of integrity testing: overt measures of integrity dealing with
attitudes towards theft and other forms of dishonesty, including admissions of theft
and other illegal activity, personality-oriented methods which include questions on
various dimensions, such as dependability, conscientiousness and social conformity,
and clinical measures like the ‘galvanic skin response’, an indicator of increased
physiological arousal.
There are many disagreements about the value of integrity testing, and also its ethical
status since the construct of integrity is vague and ill-defined, and there is no
compelling evidence for its criterion-related validity (Camara & Schneider, 1995).
Other concerns include misclassification, high selection thresholds and adverse
impact on applicants screened out by integrity test results, couple with the fact that
anyone can use them. By contrast, Ones, Viswesvaran and Schmidt (1995) point to
good construct and criterion validities suggesting promising results that should not be
ignored.
Recruiting and selecting expatriate managers
For effective performance in overseas work assignments (see also Chapter 3), a lot of
researchers have concentrated on how to prepare potential expatriates for overseas
transfer. For instance, Lanier (1979) recommends seven steps to be taken in preparing
personnel:
1. A well planned, realistic, pre-visit to the site (country).
2. Early language training, prior to departure.
3. Intensive study on issues such as history, culture and etiquette.
4. The provision of country-specific handbooks, including useful facts.
5. Efficient, explicit provision of intercompany counseling facilities.
6. Meeting returnees for “old hand” tips.
7. Notification of personnel office and spouses’ committee on arrival.
Sievenking et al (1981) stress the importance of orientation programmes prior to
expatriation, which aim to do such things as:
Develop an understanding of personal and family values so that employees can
anticipate and cope with the inevitably unsettling emotions that accompany
culture shock.
Develop an appreciation of the important ways in which the host culture will
differ from the employee’s own culture, so that the employee can guide his or her
behavior accordingly.
Show the expatriate how he or she can be rewarded in ways in addition to income
and travel, such as novelty, challenge and the opportunity to learn new skills.
Help expatriates anticipate and begin to plan for hardships, delays, frustrations,
material inconveniences, and the consequences of close living and working with
others.
Help expatriates to anticipate that, although they may have been superior
employees in their own culture, they may need to gain greater satisfaction from
experiences other than those that are work related.
In a more considered and thoughtful paper on the selection of personnel for overseas,
Tung (1981) outlines a contingency approach and notes four types of factors crucial to
success in foreign assignments: technical competence on the job; relational abilities
(social skills); ability to deal with environmental constraints (government, labor
issues); and family situation.
Tung offers a contingency approach of coping with the process based on a sensitive
selection process. A contingency framework states that in practice there is no one
criterion that could be used in all situations. Rather, each assignment should be
viewed on its own. In each instance, the selection of the ‘right person’ to fill the
position should be made only after a careful analysis of the task (in terms of
interaction with the social community) and the country of assignment (in terms of the
degree to which it is similar / dissimilar to that of the home country), and the
personality characteristics of the candidate (in terms of the candidate’s and spouse’s
ability to live and work in a different cultural environment) (p. 77-8).
Mendenhall et al. (1987: 333) indicate that the criteria which can predict acculturation
and productivity in overseas assignments have been identified by a number of authors
and are summarized as being self-orientation, others-orientation and perceptual
orientation. They suggest that self-orientation includes factors such as stress
reduction, technical competence, dealing with isolation and alienation. Others-
orientation includes factors such as relationship skills, willingness to communicate,
respect and empathy for others. Perceptual orientation is noted to include factors such
as flexible attributions, high tolerance for ambiguity, being open-minded and non-
judgmental. Underscoring the importance of personal characteristics, Hailey indicates
that personality and attitude of expatriates is the key to their success, suggesting that
“those who are outgoing, relaxed, and prepared to work within the local management
style are perceived to adapt more successfully, while unsurprisingly those who are
inflexible, arrogant, or straight jacketed fail to adapt to the local culture” (1996: 265).
Exercise
A large pharmaceutical company is one of the leading pharmaceutical manufacturers
in the United Kingdom. Because of the intense competition in the industry and the
heightened competition for highly skilled personnel, the company believes that
quality-of-work-life is a key factor for achieving competitive advantage. In support of
this belief, the company is considering the adoption of a telecommuting work
arrangement for selected jobs.
The job of Public Relations (PR) Specialist has been identified as an appropriate job
for telecommuting due to the fact that the job responsibilities are mostly information-
related activities that require independent mental effort with no supervisory
responsibilities. Exhibit 1 contains the current job description for the PR Specialist,
which reflects the primary job activities and qualifications for a full-time, in-office PR
Specialist. There is currently only one job incumbent, and that person has resigned.
You have been asked to develop a plan for recruiting and hiring a replacement who
will telecommute from home.
a) What method of job analysis would you recommend to determine the job
requirements and job specifications for a telecommuting job? Is the method you
recommend different that the method you would use if the job were performed in a
traditional office environment?
b) What procedures do you recommend for recruiting and hiring a telecommuter? Are
the procedures you recommend different than the procedures you would use if the job
were performed in a traditional office environment?
c) What changes would you make to the job description in Exhibit 1 to reflect the
telecommuting nature of the job?
d) What other recommendations would you make in order to ensure the successful
implementation of a telecommuting work arrangement?
Exhibit 1
Job Title: Public Relations Specialist
Department: Public Relations
Reports to: Director of Public Relations
General Summary: Serves as a writer on numerous firm publications; coordinates
materials; writes, edits, and proofs articles, public relations publications and
advertising copy using WordPerfect software.
Essential Job Functions:
1. Writes, edits, and proofs public relations articles, newspaper copy, and human
interest stories.
