4 to 5 page paper (Due in 12 hours)
budsimpson
HiringCommitteeWeightedDecisionTaskSolutions1.xlsxOverall averages
| Let's assume that you are compiling all of the information from each of the committee members to make a decision. In this scenario, the weights for each criteria have been average between the committee members. Then all of the scaled ratings for the candidates have been averaged between the committee members. The ultimate hiring decision based on this aggregate approach results in hiring Candidate D. Please view the spreadsheet titled "By Committee Member" for an alternative approach. | ||||||||||
| Hiring Committee Member 1 | ||||||||||
| Candidates: | Industry knowledge | Client relationships | New business development | Development of juniors | Brand leadership | Teamwork ability | Comfort with ambiguity | |||
| A | 7 | 3 | 4 | 2 | 4 | 6 | 2 | |||
| B | 3 | 2 | 1 | 5 | 2 | 5 | 3 | |||
| C | 3 | 2 | 6 | 6 | 7 | 5 | 4 | |||
| D | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 5 | 6 | 6 | |||
| E | 2 | 6 | 2 | 7 | 2 | 1 | 3 | |||
| Hiring Committee Member 2 | ||||||||||
| Candidates: | Industry knowledge | Client relationships | New business development | Development of juniors | Brand leadership | Teamwork ability | Comfort with ambiguity | |||
| A | 2 | 5 | 7 | 1 | 7 | 7 | 4 | |||
| B | 4 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 5 | 2 | |||
| C | 5 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 7 | 3 | 6 | |||
| D | 3 | 5 | 3 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | |||
| E | 4 | 4 | 2 | 6 | 5 | 1 | 3 | |||
| Hiring Committee Member 3 | ||||||||||
| Candidates: | Industry knowledge | Client relationships | New business development | Development of juniors | Brand leadership | Teamwork ability | Comfort with ambiguity | |||
| A | 5 | 2 | 5 | 4 | 6 | 6 | 2 | |||
| B | 5 | 5 | 4 | 5 | 2 | 1 | 5 | |||
| C | 5 | 4 | 6 | 2 | 7 | 3 | 6 | |||
| D | 6 | 6 | 1 | 7 | 2 | 6 | 5 | |||
| E | 5 | 3 | 2 | 5 | 6 | 3 | 6 | |||
| Hiring Committee Member 4 | ||||||||||
| Candidates: | Industry knowledge | Client relationships | New business development | Development of juniors | Brand leadership | Teamwork ability | Comfort with ambiguity | |||
| A | 4 | 6 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 1 | 4 | |||
| B | 4 | 4 | 6 | 3 | 3 | 7 | 1 | |||
| C | 2 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 6 | 4 | |||
| D | 3 | 4 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 1 | |||
| E | 7 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 3 | |||
| Hiring Committee Member 5 | ||||||||||
| Candidates: | Industry knowledge | Client relationships | New business development | Development of juniors | Brand leadership | Teamwork ability | Comfort with ambiguity | |||
| A | 5 | 6 | 7 | 4 | 5 | 1 | 3 | |||
| B | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 6 | 6 | 5 | |||
| C | 7 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 7 | |||
| D | 2 | 6 | 5 | 6 | 2 | 2 | 6 | |||
| E | 5 | 7 | 6 | 1 | 5 | 6 | 6 | |||
| Hiring Committee Member 6 | ||||||||||
| Candidates: | Industry knowledge | Client relationships | New business development | Development of juniors | Brand leadership | Teamwork ability | Comfort with ambiguity | |||
| A | 4 | 1 | 2 | 6 | 7 | 2 | 1 | |||
| B | 2 | 3 | 7 | 3 | 4 | 1 | 2 | |||
| C | 7 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 5 | 4 | 5 | |||
| D | 3 | 5 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 4 | 7 | |||
