Discussion

Impaler_2019

Gatewood_8e_Ch_10.pptx

Home >Human Resource Management homework help >Discussion

Human Resource Selection, 8e

Gatewood

© 2017 Cengage Learning® May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part, except for use as permitted in a license distributed with a certain product or service or otherwise on a password-protected website or school-approved learning management system for classroom use.

The Selection Interview

Chapter 10

The Selection Interview

Two approaches:

Option A: the structured interview with a few rules

Predictive validities from 0.44 to 0.62

Option B: as the hiring manager thinks best, unstructured

Predictive validities from 0.20 to 0.33

The Selection Interview (2)

The few rules for Option A:

1. questions should be demonstrably job related

2. Ask all applicants the same precise questions

3. Answers should be rated using anchored rating scales that define good, average, poor answers

4. multiple interviewers should independently evaluate the candidate’s answers

5. train interviewers

The Selection Interview (3)

Why do so many still prefer Option B?

An unstructured interview is flexible

Applicants have:

more discretion in answering questions, enabling them to better convey their skills and abilities

The chance to learn more about the job, work group, manager and organization

Interviewers like:

The flexibility to get to know the person

The opportunity to win the applicant over

Brief History

Early research on unstructured interview concluded that it lacked reliability, validity

But 25 years of research of structured interview shows predictive validity

Schmidt & Hunter: validity coefficient for the structured interview is 0.51

Unstructured interview better at recruiting

How combine these approaches?

Brief History Developing & Designing Effective Interviews

Outcomes of interview:

(a) an opportunity to select the best candidate

(b) an opportunity to recruit highly qualified candidates and sell them on the organization

(d) efficient and practical method for measuring an applicant WRCs

(e) permits an early decision (screening out) or later decision re applicant

Brief History Developing & Designing Effective Interviews (2)

Recruiting the Applicant to the Organization: Providing Job Information

The interviewer’s description of the job is sometimes recalled differently by the two

Use a written job description

Use an interview that is a mix of selection and recruiting

Increases the applicant’s willingness to accept an offer

Allows the employer to assess the candidate’s qualifications

Brief History Developing & Designing Effective Interviews (3)

Effect on Attracting Applicants: Recruiting Outcomes

The interview is only one source the applicant has to assess the organization

Recruiters signal the organization’s reputation

Those who are skilled and trained had a significant impact on the candidate’s attitudes toward the job

Demographic characteristics had no impact

But effect of the recruiter relatively modest

Brief History Making a Selection Decision

Interviewers’ ratings may be affected by:

Physical attractiveness & professional demeanor

Use of impression management behavior

Verbal and nonverbal behavior of the applicant

Biases most relevant to the interview:

Anchoring

Confirmation bias

Illusory correlations

Overconfidence bias

Brief History Making a Selection Decision (2)

Screening versus Selection Interview

Screening interview – to assess applicant’s general characteristics

Selection interview – to assess specific job-related WRCs

To develop questions for screening:

Identify fundamental WRCs applicant must possess

Identify the most important of these

Use a modified critical-incidents technique to identify questions

Brief History Making a Selection Decision (3)

Measuring Applicant WRCs

More is Not Better

Impossible for the interviewer to assess many WRCs; best to focus on a few, thoroughly

Appropriate WRCs for the Interview

Huffcutt: interview designed to evaluate seven major dimensions; See Table 10.1

But these not highly correlated with single-best predictor of performance – mental ability

Table 10.1 – Behavioral Dimensions Frequently Measured in Structured IV

Brief History Making a Selection Decision (4)

Types of Structured Interviews

Structured vs. Unstructured Interviews

An unstructured interview results in subjective, global evaluations not very useful

Structured interviews rely on a disciplined method for collecting job-relevant information

Table 10.2 shows components of the structured interviews that interviewers do not use very often

Table 10.2 –Dimensions of a Structured Interview

Brief History Making a Selection Decision (5)

Developing Appropriate Interview Questions

The Situational Interview

1. Do a job analysis using the critical-incidents technique

2. Review the incidents for each behavioral dimension, select a small number of the most appropriate, and use these to write interview questions

3. Score applicants’ responses using a five-point scale

Table 10.3 contains examples of such questions

Table 10.3 –Examples of Situational Interview Questions & Scoring Scales

Brief History Making a Selection Decision (6)

Developing Appropriate Interview Questions

The Behavior Description Interview

1. Do a job analysis using the critical-incidents technique

2. Review the incidents for each behavioral dimension, select a small number of the most appropriate, and use these to write interview questions

3. Create follow-up questions for each question

4. Score applicants’ responses separately using a five-point scale

Table 10.4 contains examples of such questions

Table 10.4 –Examples of Behavioral Description IV Questions & Scoring

Brief History Conclusions about Designing the Interview

To focus on WRCs in the selection interview, but include other objectives:

1. Train interviewers about rapport building

2. Just before transitioning into the structured interview, the interviewer tells the applicant what to expect during the rest of the interview

3. If acceptable to the applicant, begin the structured interview

4. With all questions asked and answered, notes are put away; then answer applicant’s questions

The Role of Technology and Global Trends

Increasing use of Skype and video-conferencing, interviews at a distance

Preliminary research suggests comparable predictive validities from these

Future research on impact of impression management behaviors

Cultural differences may influence administration and design of the interview

Reactions to structured interviews differ; may be illegal in some countries

Evaluating Interviews as Predictors

Predictive Validity

Structured interviews more valid than unstructured interviews

Behavior description interviews are past-oriented questions re prior work experience

Situational interviews are future-oriented questions asking applicants what they would do

Even when these are designed to assess the same construct, they reflect different measures

Evaluating Interviews as Predictors (2)

Predictive Validity (cont.)

Situational interviews - answers highly correlated with job knowledge, cognitive ability

Most research on these concerns entry-level, clerical and hourly jobs; applicants have no work experience

Behavior questions - answers related to more accumulated work experience and personality

Higher predictive validity for professional jobs higher in complexity

Recommended: use both types of questions

Evaluating Interviews as Predictors (3)

Reliability

Structured interviews are more reliable than unstructured interviews

The reliability of unstructured interviews can be improved by increasing the number of interviews given to a job candidate

Increases the amount of information on which a hiring recommendation can be based

Should correct for idiosyncratic biases of individual interviewers

Three or four interviews create same level of validity

Discrimination and the Interview

Discrimination might be charged if:

(a) decisions of the selection interview led to disparate treatment or disparate impact; and

(b) the interview could not be defended regarding job-relatedness

Employers should avoid asking questions relating to race, color, religion, sex, national origin, marital status, sexual orientation, age, handicap or disability, and status as a Vietnam-era or disabled veteran

Discrimination and the Interview Court Cases

Watson: major impact on how selection interview treated by courts & firms

Unscored interviews subjective, so held to be disparate treatment, easier to defend than disparate impact

Watson stated that if selection interview central to charge of discrimination, could be heard as disparate impact case

Many firms now use structured, scored interview

Table 10.5 considers specific practices

Table 10.5 – Selected Court Cases Treating the Selection Interview

Discrimination and the Interview Court Cases (2)

Discrimination Found

Stamps v. Detroit Edison Co. – interviewers not given job-related questions, scoring or rules

Weiner v. County of Oakland – questions: could you work with aggressive young men? Does your husband approve of your working?

Robbins v. White-Wilson Medical Clinic – note in margin of application: “She is a black girl. Could cause trouble”

Jones v. Mississippi DOC – IV not job-related

Discrimination and the Interview Court Cases (2)

Discrimination NOT Found

Harless v. Duck. – interview valid since questions based on WRCs from job analysis

Maine Human Rights Comm. V DOC– multiple interviewers used a form with numerical grade for 7 characteristics to assess personality

Minneapolis Comm. on Civil Rights v MN Chem Dependency Assn – applicant’s outside activities justified asking additional questions

Research Findings on Discrimination

Structured interviews help reduce influence of race, sex, age, etc. on outcomes

Small and inconsistent effect on result if interview & applicant of same race, gender

Applicant disclosure of nonobvious disability increases likelihood of hiring

Black and Hispanic candidates received evaluations about ¼ of a standard deviation lower, on average

A Model of Interviewer Decision Making

Models that focus on factors that affect decision making during the interview organize the conduct of research and interpretation of results

Models assume that interviewer and applicant are gathering and processing information about each other, the organization and the job

Dipboye’s model (Figure 10.1)identifies factors affecting decision before, during and after the interview

Figure 10.1 – A Model of the Selection Interview

A Model … Expectations…Before the Interview

Interviewers & applicants bring their own expectations, beliefs, needs & intentions re the job, interview, firm & each other

These influence all three stages of the interview

In pre-interview stage, significant impact on impressions, which influences interviewer evaluation of candidates

Interviewers seek out and recall (distort?) information supporting their pre-interview impressions

A Model … Expectations…Before the Interview (2)

Interviewer’s access to applicant information before the interview skews results:

Lab experiment: hypothetical job candidates posting negative work-related activity much less likely to re recommended by recruiter

Candidate’s who thought interviewer likely to extend an offer after first few minutes were less vigilant, less effectively managed their image during rest of interview

A Model … Expectations…Before the Interview (3)

Individual Differences

Interviewer’s evaluation affected by:

Physical attractiveness

Handshake

Candidate’s personality

Whether candidate has participated in a coaching program prior to the interview

Little or no effect by:

Candidate demographic characteristics

A Model … Expectations…Before the Interview (4)

Social Interaction during the Interview

Candidate has incentive to manage image

Attitudinal similarity raises interviewer ratings

Personable, competent, informative recruiters increase applicant’s attraction to job or firm

Interviewer ratings of candidate higher when interview is longer and interviewer talks more

Interviewer ratings more accurate when they had both a high level of verbal cues and nonverbal cues

A Model … Expectations…Before the Interview (5)

Social Interaction during the Interview (2)

Candidate’s impression management can create positive or negative images

Candidate’s ingratiation positively affect interviewers’ evaluations

Candidate’s self-promotion tactics positively affect interviewers’ evaluations

Interviewers often disagree about which topics should be covered in an interview

Relate to individual preferences, not importance

A Model … Expectations…Before the Interview (6)

Information Processing and Decision-Making Factors

Decision makers use a two-stage process

1st: interviewer tries to reduce choices by screening out unsuitable candidates (categorize)

2nd: interviewer evaluates choices more rigorously, trying to choose the “best” candidate (characterization)

A Model … Expectations…Before the Interview (7)

Information Processing and Decision-Making Factors (2)

Initial information carries considerable weight

First impression establishes an anchor for interviewer that filters all subsequent evaluations of the applicant

Interviewers give more weight to negative information than to positive information

Unfavorable ratings on only one of several characteristics resulted in rejection in 90% of cases

Interviewers may fail to recall 50% of interview

Recommendations for Using the Interview

Recommendations for how to build a better interview are summarized in Table 10.6

Table 10.6 – Recommendations for Interview Use

Recommendations for Using the Interview (2)

Restrict the Scope of the Interview

One of the major weaknesses of the interview is that it is often used to accomplish too many purposes

Recruitment and selection should be separated systematically

Often, too many WRCs are evaluated in the interview

Limit the scope to a narrower band of applicant characteristics

Table 10.7 shows an example of how to do this

Table 10.7 – Selection Plan for the Job of Maintenance Supervisor

Recommendations for Using the Interview (3)

Limit the Use of Pre-interview Data

Assuming the interview focuses on a small number of WRCs, limit interviewers to two types of information:

Complete data about any of the WRCs to be covered in the interview

Incomplete or contradictory statements presented on the application blank or other similar instruments

Access to data not directly relevant to the purposes of the interview only contributes to deficiencies in the interviewer’s decisions

Recommendations for Using the Interview (4)

Adopt a Structured Format

A set of questions should be formulated for each WRC identified for the interview

Ask these questions of each applicant

Interviewers may go beyond these questions as necessary, either to clarify a response, to seek other important details, or pursue a closely related area

This approach makes comparison of WRCs between applicants possible

Recommendations for Using the Interview (5)

Use Job-Related Questions

Three types of WRCs may be appropriately measured in an interview:

Questions of job knowledge

Questions of social interaction

Questions of personality of habitual behaviors

Table 10.8 gives an example

Table 10.8 – Selection Interview Questions …Maintenance Supervisor

Recommendations for Using the Interview (6)

Use Multiple Questions for Each WRC

The more items an assessment device possesses that measure the same WRC, the greater its reliability and validity

The number of questions will depend on information developed from the job analysis and the time available for each applicant

Consider first the relative importance of the WRCs being measured in the interview

Recommendations for Using the Interview (7)

Rely on Multiple Independent Interviewers

The use of multiple interviewers will enhance reliability, if their ratings are independent

Panel interviews are not the equivalent of multiple interviews by different interviewers

Pooling or averaging interviewer judgments reduces the influence of measurement error, particularly if these judgments are from different interviews of he same candidate

The same interviewers should interview all

Recommendations for Using the Interview (8)

Apply a Formal Scoring Format

An interview that provides a formal, defined scoring system is superior in many ways to one that does not, especially in terms of:

Legal defensibility

Reliability and validity

Interval measurement scales commonly used

Table 10.9 shows an example of a scoring form that can be used in interviews for the position of maintenance supervisor

Table 10.9 – An Example of Interview Rating Scales of WRCs

Recommendations for Using the Interview (9)

Train the Interviewer

Training should be provided whether the interview is structured or unstructured

Interviewers must:

(a) Accurately receive information

(b) Critically evaluate the information

Recommendations for Using the Interview (10)

Results of Training

Training programs have reduced some of the common rater errors: contrast, halo, leniency and central tendency

Training enhances the reliability of interviewer judgments

Account for Social Dynamics & Multiple Purposes

Structured interviews can organized into phases, including questions by the applicant