2. Writes advertising copy in conjunction with the marketing department.
3. Writes, edits, and coordinates printing and layout of company newsletter.
4. Meets with executives to determine PR needs.
5. Meets with media officials and the public to publicise firm’s accomplishments.
6. Attends information meetings at the main office on an as-needed basis.
7. Gives presentations at meetings and other public events.
8. Performs other related duties as assigned by management.
Education and Experience Required: Degree in Art/Graphic Design; demonstrated
ability to use a Windows computer hardware/software; some experience in television
or public speaking; considerable knowledge of journalism principles, English
grammar and usage; demonstrated ability to write newspaper, news, and human
interest articles, reports, brochures, and advertising copy; demonstrated ability to
work and communicate effectively with others.
Critical summary of theories
The above literature review shows an increasing homogenisation in the approaches
employed to account for the phenomena of personnel recruitment and selection which
are mainly dominated by a generic focus on improving the efficiency, effectiveness
and fairness of personnel management practice and by a concern with the selection-
performance issue. Performance is conceptualised in strict economic terms excluding
thus broader moral, social and political considerations on selection practice and
policy. Moreover, such approaches (for example, the ones that try to achieve person-
organisation fit) assume a unitary framing of the issues, in which all members of an
organisation are thought to have mutual interests and are embedded in the prevailing
socio-economic order of capitalism which attempts to govern the soul of employees
and regulate social behaviour through their endorsement of managerial objectives, and
the philosophy of individualism as a fundamental social good. The unreflective
adoption of the scientific and rational discourse of ‘objectivity’, ‘validity’, and
‘reliability’ that characterises recruitment and selection practices reinforces the mask
of science and plays a decisive role in constituting employees’ subjectivities to ensure
that employee performance can be managed. Such an approach, however, mainly
ignores the fact that personnel practices are outcomes of human interpretations,
conflicts and generalisations (Watson, 2004) and that employee agency, subjectivity
and reflexivity leads employees to multiple and differential engagements with HRM
practices (Zanoni & Janssens, 2007). Finally, the standardisation of employee
selection practices and the treatment of certain individual competencies and job
characteristics as neutral (i.e., as reflecting the reality of the person or the role) and
not as socially constructed or situated, instead of containing inequalities, has
paradoxically legitimised gendered employment practices by cloaking them in
spurious objectivity (Ozbilgin & Woodward, 2004).
Personnel Selection and Ethics
Karen Legge (2007) has argued that we need to consider the ‘moral economy’, that is
what moral norms concerning the good and the just should be embodied in and guide
choices and action in organizations (see also Chapter 5). The moral economy implies
that instead of being preoccupied with issues of efficiency and performance in strict
economic terms, we should include broader moral, social and political considerations
on recruitment and selection practice and policy. First of all, employees should be
brought back to the equation of personnel selection, by considering not only
individual variables such as abilities, skills and competencies, but also the political
nature of the employment relationship (Janssens & Steyaert, 2009), adopting a
pluralist approach to managing the employment relationship. Such an approach
criticises the belief that staffing techniques that lead to high performance are
beneficial for employees and for unions that accept them, draws attention to the
negative effects of such techniques, such as work intensification and highlights the
existence of continued discrimination against marginalised groups (Knights &
McCabe, 1998). Moreover, the complexity of the employment relationship
necessitates the exploration of the impact of a number of issues, such as fear of
layoffs, perceptions of job opportunities, unemployment or labour market positions,
on personnel recruitment and selection without ignoring multiple stakeholders’
(including employees’) interests and perspectives.
Furthermore, the quantitative techniques of recruitment and selection procedures are
methods that create a technical-scientific order whereby the technical is superimposed
on the moral and constructs a rational, goal-directed image of organisational
effectiveness, legitimasing thus managerial prerogatives. Consequently, the
management of personnel staffing concerns itself with the technical application of
techniques even where circumstances may denote that these might not be the most
appropriate responses. On the contrary, HR practices and procedures concerning
recruitment and selection should act in such a way as to achieve the ultimate and true
good of human beings as understood by the community of politicians, civil servants,
professionals, practitioners, clients and citizens in which those goods are practiced. In
this sense, the use of techniques and procedures have to be exercised with judgment
as to their relevance and applicability and informed by practical reason (Watson,
2010).
Finally, we need to ensure that the voices of those who tend to be excluded from
mainstream analyses are better represented in recruitment and selection theory and
practice (see also Chapter 4). This includes, but is not exhausted by, those in non-
standard forms of employment, minority workers and those working outside the
western industrialized economies.
Critical analysis and discussion
The formalisation part of the personnel selection agenda reinforces an image of the
work organisation as a black-box system which functions more or less well in
performance terms according to the neutral, scientific and formal, rational procedures
that convert human resource ‘inputs’ into outputs. Consequently, the objectives
pursued by the implementation of such procedures (i.e., maximization of efficiency
and effectiveness) should be of benefit to all concerned – managers, employees,
government and ‘the public’. However, it is rare for such ‘best practices’ to be
subjected to any critical analysis of the potential ‘operating’ costs, ‘unintended
consequences’ or – more graphically – the ‘collateral damage’ consequent on their
introduction. What is ‘good’ for business is not necessarily ‘best practice’ for
employees. In this respect, it is important to note that such procedures are never
neutral – they always implicate and privilege particular social values if not also
specific socio-economic interests.
Moreover, the mainstream analysis of personnel selection processes and procedures is
based on the unitarist approach – in which all members of an organisation are
assumed to have mutual interests. In practice however, recruitment and selection
practices seem to be enacted both by candidates and by selectors within organisations.
