Predictors: Résumés are among the most popular screening methods This makes sense Applicants perceive them as fair (Steiner & Gilliland 1996) Detailed

Predictors: Résumés are among the most popular screening methods

This makes sense Applicants perceive

them as fair (Steiner & Gilliland 1996)

Detailed background on what a person has done

Can be linked to job analysis information

No cost to collect them

This also seems strange Easy to fake Biased information

(only good things are mentioned)

Hard to compare Expensive in terms of

employee time

Unit 2, Lecture 4: Initial Selection Techniques

Predictors: 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


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



Experience is nearly universally used to select individuals

There are many different ways to conceptualize experience however Levels of specificity: do you measure just the

specific tasks (from job analysis) the person is doing, or do you measure the entire scope of the job?

Measurement mode: do you measure quantity, quality, or type of experience?



0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

0.35

0.4

0.45

0.5

Time Type Task Job Organization

Co

rre

cte

d c

orr

ela

tio

n w

ith

job

pe

rfo

rma

nc

e


Quinones, Ford, & Teachout (1995) showed that work experience is not a unitary concept by demonstrating by meta-analysis that the overall correlation of experience and job performance is .27 (Time = number of years, months practiced, times performed. Type = experience similar in type and size to target job. Athe the unit of analys of task, job, organization


0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0-2.99 years 3-5.99 years 6-8.99 years 9-11.99 years

Co

rre

cte

d C

orr

ela

tio

n w

ith

Pe

rfo

rma

nc

e

Low complexity High complexity


(McDaniel, Schmidt, & Hunter, 1988) N = 16,058

The correlation between job experience and job performance moderated by two variables:

1.length of experience

2.job complexity

The highest correlations were found for those with

1.low mean levels of job experience

2.for jobs that place low levels of cognitive demands on employees


Predictors: Education and Job Performance

Arguments for using education (Roth & Bobko, 2000) Indicator for job skills Measures how smart

people are (r=.50+) Measures

conscientiousness (r=.35)

Cheap and objective

Arguments against using education Why not measure

intelligence and skills directly?

Years of education is vague

Potential for adverse impact against minorities


Correlations between Education and Performance

00.050.1

0.150.2

0.250.3

0.350.4

0.45

Years ofEducation

GPA(overall)

GPA(business

jobs)

GPA(medical

jobs)

GPA(education

jobs)

Unit 2, Lecture 4: Initial Selection Techniques(Roth, BeVier, Switzer, & Schippmann, 1996)

Predictors: Education and Job Performance

Predictor: Job Specific Knowledge and Aptitude Tests

Work samples Actual physical mock up of job tasks In-basket exercises for managerial tasks Relationship with job performance r=0.54

Job knowledge Questions regarding factual and procedural

elements of the job Relationship with job performance r=0.48

Advantages and disadvantages of testing directly?


Predictor: Situational Judgment Tests

Present job applicants with realistic, job related scenarios and evaluate their responses based on a careful analysis of the tasks performed on the job

Scores are relative to those provided by experts in the content area

Results from studies of organizations show that SJTs are predictive of job performance are related to traits like general mental ability and

personality


Sales Scenario You are a Business Representative in the MSD Group. You have been in contact with an import company, CREO Imports, that is

developing its electronic equipment import business. This company has never had any personal contact with XYZ and has never shipped with XYZ. Most of its shipments have been truck to local markets, but the company is very interested in extending its reach. Its orders in these new markets correspond to 45 loads worth $110,000 in the first month, which represents a significant opportunity for XYZ.

The only relationship between CREO Imports and XYZ is your series of phone calls. You feel that a face-to-face meeting with them will be the most effective way to further the relationship and help them feel comfortable with using your services.

For each of the following questions, choose the best possible response.

1. What information would MOST help you to convince your management of the potentialopportunity at CREO?

A. Comparison numbers for electronic equipment traffic vs. other traffic.B. A review of XYZ’s service capabilities from the ports.C. The customer’s projected shipping volume and the revenue generted.D. Revenue and volume information on all electronic equipment import customers.

