Being part of an organization’s promotion board can be very rewarding, but also very
stressful. Most organizations use promotion boards to handle the difficult decisions of who to
promote internally. “Innovation is a means of creating a competitive advantage leading to the
improvement of the business results, and it is essential in business of any size or industry” (Harel
et al., 2011, p. 2). When an organization creates a promotion board, the individuals are
strategically selected in hopes to protect any ethical hiring obligations an organization might
have.
While promotion boards are used to promote internal hires within an organization, often
promotion boards and the selection process do not go without biased opinions and selections.
Colossians 4:7 “and the peace of God, which passeth all understanding, shall keep your hearts
and minds through Christ Jesus” (Carroll & Prickett,1997. p.248). Because of the issues that
often arise it is very important to have a well-organized and unbiased promotion and selection
process. It is also very important for the promotion board to have a solid understanding of
internal selection. “Internal selection refers to the assessment and evaluation of employees from
within the organization as they move between jobs via transfer and promotion system” (Judge &
Kammeyer-Mueller, 2022, p. 521).
One of the largest issues that creates a lot of conflicts between board members is the
political reasons behind why a candidate is selected. 1 Timothy 7, “Desiring to be teachers of the
law; understanding neither what they say, not whereof they affirm” (Carroll & Prickett,1997.
p.258). However, there must be board members that are willing to oversee the promotion process
to the letter of the law and hold other board members accountable for their selection. One of the
best ways to do this is to follow standards that are laid out within the substantive assessment and
discretionary assessment methods. The substantive assessment method is “used to select finalists
from internal candidates” (Judge & Kammeyer-Mueller, 2022, p. 522). The discretionary
assessment method helps organizations following “equal employment opportunity and
affirmative action (EEO/AA) concerns, whether they finalist had previously been a finalist, and a
second opinions about the finalist by others in the organization” (Judge & Kammeyer-Mueller,
2022, p. 522).
Another area that is very important to address is who has the seniority to make the final
decision. While promotion boards are designed to share equal thoughts and power within the
hiring process, someone needs to be able to keep everyone on track. “Taking charge is an
important form of proactive behavior that sustains organizational survival and success” (Xu et
al., 2023, p.1). Even when all protocols are in place, what does one do when the promotion board
is not making the right decision. The answer is simply, you follow the data.
There are many benefits of promoting internally, however, the biggest advantage is the
large amount of data that should have been collected throughout the employee’s tenure. 1
Timothy 15, “This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptations, that Christ Jesus came into
the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief” (Carroll & Prickett,1997. p.258). With the use of
the substantive assessment method internal candidates should become finalists and receive a
promotion if the following within some of these categories, “seniority, job knowledge tests,
performance appraisal, promotability ratings, assessment centers, interview exercise, promotion
panels and review boards” (Judge & Kammeyer-Mueller, 2022, p. 532).
Sometimes a promotion board can have a difficult time deciding due to the fact of having
strong candidates. Regardless of the candidates, it is very important to have strong knowledge of
potential legal issues. As a board member it is important to understand the “legal influences of
the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures (UGESP) and the glass ceiling”
(Judge & Kammeyer-Mueller, 2022, p. 551). It is also very important to take into consideration
the different “management policy, environmental structure and executive strategies” (Sedghi en
al., 2023, p.1). If all board members have a strong knowledge and understanding of these few
areas, it is the hope that all political issues can be set aside and a strong candidate is selected.
References
Carroll, R. P., & Prickett, S. (1997). The bible: Authorized king james version. Oxford University
Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/actrade/9780199535941.book.1
Harel, R., Schwartz, D., & Kaufmann, D. (2021). The relationship between innovation
promotion processes and small business success: The role of managers’ dominance.
Review of Managerial Science, 15(7), 1937-1960. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-020-
00409-w
Judge, T. A., & Kammeyer-Mueller, J. D. (2022). Staffing organizations (10th ed.). McGraw
Hill.
Sedghi, F., Mahdizadeh, M., Vahedian- Shahroodi, M., & Gholian-Aval, M. (2023). Exploring
the conceptual framework of a health-promotion faculty from the perspective of
members: A qualitative study. BMJ Open, 13(5), e073059-e073059.
https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2023-073059
Xu, A. J., Loi, R., & Chow, C. W. C. (2023). Does taking charge help or harm employees'
promotability and visibility? an investigation from supervisors' status perspective.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 108(1), 53-71. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000752
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