If we take into account concepts such as agency and subjectivity, and recognise
employees as human beings capable of reflexive thought and action (Giddens, 1993),
then there is the possibility that different employees actively engage in different ways
with recruitment and selection practices, undermining, delaying or supporting their
implementation. On the other hand, selectors do not simply adopt the ‘scientific’ and
rational principles of the practices, but appear to manipulate them according to pre-
existing local power relations, since the design of such practices is ‘mediated’ by
managerial interpretation and political manoeuvring (Watson, 2004). It should not be
ignored that HR strategies are outcomes of human interpretations, conflicts, guesses
and rationalisations, albeit with these of human agency operating within a context of
social and political-economic circumstances.
Finally, a significant consequence of the ever-increasing emphasis on the HR-
performance link has been the progressive exclusion of more and more alternative
voices, and practices which do not necessary promote high commitment and high
performance (MacDuffie, 1995). Hence, the problems and issues of personnel
selection have largely been ignored in small and medium-sized organisations (e.g.,
Taylor, 2004), in various forms of sub-contracting designed to increase ‘flexibility’
through the creation of ‘dependent self-employment’ (Muehlberger 2007); there is
little specific reference to unionised workplaces or to the increasing problems
associated with (and for) immigrant labour, as well as employees in non-Western and
so-called developing economies. Similarly, the increasing resort to outsourcing work
to countries where labour is cheaper is excluded from the mainstream ‘recruitment
and selection agenda’. The irony here, of course, is that most of these social practices
can be seen as reflecting the ‘success’ of the globalisation project for they can all be
seen as symptoms of the successful deregulation of labour markets which is a central
element of the neo-liberal policy agenda.
Benefits of studying HRM from a critical perspective
A critical perspective is advanced in order that personnel recruitment and selection
practices might be better contextualised within the prevailing socio-economic,
political and cultural factors which shape those practices; that the scientific, objective
and rational assumptions and language of recruitment and selection may be
denaturalised and challenged; and that voices excluded in mainstream personnel
selection may be heard. The adoption of a pluralist frame of reference, in which the
employment relationship is understood to involve and articulate different interests,
has the potential to reintroduce the possible contribution of those ‘external’ to the
organisation such as the state or trade unions as significant actors in devising selection
policies and practices. Such an approach will force selection specialists to consider
possible ways to manage the endemic potential conflicts associated with such
differential interests.
Moreover, the deconstruction of the natural and neutral language of science,
rationality and objectivity used for the legitimisation of the ‘reliable’ and ‘valid’
recruitment and selection procedures might expose the institutionalised power
inequalities but also the local power relations within organisations which reinforce but
also impede their implementation in practice. A critical perspective directs us towards
the analysis of the contextual circumstances in which certain practices are adopted or
not by management.
This is perhaps most clearly evident in another aspect of denaturalisation: the concern
of critical approaches to reveal how the content of knowledge, the individual skills
and ability profiles identified as central or critical to good selection decisions are
understood as relatively neutral and are treated as largely reflecting the reality of the
role or the person. Viewing competencies as individual-level attributes deflects
attention away from how their meaning is socially constructed in specific contexts.
Treating individual skills and job characteristics as neutral and not as socially
constructed or situated, we are in danger of either privileging certain modes of
performance or reproducing the idea that different groups are naturally suited to some
roles rather than others, undermining in such a way the chances of achieving equal
opportunities. Consequently, recruitment and selection would benefit from the
adoption of a critical perspective as it can offer additional insights into how roles,
identities and individual competencies are socially constructed and identify the
implications of these processes for selection and recruitment.
Finally, a critical perspective will provide voice for all those marginalised actors from
mainstream personnel recruitment and selection research and practice. These include,
for example, the employees themselves of large multinational corporations but also
employees in non-Western and so-called developing economies, employees in SMEs,
public and third-sector organisations as well as alternative forms of organisation (e.g.,
cooperatives), employees working in non-standard forms of employment, including
the self-employed, sub-contractors, part-times and agency workers, and immigrant
labour among others. Such a focus will enhance our understanding of what is
happening to employment regulation outside large and multinational corporations.
In short, Boxall et al. (2007, p.7) argue that a critical perspective to HRM should be
concerned with why management does what it does; with how contextualised
processes of HRM work in practice; and with questions of “for whom and how well”
when assessing the outcomes of HRM, taking account of both employee and
managerial interests, and laying a basis for theories of wider social consequence.
Summary and recommendations including the identification of good practices
Employee staffing decisions involving the recruitment and selection of individuals are
made every day in work organisations. There has been a tendency for a rational and
scientific personnel technology to be applied to these choices. This involves strongly
formalised procedures and the heavy use of such devices as psychological tests. Such
a technology is intended to help select individuals in a way that will be deemed
efficient, acceptable and fair. However, it tends to become restrictive and
counterproductive. Its use can be associated with a control way of thinking about
work organisations and people. A more realistic and critical way of thinking indicates
that selection processes are highly ambiguous and are dependent on basic human
processes of judgement, guesswork, chance taking, debate and negotiation. Selection
processes in general are better seen as parts of broader and more continuous processes
of bargaining and adjustment in which both organisational arrangements and human
beings themselves change and adapt within the ongoing negotiated order of the
organisation.
End of chapter set of (mini-essay type) questions and class activities
1. If you had entered into a joint venture with a foreign company but knew that
women were not treated fairly in that culture, would you consider sending a female
expatriate to handle the start-up? Why or why not?
2. Evaluation hiring is a procedure where a job candidate is hired by a staffing
company but put to work at another company. After a set period of time (usually 90
days) the company decides whether to hire the person as a permanent employee.
Analyse the benefits for the company which arise from using such a procedure. Which
are the ethical issues involved in evaluation hiring?
3. Should applicants be selected primarily on the basis of their ability or on
personality / fit? How can fit be assessed?