2. What would be the MOST important thing to ask the customer to help you plan themost productive first meeting?

A. What the customer hopes to accomplish at the meeting.B. What the customer’s strategic market goals are.C. What the customer takes into consideration when choosing a transportation provider.D. How the company is currently shipping.

3. What should be the primary focus of your initial meeting with the customer?

A. The benefits XYZ can offer the company as it moves into new markets.B. Basic shipping information for inexperienced shippers.C. Potential problems that may occur.D. Other electronic equipment traffic that XYZ ships from ports.


Predictor: Situational Judgment Tests

Predictor: General mental ability for selection

Critical area for measurement Everyone agrees that they want smarter employees Intelligence would seem to matter for every single

aspect of job performance There is evidence that this is something that is

fairly stable within a person Why are intelligent individuals better at their

jobs?


What is it? It goes by many names: g, general mental ability, IQ,

intelligence A general measure of cognitive functioning that should work

across several different domains First proposed by Francis Galton, an English geneticist and

relative of Darwin It remains one of the most studied of all human

characteristics Is it really a trait? Is it stable?

Test re-test (age 6 to 18=0.77; age 12 to age 18=0.89) Estimates of heritability range as high as h2=0.75

So what’s the alternative? The SAT/GRE dimensions Howard Gardner’s theory of multiple intelligences



After taking into account gender and physical stature, brain size is correlated about .40 with IQ

The speed of nerve conduction is also correlated with IQ

Energy expended during problem solving is inversely related to IQ levels

The brain waves of individuals with higher IQs respond more quickly to simple sensory stimuli (clicks, lights)



Correlation of GMA (1980) with life outcomes (1990)Sample size = 8891 (NLSY)

-0.30

-0.20

-0.10

0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

0.70

Education Income Self-esteem Weeksunemployed

Criteria

Co

rrel

atio

n

Data clearly show that general mental ability as measured by the ASVAB is correlated with education levels, income, self-esteem, and weeks of unemployment even with a 10-year gap between measures



Job complexity

Proficiency ratings

Training success

General job familiesHigh (synthesizing/coordination) 0.59 0.50 15%Medium (compiling/computing) 0.51 0.57 63%Low (comparing/copying) 0.40 0.54 18%

Industrial job familiesHigh (setup work) 0.56 0.65 3%Low (feedback/offbearing) 0.23 n/a 2%

GATB Validity for: % of U.S. Workers in these

occupations


GMAEverything

else

Nuclear weapons specialist 77.3% 0.8%Air crew operations specialist 69.7% 1.8%Weather specialist 68.7% 2.6%Intelligence specialist 66.7% 7.0%Fireman 59.7% 0.6%Dental assistant 55.2% 1.0%Security police 53.6% 1.4%Vehicle maintenance 49.3% 7.7%General maintenance 28.4% 2.7%

Percentage of training success explained by:

(Hunter and Hunter, 1984; Ree and Earles, 1990)




We can train people to do things where skills are concerned. But there is one capability we do not have and that is to change a person’s attitude. So we prefer an unskilled person with a good attitude…to a highly skilled person with a bad attitude Herb Kelleher, CEO, Southwest Airlines

Most organizations want to hire people based on their personalities, but personality is notoriously difficult to measure


Predictor: Personality

Dimensions of personality: Meta-analytic results



Conscientiousness Tendency towards orderliness, dutifulness,

achievement striving, self-discipline, and caution

Are there positive features of this trait? Are there drawbacks? When do you think this would be most

important?



Summary of processes Increases goal setting behaviors Increases self-efficacy Increases value placed on social order and

conformity Summary of situational effects

Stronger effects when situations are weak or when supervision is non-existent

Average conscientiousness of a group is related to group performance

Can actually decrease performance for novel tasks

More likely to be entrepreneurs Unit 2, Lecture 4: Initial Selection Techniques

Conscientiousness


A tendency towards friendliness, gregariousness, assertiveness, activity, and excitement seeking


important?


