Hrm
Part 4
Staffing Activities: Selection
Chapter 10:
Internal Selection
McGraw-Hill/Irwin
Copyright © 2012 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.
Staffing Policies and Programs
Staffing System and Retention Management
Support Activities
Legal compliance
Planning
Job analysis
Core Staffing Activities
Recruitment: External, internal
Selection:
Measurement, external, internal
Employment:
Decision making, final match
Staffing Organizations Model
10-*
10-*
Chapter Outline
- Preliminary Issues
- Logic of Prediction
- Types of Predictors
- Selection Plan
- Initial Assessment Methods
- Talent Management/ Succession Systems
- Peer Assessments
- Self-Assessments
- Managerial Sponsorship
- Informal Discussions and Recommendations
- Choice of Methods
- Substantive Assessment Methods
- Seniority and Experience
- Job Knowledge Tests
- Performance Appraisal
- Promotability Ratings
- Assessment Centers
- Interview Simulations
- Promotion Panels and Review Boards
- Choice of Methods
- Discretionary Assessment Methods
- Legal Issues
10-*
Learning Objectives for This Chapter
- Compare how the logic of prediction applies to internal vs. external selection decisions
- Evaluate the relative advantages and disadvantages of the five initial assessment methods used in internal selection
- Consider the merits and pitfalls of using seniority and experience for internal selection decisions
- Describe the main features of assessment centers
- Understand the advantages and disadvantages of using assessment centers for internal selection decisions
- Evaluate the relative advantages and disadvantages of the seven substantive assessment methods used in internal selection
10-*
Discussion Questions for This Chapter
- Explain how internal selection decisions differ from external selection decisions.
- What are the differences among peer ratings, peer nominations, and peer rankings?
- Explain the theory behind assessment centers.
- Describe the three different types of interview simulations.
- Evaluate the effectiveness of seniority, assessment centers, and job knowledge as substantive internal selection procedures.
- What steps should be taken by an organization that is committed to shattering the glass ceiling?
10-*
Preliminary Issues
- Logic of prediction
- indicators of internal applicants’ degree of success in past situations should be predictive of their likely success in new situations
- Types of predictors
- there is usually greater depth and relevance to the data available on internal candidates relative to external selection
- Selection plan
- important for internal selection to avoid the problems of favoritism and gut instinct that can be especially prevalent in internal selection
10-*
Logic of Prediction: Past Performance Predicts Future Performance
- Advantages of internal over external selection
- Greater depth and relevance of data available on internal candidates
- Greater emphasis can be placed on samples and criteria rather than signs
*
10-*
Discussion Questions
- Explain how internal selection decisions differ from external selection decisions.
10-*
Talent Management/Succession Systems
- Keep ongoing records of skills, talents, and capabilities of employees
- Primary goal is to facilitate internal selection systems through up-to-date, accurate records on employees
- Potential uses
- Performance management
- Recruitment needs analysis
- Employee development
- Compensation and career management
10-*
Peer Assessments
- Methods include peer ratings, peer nominations, peer rankings
- Strengths
- Rely on raters who presumably are knowledgeable of applicants’ KSAOs
- Peers more likely to view decisions as fair due to their input
- Weaknesses
- May encourage friendship bias
- Criteria involved in assessments are not always clear
10-*
Ex. 10.1: Peer Assessment Methods
10-*
Initial Assessment Methods
- Self-assessments
- Job incumbents asked to evaluate own skills to determine promotability
- Exh. 10.2: Self-Assessment Form
- Managerial sponsorship
- Higher-ups given considerable influence in promotion decisions
- Exh. 10.3: Employee Advocates
- Informal discussions and recommendations
- May be suspect in terms of relevance to actual job performance
10-*
Exhibit 10.4 Choice of Initial Assessment Methods
10-*
Discussion Questions
- What are the differences among peer ratings, peer nominations, and peer rankings?
10-*
Substantive Assessment Methods
- Seniority and experience
- Job knowledge tests
- Performance appraisal
- Promotability ratings
- Assessment centers
- Interview simulations
- Promotion panels and review boards
10-*
Overview of Seniority and Experience
- Definitions
- Seniority
- Length of service with organization, department, or job
- Experience
- Not only length of service but also kinds of activities an employee has undertaken
- Why so widely used?