4. You work for a medium-sized, high-tech firm that faces intense competition on a
daily basis. Change seems to be the only constant in your workplace, and each
worker’s responsibilities shift from project to project. Suppose you have the major
responsibility for filling the job openings at your company. How would you go about
recruiting and selecting the best people? How would you identify the best people to
work in this environment?
5. In many organisations that have worked to a team structure, the team is the
principal unit where work gets done. However, most organisations recruit and hire as
though there was one job description and the team did not exist. If there are distinct
roles to be played on a team, how would you go about recruiting and hiring for them?
The characteristics needed by individual team members depend on the team and the
strengths and weaknesses of other who are on the team. How could you include this
dynamic and interactive nature in the recruitment and hiring process?
6. One of the strategic staffing choices is whether to pursue workforce diversity
actively or passively. First suggest some ethical reasons for active pursuit of diversity,
and then suggest some ethical reasons for a more passive approach. Assume that the
type of diversity in question is increasing workforce representation of women and
ethnic minorities.
7. Why is it important for the organisation to view all components of staffing from the
perspective of the job applicant?
8. Assume the organisation you work for practices strict adherence to the rules of
objective, scientific and rational recruitment and selection. But beyond that it seems
that “anything goes” in terms of tolerated staffing practices. What is your assessment
of this approach?
9. Do you think targeted recruitment systems, for example those that target older
workers, women, minorities or people with desired skills, are fair? Why or why not?
10. Cognitive ability tests are one of the best predictors of job performance, yet they
have substantial adverse impact against minorities. Do you think it’s fair to use such
tests? Why or why not?
11. Do you think it’s ethical for employers to select applicants on the basis of
questions such as “Dislike loud music” and “Enjoy traveling around the world on a
backpack” even if the scales that such items measure have been shown to predict job
performance? Explain.
12. Given recent changes in the nature of work, and especially in period of economic
turbulence, discuss the relative effectiveness of job analysis techniques and suggest
how they might be improved.
13. Suppose you are asked to write a recommendation letter for a friend you like but
consider unreliable. Would it be ethical for you to write a positive reference even
though you anticipate that your friend will not be a good employee? If not, would it
be ethical for you to agree to write the letter knowing that you will not be very
positive in your assessment of your friend’s abilities?
Annotated further readings
Bolton, S.C. & Houlihan, M. (2007). Searching for the Human in Human Resource
Management. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Boxall, P., Purcell, J., Wright, P. (2007). The Oxford Handbook of Human Resource
Management. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Grey, C., & Willmott, H. (2005). Critical Management Studies: A Reader. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Legge, K. (1995). Human Resource Management: Rhetorics and Realities. London:
Palgrave Macmillan.
Leopold, J., Harris, L. & Watson, T.J. (2005). The Strategic Management of Human
Resources. London: FT Prentice Hall.
Pinnington, A., Macklin, R. & Campbell, T. (2007). Human Resource Management:
Ethics and Employment. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Case Study
On Monday morning at 7:30 a.m., Dr. Hans was leaving his apartment, specifically
rented to expatriates, and was going towards his office in Kuala Lumpur’s central
business district. On the way, Hans listened to the voice messages on his mobile
phone, one of which was from the assistant of the firm’s owner, Frank. The message
stated that Hans was expected to call back before his meeting with the human
resources (HR) team that he was leading. The team meeting was scheduled in order to
bring together Hans and Chinese human resource experts to form a cross-functional
project team responsible for the development and implementation of a new personnel
process, in the context of global restructuring, in order to fill 25 middle management
positions in the Australasia region. According to the company’s, MobilCom’s, in-
house global localisation policy, 90 per cent of the new management positions were
filled by individuals who originated from the country they would be working in. The
affected areas included sales and marketing, purchasing, supply chain management,
and finance and accounting, at locations in Hong Kong, Kuala Lumpur, Bangkok,
Jakarta, Singapore, Sydney, Oakland and Port Moresby. The new personnel selection
system was part of the company’s new objective to standardise all human resource
instruments for selection purposes around the globe. This new personnel selection
system had to be developed internally.
When Hans first heard about the above changes, it immediately occurred to him that
this would not be easy as personnel selection procedures varied significantly between
countries. He also knew that the existing selection instruments were by no means
flawless in any specific country. After the application documents were analysed,
structured interview with the candidates were conducted by a department
representative and an HR specialist. If both interviewers came to a positive conclusion
on the candidate’s qualifications, the top candidate completed an individual
assessment centre in order to point out his/her interpersonal competencies rather than
his/her professional competencies. The individual assessment centres consisted of
biographical questions, case studies on leadership in an international context and
participation in a leaderless group discussion. Ultimately, additional references were
obtained for each candidate, although different procedures existed in different
countries. After reference checks were completed, each candidate received written
feedback and a report was generated and added to the successful candidate’s
personnel file.
For several years now, Hans had been finding faults in the design of the individual
assessment centres, but he could not influence possible modifications because the
individual assessment centres were conducted by external consulting firms.
Additionally, he questioned the validity of the information obtained from the centres,
as well as the selection system as a whole and he felt the need to improve the contents
of the structured interviews that were based on the candidate’s current situation, as
opposed to the candidate’s previous work experience. Overall, efforts to improve the
current selection systems had only rarely been undertaken due to limited time and the
budget allotted for personnel affairs – a memorable fact that Hans had already pointed
out to the management several times.
The development of a new multinational personnel selection system now posed a
huge challenge for Hans and his project team. His team, comprised of Australian and
Chinese members with HR knowledge as well as HR managers from the headquarters,
had already been working on the development of the new personnel selection system
for four months. Over the past few weeks numerous meetings had been held, yet no
significant progress had been made. One reason could be attributed to the fact that
there was obvious heterogeneity between the Australian and Asian team members’
opinions regarding the new personnel selection system. This created an ambience that
was tense and dissent with respect to sharing the workload. For today’s meeting, the
goal was to come to a consensus on several important issues: 1) what individual
modules the new personnel selection system should contain, 2) whether country-
specific adaptations were necessary and feasible for each module, and 3) the
implementation process of the new personnel instrument at each location.
