Recruitment
Internal Selection
Preliminary Issues
©McGraw-Hill Education
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
In this logic, it’s necessary that qualifications carry over from one job to another
Types of predictors
there is usually greater depth and relevance to the data available on internal candidates relative to external selection
©McGraw-Hill Education.
Logic of Prediction: Past Performance Predicts Future Performance
©McGraw-Hill Education.
Internal Versus External Selection
The data collection on internal applicants in their previous jobs often offer greater depth, relevance, and verifiability than the data collected on external applicants. This is so because organizations usually have much more detailed and in-depth information about internal candidates’ previous job experiences. This makes it easier to access data that are reliable about internal candidates than would be the case with external candidates. In terms of relevance of past experiences, organizations may also have better data with which to make selection decisions on internal than external candidates. The experiences of insiders may more closely mirror the experiences likely to be encountered on the new job than the experiences of outsiders. Another positive aspect of the nature of predictors for internal selection is verifiability. Instead of merely relying on the opinion of one person as to the suitability of an internal candidate for the job, multiple assessments can solicited. By pooling opinions, it is possible to get a more complete and accurate picture of a candidate’s qualifications
©McGraw-Hill Education.
Internal Versus External Selection
Internal selection refers to the assessment and evaluation of internal job applicants
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
©McGraw-Hill Education.
Internal Selection
Initial Assessment Methods
©McGraw-Hill Education
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
©McGraw-Hill Education.
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
©McGraw-Hill Education.
Peer Assessments
Differences between peer ratings, peer nominations, peer rankings
All three methods are peer assessments used to make promotion decisions. With peer ratings, readiness to be promoted is assessed for each peer using a rating scale. The person with the highest ratings is deemed most promotable. With peer nominations, one relies on voting for the most promotable candidates. Peers receiving the greatest number of “votes” are the most promotable. And, finally, peer rankings rely upon a rank ordering of peers. Those peers with the highest rankings are the most promotable
©McGraw-Hill Education.
Employee Advocates
Coach
Provides day-to-day feedback
Diagnoses and resolves performance problems
Creates opportunities for employees using existing training programs and career development programs
Sponsor
Actively promotes person for advancement opportunities
Guides person’s career rather than simply informing them of opportunities
Creates opportunities for people in decision-making capacities to see the skills of the employee (e.g., lead a task force)
Mentor
Becomes personally responsible for the success of the person
Is available to person on and off the job
Lets person in on “insider” information
Solicits and values person’s input
©McGraw-Hill Education.
Evaluation of Initial Assessment Methods
| Predictor | Use | Cost | Reliability | Validity | Utility | Applicant reactions | Adverse Impact |
| Self-nominations | Low | Low | Moderate | Moderate | ? | Mixed | ? |
| Talent management/ succession systems | High | High | Moderate | Moderate | ? | ? | ? |
| Peer assessments | Low | Low | High | High | ? | Negative | ? |
| Managerial sponsorship | Low | Moderate | ? | ? | ? | Positive | ? |
| Informal methods | High | Low | ? | ? | ? | Mixed | ? |
©McGraw-Hill Education.
Internal Selection
Substantive Assessment Methods
©McGraw-Hill Education
Substantive Assessment Methods
Seniority and experience
Job knowledge tests
Performance appraisal
Promotability ratings
Assessment centers
Interview simulations
Promotion panels and review boards
©McGraw-Hill Education.
Overview of Seniority and Experience
Initially, the concepts of seniority and experience may seem the same. In reality, however, they are quite different. Seniority typically refers to length of service or tenure with the organization, department, or job. For example, company seniority is measured as length of continuous employment in an organization—the difference between the present date of employment and the date of hire. Thus, seniority is a purely quantitative measure that has nothing to do with the type or quality of job experiences. Conversely, experience generally has a broader meaning. While seniority may be one aspect of experience, experience itself encompasses a broader range. As an example, two employees working at the same company for 20 years may have the same level of seniority but very different levels of experience if one of them has performed a number of different jobs, worked in different areas of the organization, and enrolled in various training programs. Thus, experience includes not only the length of service in the organization or in various positions in the organization but also the kinds of activities undertaken in those positions
©McGraw-Hill Education.
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
©McGraw-Hill Education.