| E | 4 | 3 | 5 | 7 | 4 | 3 | 4 | |||
| Committee Member weights | ||||||||||
| Hiring Committee Member: | Industry knowledge | Client relationships | New business development | Development of juniors | Brand leadership | Teamwork ability | Comfort with ambiguity | |||
| 1 | 19 | 42 | 5 | 6 | 10 | 17 | 1 | 100 | ||
| 2 | 5 | 31 | 18 | 3 | 23 | 2 | 18 | 100 | ||
| 3 | 19 | 25 | 18 | 3 | 3 | 13 | 19 | 100 | ||
| 4 | 10 | 43 | 19 | 7 | 6 | 6 | 9 | 100 | ||
| 5 | 7 | 30 | 9 | 21 | 4 | 13 | 16 | 100 | ||
| 6 | 19 | 28 | 4 | 22 | 17 | 5 | 5 | 100 | ||
| 13.1666666667 | 33.1666666667 | 12.1666666667 | 10.3333333333 | 10.5 | 9.3333333333 | 11.3333333333 | <-- Average weight for each criteria | |||
| 0.1316666667 | 0.3316666667 | 0.1216666667 | 0.1033333333 | 0.105 | 0.0933333333 | 0.1133333333 | <-- Weight converted to percentage | |||
| Overall Averages | ||||||||||
| Candidates: | Industry knowledge | Client relationships | New business development | Development of juniors | Brand leadership | Teamwork ability | Comfort with ambiguity | |||
| Weight | 0.1316666667 | 0.3316666667 | 0.1216666667 | 0.1033333333 | 0.105 | 0.0933333333 | 0.1133333333 | |||
| A | 4.5 | 3.8333333333 | 4.8333333333 | 3.6666666667 | 5.8333333333 | 3.8333333333 | 2.6666666667 | 4.1033333333 | <-- Average rating of candidate by criteria; multiplied by the weight (using "sumproduct" function) | |
| B | 3.3333333333 | 3.1666666667 | 3.5 | 3.1666666667 | 3.3333333333 | 4.1666666667 | 3 | 3.3211111111 | ||
| C | 4.8333333333 | 3.1666666667 | 4.3333333333 | 3.6666666667 | 5 | 4 | 5.3333333333 | 4.0955555556 | ||
| D | 3.1666666667 | 4.6666666667 | 2.6666666667 | 4.6666666667 | 3.8333333333 | 4.5 | 5 | 4.1605555556 | ||
| E | 4.5 | 4 | 3.3333333333 | 4.8333333333 | 4.1666666667 | 2.5 | 4.1666666667 | 3.9672222222 | ||
By Committee Member
| Let's assume that each committee member went through the decision making process independently. Meaning that they each applied their own weights to their indivual ratings and came to a hiring meeting with a vote of who to hire. In this scenario, Candidate A would be hired with 3 votes and Candidade D would have received 0 votes. | ||||||||||
| Hiring Committee Member 1 | ||||||||||
| Candidates: | Industry knowledge | Client relationships | New business development | Development of juniors | Brand leadership | Teamwork ability | Comfort with ambiguity | |||
| Weights | 0.19 | 0.42 | 0.05 | 0.06 | 0.1 | 0.17 | 0.01 | <-- Weights coming from Hiring Committee Member 1's rating scale | ||
| A | 7 | 3 | 4 | 2 | 4 | 6 | 2 | 4.35 | <-- Rating multiplied by weight (using the sumproduct function) | |
| B | 3 | 2 | 1 | 5 | 2 | 5 | 3 | 2.84 | ||
| C | 3 | 2 | 6 | 6 | 7 | 5 | 4 | 3.66 | ||
| D | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 5 | 6 | 6 | 2.97 | ||
| E | 2 | 6 | 2 | 7 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 3.82 | ||
| Hiring Committee Member 2 | ||||||||||
| Candidates: | Industry knowledge | Client relationships | New business development | Development of juniors | Brand leadership | Teamwork ability | Comfort with ambiguity | |||
| 0.05 | 0.31 | 0.18 | 0.03 | 0.23 | 0.02 | 0.18 | ||||
| A | 2 | 5 | 7 | 1 | 7 | 7 | 4 | 5.41 | ||
| B | 4 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 5 | 2 | 2.7 | ||
| C | 5 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 7 | 3 | 6 | 4.19 | ||
| D | 3 | 5 | 3 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 4.54 | ||