When Hans arrived at his office, one of the three Chinese secretary, avoiding eye-
contact by looking down to the floor but with a big smile and gestures that appeared
submissive as she perpetually nodded her head – reminded him that Frank was
waiting for him to return his call. Hans picked up the telephone and Frank began
speaking:
“Mr. Hans, you know how much I appreciate your dedication to the company, but I
have concerns about the current international selection procedures. We need
something that is going to work, and work immediately! And don’t you dare try to
offer me this empirical or validity stuff. I don’t give a damn. You have a whole
department with highly qualified people. I assume you are capable of filling these
vacant management positions. We also need a selection system that works
everywhere. We cannot afford to apply different procedures in every country. What
we need are consistent procedures, something applicable cross-nationally and cross-
regionally. You, as a cosmopolitan, should know exactly what I mean. I also expect
everything to be documented with every detail”.
Although Hans shared Frank’s enthusiasm for an improved personnel selection
system, there were many complications that could arise of which Frank seemed
obviously unaware and Hans tried to inform him about possible problems. Hans
argued that although a multinational selection system would have its advantages,
these advantages may become costly when they are not easily implemented in each
region. Each country has its own unique economic and education situations, which
would undoubtedly become problematic when creating a universal personnel selection
system. With respect to cultural difference, he argued that a standardised personnel
selection system would also ignore cultural differences and culture-specific
circumstances. This would not only affect the individual modules of the system, but
also the basic job requirements, the adaptation of modules to specific countries, and
the use of specific selection methods. He also expressed his concern with Frank’s lack
of interest in testing the validity of the new selection procedures.
Of course, that wasn’t exactly what Frank wanted to hear:
“Don’t tell me about problems, I want solutions, and you should not forget that this is
what I pay you and your team to do. You have until the end of this week to deliver
final and written conclusions of this matter. If not, I will reduce your team in Kuala
Lumpur by half, and I will delegate the development of this new system to global
headquarters. Either you will come up with something useful by the end of this week,
or central headquarters will do the job. End of discussion”.
The team meeting
At the meeting, Hans informed everyone about the current situation with Frank, set
the objectives of the meeting and asked for the detailed recording of everything they
discuss. The Chinese colleagues agreed by nodding their heads uniformly, a
behaviour which was always expected when there was an order from a member with
higher hierarchical status, while the Australian colleagues openly disapproved the
detailed recording of the discussions. During the meeting, there was an apparent
disagreement between a Chinese HR employee and the Australian economist
regarding the definition of the job requirement and their profiles. Yu wanted to
include 15 dimensions, five components that test the candidate’s professional
competencies and 10 dimensions that evaluate social competencies. However,
Andreas openly disagreed with this proposition stating: “I told you many times that
the acquisition of 15 dimensions is simply impossible. It is important to define clearly
distinguishable job requirements that are measurable, describable, and that are equally
relevant in all countries of the region”. Yu, intimidated by her Australian colleague’s
manner, blushed and looked down towards the floor, signalling that she did not dare
to say anything further. She often found it difficult to cope with negative feedback,
particularly when it occurred in front of her colleagues. There had been several times
already that she could not stand up to Andreas, which seemed to affect her more and
more each time. She had once spoken to Hans about her difficulties communicating
with Andreas; however, Hans was quickly irritated by the complaint and asked her to
wait and hope for an improvement of the situation. Yu never discussed the situation
with Hans again. The German in-house psychologist intervened and proposed the
inclusion of six competencies, such as technical and vocational skills, social
competencies, leadership competencies, communicative competencies, flexibility, and
adaptability, which show great validity and relliability. There was disagreement from
some Chinese members who proposed the inclusion of several more and different
competencies, which ended with them feeling irritated and intimidated. Andreas
proposed that they should bring a majority vote with respect to the skills due to the
time pressure, but the Chinese HR member argued: “no, a majority vote is not the
solution. It may lead to good decisions not succeeding because certain team members
follow the uniform opinion of the majority. We should try to reach a consensus on this
issue”. The dispute was solved by Hans who decided which would be the final job
requirements for the selection of managers and who adopted the six dimensions
proposed by the German team members.
The next important issue on the agenda was the definition of the modules and the job
requirements for each module. For this issue, there was agreement that a multinational
selection system should be two-tiered. The first tier consists of three modules: a
viewing of the candidates’ application documents, a telephone conference with the
applicants that should be conducted in an unstructured manner, and the obtaining of
three references from former employers. Unlike the current procedures, references
should not only be used to verify past employment and the duration of employment,
but also include a statement regarding the candidate’s personality. Four modules will
follow in the second tier. Specifically, a panel interview, a biography-oriented in-
depth interview, a simulated group exercise, and testing procedures. All modules were
described in great detail and emphasis was given to the inclusion of standardised tests
in order to increase the validity of the entire process, even though there is evidence
that intelligence and personality tests are not generally highly accepted and cultural
problems exist.
Towards the end of the long and detailed presentation of the modules, Anne
interrupted: “I don’t want to be rude, but isn’t it important to take the candidate’s
perspective into consideration, as well?” But Andreas countered: “Unfortunately,
nobody cares about the candidate’s perspective. We are interested in choosing the
right person, certainly not in satisfying the applicants – these never-ending
discussions on fairness and acceptance. Reality differs significantly from the ideal
procedures we are taught in university”.