- Direct experience in a job content area reflects an accumulated stock of KSAOs necessary to perform job
- Information is easily and cheaply obtained
- Protects employee from capricious treatment and favoritism
- Promoting senior or experienced employees is socially acceptable -- viewed as rewarding loyalty
10-*
Evaluation of Seniority and Experience
- Employees typically expect promotions will go to most senior or experienced employee
- Relationship to job performance
- Seniority is unrelated to job performance
- Experience is moderately related to job performance, especially in the short run
- Experience is superior because it is:
- a more valid method than seniority
- more likely to be content valid when past or present jobs are similar to the future job
- Experience is unlikely to remedy initial performance difficulties of low-ability employees
- is better suited to predict short-term rather than long-term potential
10-*
Job Knowledge Tests
- Job knowledge includes elements of both ability and seniority
- Measured by a paper-and-pencil test or a computer
- Holds great promise as a predictor of job performance
- Reflects an assessment of what was learned with experience
- Also captures cognitive ability
10-*
Performance Appraisal
- A possible predictor of future job performance is past job performance collected by a performance appraisal process
- Advantages
- Readily available
- Probably capture both ability and motivation
- Weaknesses
- Potential lack of a direct correspondence between requirements of current job and requirements of position applied for
- “Peter Principle”
10-*
Performance Appraisal
- Ex. 10.5: Questions to Ask in Using Performance Appraisal as a Method of Internal Staffing Decisions
- Is the performance appraisal process reliable and unbiased?
- Is present job content representative of future job content?
- Have the KSAOs required for performance in the future job(s) been acquired and demonstrated in the previous job(s)?
- Is the organizational or job environment stable such that what led to past job success will lead to future job success?
10-*
Promotability Ratings
- Assessing promotability involves determining an applicant’s potential for higher-level jobs
- Promotability ratings often conducted along with performance appraisals
- Useful for both selection and recruitment
- Caveat
- When receiving separate evaluations for purposes of appraisal, promotability, and pay, an employee may receive mixed messages
10-*
Overview of Assessment Centers
- Elaborate method of employee selection
- Involves using a collection of predictors to forecast success, primarily in higher-level jobs
- Objective
- Predict an individual’s behavior and
effectiveness in critical roles, usually managerial - Incorporates multiple methods of assessing multiple KSAOs using multiple assessors
10-*
Ex. 10.7 Assessment Center Rating Form
- Participants take part in several exercises over multiple days
- In-basket exercise
- Leaderless group discussion
- Case analysis
- Trained assessors evaluate participants’ performance
10-*
Characteristics of Assessment Centers
- Participants are usually managers being assessed for higher-level managerial jobs
- Participants are evaluated by assessors at conclusion of program
10-*
Evaluation of Assessment Centers
- Validity
- Average validity ŕ = .37
- Validity is higher when
- Multiple predictors are used
- Assessors are psychologists rather than managers
- Peer evaluations are used
- Possess incremental validity in predicting performance and promotability beyond personality traits and cognitive ability tests
- Research results
- “Crown prince/princess” syndrome
- Participant reactions
10-*
Other Substantive Assessment Methods
- Interview simulations
- Role-play: candidate must play work related role with interviewer
- Fact finding: candidate needs to solicit information to evaluate an incomplete case
- Oral presentations: candidate must prepare and make an oral presentation on assigned topic
- Promotion panels and review boards: use multiple raters, which can improve reliability and can broaden commitment to decisions reached
10-*
Exhibit 10.8 Choice of Substantive Assessment Methods
10-*
Discussion Questions
- Explain the theory behind assessment centers.
- Describe the three different types of interview simulations.
- Evaluate the effectiveness of seniority, assessment centers, and job knowledge as substantive internal selection procedures.
10-*
Discretionary Assessment Methods
- Narrows list of finalists to those who will receive job offers
- Decisions often made on basis of
- Organizational citizenship behavior and
- Staffing philosophy regarding EE0 / AA
- Differences from external selection
- Previous finalists not receiving job offers do not simply disappear
- Multiple assessors generally used
10-*
Legal Issues
- Uniform Guidelines on Employee
Selection Procedures (UGESP) - Shattering the glass ceiling
- Employ greater use of selection plans
- Minimize use of casual, subjective methods and use formal, standardized, job-related assessment methods
- Implement programs to convey KSAOs necessary for advancement to aspiring employees
10-*
Discussion Questions
- What steps should be taken by an organization that is committed to shattering the glass ceiling?
10-*
Ethical Issues
- Issue 1
- Given that seniority is not a particularly valid predictor of job performance, do you think it’s unethical for a company to use it as a basis for promotion? Why or why not?
- Issue 2
- Vincent and Peter are both sales associates, and are up for promotion to sales manager. In the last five years, on a 1=poor to 5=excellent scale, Vincent’s average performance rating was 4.7 and Peter’s was 4.2. In an assessment center that was meant to simulate the job of sales manager, on a 1=very poor to 10=outstanding scale, Vincent’s average score was 8.2 and Peter’s was 9.2. Assuming everything else is equal, who should be promoted? Why?
*