| E | 4 | 4 | 2 | 6 | 5 | 1 | 3 | 3.69 | ||
| Hiring Committee Member 3 | ||||||||||
| Candidates: | Industry knowledge | Client relationships | New business development | Development of juniors | Brand leadership | Teamwork ability | Comfort with ambiguity | |||
| 0.19 | 0.25 | 0.18 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.13 | 0.19 | ||||
| A | 5 | 2 | 5 | 4 | 6 | 6 | 2 | 3.81 | ||
| B | 5 | 5 | 4 | 5 | 2 | 1 | 5 | 4.21 | ||
| C | 5 | 4 | 6 | 2 | 7 | 3 | 6 | 4.83 | ||
| D | 6 | 6 | 1 | 7 | 2 | 6 | 5 | 4.82 | ||
| E | 5 | 3 | 2 | 5 | 6 | 3 | 6 | 3.92 | ||
| Hiring Committee Member 4 | ||||||||||
| Candidates: | Industry knowledge | Client relationships | New business development | Development of juniors | Brand leadership | Teamwork ability | Comfort with ambiguity | |||
| 0.1 | 0.43 | 0.19 | 0.07 | 0.06 | 0.06 | 0.09 | ||||
| A | 4 | 6 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 1 | 4 | 4.87 | ||
| B | 4 | 4 | 6 | 3 | 3 | 7 | 1 | 4.16 | ||
| C | 2 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 6 | 4 | 2.24 | ||
| D | 3 | 4 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 1 | 3.44 | ||
| E | 7 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 2.42 | ||
| Hiring Committee Member 5 | ||||||||||
| Candidates: | Industry knowledge | Client relationships | New business development | Development of juniors | Brand leadership | Teamwork ability | Comfort with ambiguity | |||
| 0.07 | 0.3 | 0.09 | 0.21 | 0.04 | 0.13 | 0.16 | ||||
| A | 5 | 6 | 7 | 4 | 5 | 1 | 3 | 4.43 | ||
| B | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 6 | 6 | 5 | 2.86 | ||
| C | 7 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 7 | 4.22 | ||
| D | 2 | 6 | 5 | 6 | 2 | 2 | 6 | 4.95 | ||
| E | 5 | 7 | 6 | 1 | 5 | 6 | 6 | 5.14 | ||
| Hiring Committee Member 6 | ||||||||||
| Candidates: | Industry knowledge | Client relationships | New business development | Development of juniors | Brand leadership | Teamwork ability | Comfort with ambiguity | |||
| 0.19 | 0.28 | 0.04 | 0.22 | 0.17 | 0.05 | 0.05 | ||||
| A | 4 | 1 | 2 | 6 | 7 | 2 | 1 | 3.78 | ||
| B | 2 | 3 | 7 | 3 | 4 | 1 | 2 | 2.99 | ||
| C | 7 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 5 | 4 | 5 | 5.87 | ||
| D | 3 | 5 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 4 | 7 | 4.37 | ||
| E | 4 | 3 | 5 | 7 | 4 | 3 | 4 | 4.37 | ||
| Weights by committee member | ||||||||||
| Hiring Committee Member: | Industry knowledge | Client relationships | New business development | Development of juniors | Brand leadership | Teamwork ability | Comfort with ambiguity | |||
| 1 | 19 | 42 | 5 | 6 | 10 | 17 | 1 | 100 | ||
| 2 | 5 | 31 | 18 | 3 | 23 | 2 | 18 | 100 | ||
| 3 | 19 | 25 | 18 | 3 | 3 | 13 | 19 | 100 | ||
| 4 | 10 | 43 | 19 | 7 | 6 | 6 | 9 | 100 | ||
| 5 | 7 | 30 | 9 | 21 | 4 | 13 | 16 | 100 | ||
| 6 | 19 | 28 | 4 | 22 | 17 | 5 | 5 | 100 | ||
| Weights converted to percentages | ||||||||||
| Hiring Committee Member: | Industry knowledge | Client relationships | New business development | Development of juniors | Brand leadership | Teamwork ability | Comfort with ambiguity | |||
| 1 | 0.19 | 0.42 | 0.05 | 0.06 | 0.1 | 0.17 | 0.01 | |||
| 2 | 0.05 | 0.31 | 0.18 | 0.03 | 0.23 | 0.02 | 0.18 | |||
| 3 | 0.19 | 0.25 | 0.18 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.13 | 0.19 | |||
| 4 | 0.1 | 0.43 | 0.19 | 0.07 | 0.06 | 0.06 | 0.09 | |||
| 5 | 0.07 | 0.3 | 0.09 | 0.21 | 0.04 | 0.13 | 0.16 | |||
| 6 | 0.19 | 0.28 | 0.04 | 0.22 | 0.17 | 0.05 | 0.05 | |||