Now, Angela jumped into the discussion: “However, let’s not forget that management
is not just a technical matter and sometimes, if you find someone generally useful,
then you could adapt the job to fit the person. The selection process is always a sort of
negotiation between the potential employee and the potential employer. We, as
recruiters, cannot really know what any of these people is really going to be like if
you take them on. Therefore, we need to deploy the basic human skills of eliciting
helpful responses from people and judging the likelihood of one person being a better
bet for the organisation than another. In this sense, there is no ‘right person’, there is
only ‘the better bet’. Some of the most important determinants of how well someone
does the job are ones that arise after the appointment of the individual”.
Hans could not stand any further disputes at the time and took the initiative to
terminate the long meeting which achieved the first step to specify the modules in
content and procedures. However, it did not specify the adaptations for each target
country and the ways of implementing those modules. Hans thought that he should
make the decisions himself and include them in the report to be handled to Frank.
Right after the meeting, Hans went straight to his office and did not come out again
for the rest of the afternoon. As soon as he received the meeting minutes he wrote his
final report for Frank. He later received a short notice sent by Frank informing him
that important basic conditions and necessary adaptations had not been taken into
consideration sufficiently in the new multinational personnel selection system;
therefore, he had handed the case over to global headquarters. Finally, he stated that
there would be staff-related consequences for his department in Kuala Lumpur.
Case study questions
1. Describe in detail all the modules included in the two-tiered selection system
proposed by the team.
2. What is the critical analysis of the case study?
References
Anderson, N. (2001). Towards a theory of socialization impact: Selection as pre-entry socialization. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 9, ½, 84-91.
Avery, D. R., Hernandez,M., & Hebl, M. R. (2004).Who's watching the race? Racial salience in recruitment advertising. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 34, 146−161.
Balthazard, P., Potter, R. E., & Warren, J. (2004). Expertise, extraversion and group interaction styles as performance indicators in virtual teams. Database for Advances in Information Systems, 35(1), 41–64.
Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (1993). Autonomy as a moderator of the relationship between the Big Five personality dimensions and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(1), 111–118.
Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (1996). Effects of impression management and self-deception on the predictive validity of personality constructs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 261-272.
Bevelander, P. (1999). The employment integration of migrants in Sweden. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 25, 3, 445-468.
Blinkhorn, S. & Johnson, C. (1990). The insignificance of personality testing. Nature, 348, 671-672.
Boxall, P., Purcell, J., & Wright, P. (2007). Human resource management: Scope, analysis, and significance. In P. Boxall, J. Purcell and P. Wright (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of human resource management. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bragger, J. D., Kutcher, E., Morgan, J., & Firth, P. (2002). The effects of the structured interviewon reducing biases against pregnant job applicants. Sex Roles, 46, 215−226.
Breaugh, J. A., Macan, T. H., & Grambow, D. M. (2008). Employee recruitment: Current knowledge and directions for future research. In G. P. Hodgkinson & J. K. Ford (Eds.), International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, vol. 23. (pp. 45−82)New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Brtek, M.D. & Motowidlo, S.J. (2002). Effects of procedure and outcome accountability on interview validity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 1, 185-191.
Buckley, M. R., Jackson, K. A., Bolino, M. C., Veres, J. G., III, & Field, H. S. (2007). The influence of relational demography on panel interview ratings: A field experiment. Personnel Psychology, 60, 627−646.
Cable, D.M. & Yu, K.Y.T. (2006). Managing job seekers’ organizational image beliefs: The role of media richness and media credibility. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 4, 828-840.
Caligiuri, P. M., & Phillips, J. M. (2003). An application of self-assessment realistic job previews to expatriate assignments. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 14, 1102−1116.
Cascio, W.F. (1995). Whither industrial and organizational psychology in a changing world of work. American Psychologist, 50, 11, 928-939.
Castilla, E. J. (2005). Social networks and employee performance in a call center. American Journal of Sociology, 110, 1243−1283.
Cattell, R.B. (1965). The scientific analysis of personality. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Chapman, D. S., Uggerslev, K. L., Carroll, S. A., Piasentin, K. A., & Jones, D. A. (2005). Applicant attraction to organizations and job choice: A meta-analytic review of the correlates of recruiting outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 928−944.
Chung-Yan, G.A. & Cranshaw, S.F. (2002). A critical re-examination and analysis of cognitive ability tests using the Thorndike model of fairness. Journal of Occupational and Organisational Psychology, 75, 4, 489-509.
Conway, J. M., Jako, R. A., & Goodman, D. F. (1995). A meta-analysis of interrater and internal consistency reliability of selection interviews. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80, 565−579.
Costa, P.T. Jr. & McCrae, R.R. (1990). The NEO Personality Inventory Manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
Dalessio, A. T., Crosby, M., & McManus, M. A. (1996). Stability of biodata keys and dimensions across English-speaking countries: A test of the cross-situational hypothesis. Journal of Business and Psychology, 10, 289−296.
Dipboye, R. L., Wooten, K., & Halverson, S. K. (2004). Behavioral and situational interviews. In J. C. Thomas (Ed.), Comprehensive Handbook of Psychological Assessment, 4, industrial and organizational assessment (pp. 297−316). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons Inc.
Drakeley, R.J. (1989). Biographical data. In P. Herriot (Ed.), Handbook of assessment in organizations (pp. 439-453). Chichester: Wiley.
Dunning, D. (2007). Prediction: The inside view. In A.W. Kruglanski & E. T. Higgings (Eds.), Social psychology: A handbook of basic principles (pp. 69−90). New York: Guilford Press.
Earl, J., Bright, J.E. & Adams, A. (1998). ‘In my opinion’: what gets graduates resumes short-listed? Australian Journal of Career Development, 7, 15-19.