Extroversion


Summary of processes Decreases blood flow to frontal lobes Both introverts and extraverts are trying to regulate their

level of psychological arousal Associated with increased self-efficacy Linked to achievement motivation

Summary of situational effects More important in social situations like leadership Can increase citizenship behavior (helping) in some social

situations Extraversion is a hindrance in distributive bargaining Higher variability in extroversion linked to superior group

performanceUnit 2, Lecture 4: Initial Selection Techniques

Extroversion


A tendency towards trust, morality, altruism, cooperation, modesty, and sympathy


important?


Agreeableness


Summary of processes Associated with values of benevolence and traditionalism Has a relatively large negative relationship with goal-setting Breaks into two dimensions—morality and conflict

avoidance Summary of situational effects

Agreeable individuals are more helpful in minimally constrainted situations

Agreeable individuals prefer tasks calling for helping, but dislike tasks calling for conflict

Agreeableness does not moderate helping friends or family—but agreeableness does moderate helping strangers

Agreeableness is related to citizenship and helping performance in groups (not surprisingly)

Agreeableness is a hindrance in distributive bargainingUnit 2, Lecture 4: Initial Selection Techniques

Agreeableness


A tendency towards imagination, artistic interests, emotionality, adventurousness, “intellect”, and liberalism


important?


Openness to experience


Summary of processes Increased activity in the dopamine systems More flexible organization of ideas Mildly linked to goal setting motivation Place more value on universalism and self-

direction; tend to distain conformity and tradition Summary of situational effects

Open individuals learn faster in situations calling for change

Openness is very strongly linked to creativity More likely to be entrepreneurs


Openness to experience


Summary of processes Increased sensitivity to environmental stimuli due to

activation of the sympathetic nervous system Linked to worry, negative emotional states, and increased

use of avoidance coping strategies Negatively linked to all aspects of motivation

Summary of situational effects Less likely to do well as entrepreneurs Higher variability in neuroticism negatively linked to team

performance Interesting—not more likely to turnover from jobs and

relationships with performance as a whole are weak


Neuroticism


Core Self-Evaluations

Scale items I am confident I get the success I deserve in life. I am capable of coping with most of my problems. There are times when things look pretty bleak

and hopeless to me (R). When I try, I generally succeed. I determine what will happen in my life. I am filled with doubts about my competence (R)



These are measures of core self-evaluations Typical features

Positive self image (self-esteem and self-efficacy)

Internal locus of controlLow neuroticism

Stability can be inferred from self-esteem measures Test-retest correlations among adults over

periods around two years typically average around 0.60

Lower stability in very young and very old individuals



Core Self Evaluations: Normal Personality

People with positive self-evaluations set higher goals for themselves, which is a major reason for their higher levels of performance (Erez & Judge, 2001)



Core Self Evaluations: Performance

Predictor: PersonalityBig Five Personality Traits at Work


Predictor: Interviews

Would you ever work at a company that didn’t interview you first? Why or why not? What do you try to learn in an interview?

Would you ever hire an applicant that hadn’t been interviewed first? Why or why not? What do managers try to learn in an interview?

As an applicant, what are the best and worst interview experiences you’ve had


Questions

Interviews are very familiar and very important

Applicants typically like them Asked applicants to

rate lots of methods of selection

They liked interviews, simulations, and job knowledge tests the best

They liked personality and life history items the least

Organizations typically like them too Interviews are the

most common selection method in real organizations

Managers may prefer candidates they have met prior to hiring



Smither, Reilly, Millsap, Pearlman, and Stoffey study

What do interviewees say that they’re looking for?