Job Knowledge Tests
Job knowledge measures one’s mastery of the concepts needed to perform certain work. Job knowledge is a complex concept that includes elements of both ability (capacity to learn) and seniority (opportunity to learn). It is usually measured with a paper-and-pencil test. To develop a paper-and-pencil test to assess job knowledge, the content domain from which test questions will be constructed must be clearly identified. For example, a job knowledge test used to select sales managers from salespeople must identify the specific knowledge necessary for being a successful sales manager
Holds great promise as a predictor of job performance
Reflects an assessment of what was learned with experience
Also captures cognitive ability
For ex. essay tests are best used to assess written communication skills.
©McGraw-Hill Education.
Performance Appraisal
One possible predictor of future job performance is past job performance. This assumes that elements of the future job are similar to those of the past job. Data on employees’ previous performance are routinely collected as part of the performance appraisal process and thus available for use in internal selection. One advantage of performance appraisals over other internal assessment methods is that they are readily available in many organizations. Another desirable feature is that they likely capture both ability and motivation. Hence, they can offer a complete look at the person’s qualifications for the job
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”
©McGraw-Hill Education.
Performance Appraisal
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?
©McGraw-Hill Education.
Promotability Ratings
Promotability ratings are useful not only from a selection perspective but also from a recruitment perspective. By discussing what is needed to be promotable, employee development may be encouraged as well as coupled with organizational sponsorship of the opportunities needed to develop. In turn, the development of new skills in employees increases the internal recruitment pool for promotions
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
©McGraw-Hill Education.
Interview Simulations
An interview simulation mimics the oral communication required on the job. It is sometimes used in an assessment center, but less frequently than in-basket exercises, leaderless group discussions, and case analysis. It is also used as a predictor separate from the assessment center. There are several different forms of interview simulations; Role-Play, Fact Finding, and oral Presentations
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
©McGraw-Hill Education.
Promotion Panels/Review Boards
In the public sector, it is a common practice to use a panel or board of people to review the qualifications of candidates. Frequently, both internal and external candidates are assessed. The panel or board typically consists of job experts, HR professionals, and representatives from constituencies in the community that the board represents
Promotion panels and review boards: use multiple raters, which can improve reliability and can broaden commitment to decisions reached
©McGraw-Hill Education.
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
©McGraw-Hill Education.
Theory Behind Assessment Centers
An assessment center is a collection of predictors used to forecast success, primarily in higher-level jobs. It is used for higher-level jobs because of the high costs involved in conducting the center. The theory behind assessment centers is focused on the concern with predicting an individual’s behavior and effectiveness in critical roles, usually managerial ones. Since these roles require complex behaviors, multiple KSAOs are used to predict these behaviors. This means that multiple methods of assessing the KSAOs, as well as multiple assessors, are required. In theory, the result of this type of assessment should be higher validity than could be obtained from a single assessment method or assessor
©McGraw-Hill Education.
Characteristics of Assessment Centers
Participants are usually managers being assessed for higher-level managerial jobs
Participants are evaluated by assessors at conclusion of program
©McGraw-Hill Education.
Evaluation of Substantive Assessment Methods, 1
| Predictors | Use | Cost | Reliability | Validity | Utility | Applicant Reactions | Adverse Impact |
| Seniority | High | Low | High | Low | ? | ? | High |
| Experience | High | Low | High | Moderate | High | Positive | Mixed |
| Job knowledge tests | Low | Moderate | High | High | ? | ? | ? |
| Performance appraisal | Moderate | Moderate | ? | Moderate | ? | ? | ? |
| Promotability ratings | Low | Low | High | High | ? | ? | ? |
| Assessment center | Low | High | High | High | High | ? | ? |
©McGraw-Hill Education.
Evaluation of Substantive Assessment Methods, 2
| Predictors | Use | Cost | Reliability | Validity | Utility | Applicant Reactions | Adverse Impact |
| In-basket exercise | Low | Moderate | Moderate | Moderate | High | Mixed | Mixed |
| Leaderless group discussion | Low | Low | Moderate | Moderate | ? | ? | ? |
| Case analysis | Low | Low | ? | Moderate | ? | ? | ? |
| Global assignments | High | Moderate | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? |
| Interview simulations | Low | Low | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? |
| Panels and review boards | Low | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? |
©McGraw-Hill Education.