Ellingson, J. E., Sackett, P. R., & Hough, L. M. (1999). Social desirability corrections in personality measurement: Issues of applicant comparison and construct validity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 155–166.
Eysenck, M.W. (1982). Attention and arousal. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Frazer, R. A., & Wiersma, U. J. (2001). Prejudice versus discrimination in the employment interview: We may hire equally, but our memories harbour prejudices. Human Relations, 54, 173−191.
Giddens, A. (1993). The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Goleman, D. (1996). Emotional intelligence. New York: Bantam Books.
Guion, R.M. (1998). Assessment, measurement and prediction for personnel decisions. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Halfhill, T., Nielsen, T. M., Sundstrom, E., & Weilbaecher, A. (2005). Group personality composition and performance in military service teams. Military Psychology, 17(1), 41–54.
Herriott, P. (2003). Assessment by groups: Can value be added? European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 12, 2, 131-145.
Hough, L.A. & Oswald, F.L. (2000). Personnel selection: Looking toward the future – remembering the past. Annual Review of Psychology, 51, 631-664.
Janssens, M. & Steyaert, C. (2007). HRM and performance: A plea for reflexivity in HRM studies. Journal of Management Studies, 46, 1, 143-155.
Janz, T. (1982). Initial comparisons of patterned behaviour description interviews versus unstructured interviews. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67, 577-580.
Jussim, L., Coleman, L. M., & Learch, L. (1987). The nature of stereotypes: A comparison and integration of three theories. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 536−546.
Kickul, J., & Neuman, G. (2000). Emergent leadership behaviors: The function of personality and cognitive ability in determining teamwork performance and KSAs. Journal of Business and Psychology, 15(1), 27–51.
Klingner, Y. & Schuler, H. (2004). Improving participants’ evaluations while maintaining validity by a work sample-intelligence test hybrid. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 12, 1-2, 120-134.
Knights, D. & McCabe, D. (1998). ‘The times they are a changin’? Transformative organizational innovations in financial services in the UK. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 9, 168-184.
Knights, D. & Raffo, C. (1990). Milk round professionalism in personnel recruitment: myth or reality? Personnel Review, 19, 28-37.
Kruglanski, A. W., & Sleeth-Keppler, D. (2007). The principles of social judgment. In A. W. Kruglanski & E. T. Higgings (Eds.), Social psychology: A handbook of basic principles (pp. 116−137). New York: Guilford Press.
Kutcher, E. J., & Bragger, J. D. (2004). Selection interviews of overweight job applicants: Can structure reduce the bias? Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 34, 1993−2022.
Latham, G.P. and Saari, L.M. (1984). Do people do what they say? Further studies on the situational interview. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69, 569-573.
Legge, K. (2007). Putting the missing H into HRM: The case of the flexible organisation. In S.C. Bolton and M. Houlihan (Eds.), Searching for the human in human resource management. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
LePine, J. A., & Van Dyne, L. (2001). Voice and cooperative behavior as contrasting forms of contextual performance: Evidence of differential relationships with big five personality characteristics and cognitive ability. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(2), 326–336.
Lievens, F., & De Paepe, A. (2004). An empirical investigation of interviewer-related factors that discourage the use of high structure interviews. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25, 29−46.
Lievens, F., & Klimoski, R. J. (2001). Understanding the assessment centre process: Where are we now? International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 16, 245–286.
Lievens, F., Harris, M. M., Van Keer, E., & Bisqueret, C. (2003). Predicting cross- cultural training performance: The validity of personality, cognitive ability, and dimensions measured by an assessment center and a behavior description interview. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(3), 476–486.
Lin, N. -P., Chiu, H. -C., & Hsieh, Y. -C. (2001). Investigating the relationship between service providers' personality and customers' perceptions of service quality across gender. Total Quality Management, 12(1), 57–67.
MacDuffie, J.P. (1995). Human resource bundles and manufacturing performance: organizational logic and flexible production systems in the world auto industry. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 48, 2, 197-221.
Mael, F. A. (1991). A conceptual rationale for the domain and attributes of biodata items. Personnel Psychology, 44, 763−792.
McDaniel, M. A., Whetzel, D. L., Schmidt, F. L., & Maurer, S. (1994). The validity of employment interviews: A comprehensive review and meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 599−616.
McFarland, L. A., Ryan, A. M., Sacco, J. M., & Krista, S. D. (2004). Examination of structured interviewratings across time: The effects of applicant race, rater race, and panel composition. Journal of Management, 30, 435−452.
Meyer, J.P. & Allen, N.J. (1997). Commitment in the workplace: Theory, research and application. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Mohammed, S., & Angell, L. C. (2003). Personality heterogeneity in teams: Which differences make a difference for team performance? Small Group Research, 34(6), 651–677.
Mohammed, S., Mathieu, J. E., & Bartlett, A. L. (2002). Technical–administrative task performance, leadership task performance, and contextual performance: Considering the influence of team- and task-related composition variables. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23(7), 795–814.
Mol, S. T., Born, M. P., Willemsen, M. E., & Van Der Molen, H. T. (2005). Predicting expatriate job performance for selection purposes: A quantitative review. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 36(5), 590–620.
Morgeson, F. P., Reider, M. H., & Campion, M. A. (2005). Selecting individuals in team settings: The importance of social skills, personality characteristics, and team work knowledge. Personnel Psychology, 58(3), 583–611.
Mount, M.K., Barrick, M.R. & Strauss, J.P. (1994). The joint relationship of conscientiousness and ability with performance: Test of the interaction hypothesis. Journal of Management, 25, 707-721.
Muehlberger, U. (2007). Dependent self-employment: Workers on the border between employment and self-employment. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Nikolaou, I. (2003). Fitting the person to the organisation: Examining the personality– job performance relationship from a new perspective. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 18(7/8), 639–648.