In general, research suggests that applicants prefer: Non-invasive questions Interviewers who know something about the job (preferably not someone from HR)

Interviewers’ general interpersonal skills Warmth Sincerity Listening skills

However, job characteristics are much more predictive of applicant intentions to take a job than are their perceptions of interviewers

Interviewers are seen as signals of the company’s culture



Huffcutt, Conway, Roth, & Stone:Constructs Measured in Interviews

Tried to build up a taxonomy of constructs that might be relevant for job performance Mental capability, since most jobs obviously involve some

mental operations The actual declarative information a person has stored

regarding the job (knowledge and skills) Personality traits as represented by the FFM Applied social skills, which are apropos because interviews

might be especially good for measuring these Fit with the values of the organization, that again might be

difficult to assess outside of a conversation



Research Had Demonstrated GMA Loadings for InterviewsInterview characteristics rc

Overall relationship 0.40

Structure Low 0.52

Medium 0.40

High 0.35

Content Situational 0.32

Behavioral 0.18

Ability scores available?

Yes 0.59

No 0.38

Interviews are correlated with GMA More structured interviews

are less correlated with ability

Situational interviews are more correlated with ability

When scores are available, interviewers engage in confirmatory biases

It may be that structured interviews are sometimes designed to avoid ability.

Huffcutt & Roth, 1996Unit 2, Lecture 4: Initial Selection Techniques


Huffcutt, Conway, Roth, & Stone: Constructs Measured in Interviews

Structure

Overall Low High

General intelligence .24 .26 .11

Job knowledge .42 .49 .33

Extroversion .33 .22 .40

Conscientiousness .33 .24 .37

Agreeableness .51 .25 .53

Emotional stability .47 .18 .56

Interpersonal skills .39 .31 .40

Communication skills

.26 .05 .31

Leadership .47 .40 .40

Org. fit .49 .07 .58

Interviewers are basically looking for the same things that most tests are

Results suggest that structured interviews may do a slightly better job at getting personality



Huffcutt, Conway, Roth, & Stone:Constructs Measured in Interviews Structured interviews appear to be better

at measuring several constructs that are important for job performance

Unstructured interviews appeared to show larger race and sex differences

Interviews are not really completely different from tests, they measure many of the constructs we try to assess with tests



Are there trade offs in which interview methods are best?

Legal defensibility?

Face validity? Content

validity? Criterion-

related validity?

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

Unstr. Semi-str. High str.



Huffcutt, A. I., & Arthur, W., Jr. (1994). Hunter and Hunter (1984) revisited: Interview validity for entry level jobs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 184-190.

Methods for structured interviews Behavioral interviews

Tell me about a time that you showed leadership skills…

Premise: past behavior predicts future behavior

Development Get lists of critical

behaviors through interviewing incumbents and SMEs

Develop scoring systems based on points for quality of each response

Situational interviews Calculate a product

demand forecast given this raw data…

Premise: performance best demonstrated by real life situation

Development Get lists of typical tasks

through interviewing incumbents and SMEs

Develop scoring systems based on points for each responseUnit 2, Lecture 4: Initial Selection Techniques


Very common, but hopelessly vague questions Tell me about yourself…

Problem: Totally unstandardized What would you say is your greatest

strength? Problem: Again, unstandardized; difficult to

define what a “good” answer is Describe a challenge you faced at your last

job; how did you overcome it? No assurance this challenge is similar to the

current jobUnit 2, Lecture 4: Initial Selection Techniques


Common behavioral interview questions Describe a time when you independently decided that

something needed to be done, and you independently took responsibility for making certain it was done.

Tell me about a problem that you tried to solve (at work) related to task xxx on the job description. How did you identify and solve the problem?

Describe a time when you tried to persuade someone to do something that he/she was unwilling to do.

Describe a time when you had to do task xxx on the job description.



Example: Developing a behavioral interview

Tell me about a time when you have worked with customers who were angry. If you haven’t worked with customers, tell me about another time you dealt with an angry person.

Examples of behaviors: 0 points: complained about customers and explained how they

refused to back down 1 point: gave a full refund or caved in completely without any

supporting information; described feeling stressed out 2 points: politely told the person that policy says no refunds are

given; note customer seemed to be happy in the end 3 points: apologize and explain that while store policy requires a

receipt, the person is welcome to contact the manager with further questions; note a positive feeling from the customer at the end



Documents

Predictors: Résumés are among the most popular screening methods This makes sense Applicants perceive them as fair (Steiner & Gilliland 1996) Detailed