O'Connell, M. S., Doverspike, D., Norris-Watts, C., & Hattrup, K. (2001). Predictors of organizational citizenship behavior among Mexican retail salespeople. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 9(3), 272–280.
Ones, D. S., & Viswesvaran, C. (1998). The effects of social desirability and faking on personality and integrity assessment for personnel selection. Human Performance, 11, 245–269.
Ozbilgin, M. & Woodward, D. (1994). Belonging and otherness: sex equality in banking in Turkey and Britain. Gender, Work and Organization, 11, 6, 668-688.
Ployhart, R. E., Schneider, B., & Schmitt, N. (2006). Staffing organizations: Contemporary practice and theory, (3rd edition.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Purkiss, S. L., Segrest, W. L., Perrewe, P. L., Gillespie, T. L., Mayes, B. T., & Ferris, G. R. (2006). Implicit sources of bias in employment interview judgments and decisions. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 101, 152−167.
Roberson, Q. M., Collins, C. J., & Oreg, S. (2005). The effects of recruitment message specificity on applicant attraction to organizations. Journal of Business and Psychology, 19, 319−339.
Robertson, I.T. & Smith, M. (2001). Personnel selection. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 74, 441-472.
Rynes, S. L., & Cable, D. M. (2003). Recruitment research in the twenty-first century. In W. C. Borman D. R. Ilgen & R. J. Klimoski (Eds.), Handbook of psychology:
Industrial and organizational psychology, vol. 12. (pp. 55−76)Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Rynes, S. L., Bretz, R. D., Jr., & Gerhart, B. (1991). The importance of recruitment in job choice: A different way of looking. Personnel Psychology, 44, 487−521.
Salgado, J.F. (1999). Personnel selection methods. In C.L. Cooper and I.T. Robertson (Eds.), International review of industrial and organizational psychology (Vol. 14). Chichester: Wiley.
Salgado, J.F., Anderson, N., Moscoso, S., Bertua, C. De Fruyt, F. & Rolland, J.P. (2003). A meta-analytic study of general mental ability validity for different occupations in the European Community. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 6, 176-184.
Schmeichel, B.J. & Vohs, K.D. (2009). Self-affirmation and self-control: Affirming core values counteracts ego depletion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96, 4, 770-782.
Schmidt, F.L. & Hunter, J.E. (1998). The validity and utility of selection methods in personnel psychology: Practice and theoretical implications of 85 years of research findings. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 2, 262-274.
Schmitt, N., Gooding, R.Z., Noe, R.A. & Kirsch, M. (1984). Meta-analyses of validity studies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 70, 280-289.
Shackleton, V. & Newell, S. (1997). International assessment and selection. In N. Anderson and P. Herriot (Eds.), International handbook of selection and assessment (pp. 81-95). Chichester: Wiley.
Sharf, J. C. (1994). The impact of legal and equal employment opportunity issues on personal history inquiries. In G. A. Stokes, M. D. Mumford, &W. A. Owens (Eds.), Biodata handbook (pp. 351−390). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
Silvester, J. (2003). A natural selection. People Management, January, 36-39.
Smith, M. & George, D. (1992). Selection methods. In C.L. Cooper & I.T. Robertson (Eds.), International review of industrial and organizational psychology (Vol. 7, pp. 55-97). Chichester: Wiley.
Sternberg, R.J. & Wagner, R.K. (1995). Practical intelligence in everyday life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Stewart, G. L., Fulmer, I. S., & Barrick, M. R. (2005). An exploration of member roles as a multilevel linking mechanism for individual traits and team outcomes. Personnel Psychology, 58(2), 343–365.
Stone, D.L. & Stone-Romero, E.F. (2004). The influence of culture on role-taking in culturally diverse organizations. In M.S. Stockdale & F.J. Crosby (Eds.), The psychology and management of workplace diversity (pp. 78-99). Malden, MA : Blackwell Publishing.
Syed, J. (2008). Employment prospects form skilled immigrants : A relational perspective. Human Resource Management Review, 18, 28-45.
Taylor, S. (2004). Hunting the snark: A critical analysis of human resource management discourses in relation to managing labour in smaller organizations. In S. Marlow, D. Patton, and M. Ram (Eds.), Managing labour in small firms. London: Routledge.
Templer, K. J., Tay, C., & Chandrasekar, N. A. (2006). Motivational cultural intelligence, realistic job preview, realistic living condition preview, and cross- cultural adjustment. Group and Organization Management, 31, 154−173.
Viswesvaran, C. & Ones, D.S. (2000). Perspectives of models of job performance. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 8, 216-225.
Watson, T. (2004). HRM and critical social science analysis. Journal of Management Studies, 41, 447-467.
Watson, T. (2010). Critical social science, pragmatism and the realities of HRM. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 21, 6, 915-931.
Wilk, S. L., & Cappelli, P. (2003). Understanding the determinants of employer use of selection methods. Personnel Psychology, 56, 103−124.
Williams, S. D. (2004). Personality, attitude, and leader influences on divergent thinking and creativity in organizations. European Journal of Innovation Management, 7(3), 187–204.
Witt, L. A. (2002). The interactive effects of extraversion and conscientiousness on performance. Journal of Management, 28(6), 835–851.
Zanoni, P. & Janssens, M. (2007). Minority employees engaging with (diversity) management: an analysis of control, agency and micro-emancipation. Journal of Management Studies, 44, 1371-1397.
Zedeck, S. & Cascio, W.F. (1984). Psychological issues in personnel decisions. Annual Review of Psychology, 35, 461-518.
Zottoli, M. A., & Wanous, J. P. (2000). Recruitment source research: Current status and future directions. Human Resource Management Review, 10, 353−383.