Selection

Selection is the process of choosing individuals with qualifications needed to fill jobs in an
organization. Without these qualified employees, an organization is far less likely to succeed.
Perhaps the best perspective on selection and placement comes from two HR beliefs that
underscore the importance of effective staffing:
■ “Hire hard, manage easy.” The amount of time and effort spent selecting the right people for
jobs may make managing them as employees much less difficult because many problems are
eliminated.
■ “Good training will not make up for bad selection.” When the right people with the appropriate
capabilities are not selected, employers will have difficulty later adequately training the lesser
qualified individuals who were selected.
Placement
The ultimate purpose of selection is placement, or fitting a person to the right job. Placement of
human resources should be seen primarily as a matching process that can affect many different
employment outcomes. How well an employee is matched to a job can affect the amount and
quality of the employee’s work, as well as the training and operating costs required to prepare
the individual for work life. Finally, employee morale can also be an issue because good fi t
encourages individuals to be positive about what they accomplish on the job.

Applicant Knowledge, Skills, and Abilities

Selection and placement activities typically focus on applicants’ knowledge, skills, and abilities
(KSAs), but these activities should also focus on the degree to which job candidates “generally”
match the situations experienced both on the job and in the company. For instance, the match
between a person and the job and/or company could impact such factors as an individual’s
attraction to work and intentions to take a job. One study found that different types of fi t were
related to satisfaction with work, commitment to a company, and quitting intentions.
Consequently, managers should definitely consider the work relationship between personal and
occupational characteristics.
Person/job fit is an important concept that involves matching the KSAs of individuals with the
characteristics of jobs. People already in jobs can help identify the most important KSAs for
success as part of job analysis. The fi t between the individual and job characteristics is
particularly important when dealing with overseas assignments because employees must have the
proper personality, skills, and interpersonal abilities to be effective in the international
environment
In addition to matching people to jobs, employers are also increasingly concerned about the
congruence between people and companies, or person/ organization fit. For instance, a recent
study of person/organization fi t showed that congruence was related to various attitudes about
work, suggesting that fi t is important when managers make placement decisions.
Person/organization fi t is also important from a “values” perspective, with many organizations
trying to positively link a person’s principles to the company’s values. Organizations tend to
favor job applicants who effectively blend into how business is conducted. Person/organization
fit can also influence employees’ and customers’ beliefs about the organization, making such a
fit a key strategic consideration.
Criteria, Predictors, and Job Performance

Regardless of whether an employer uses specific KSAs or a more general approach, effective selection of
employees involves using criteria and predictors of job performance. At the heart of an effective
selection system must be knowledge of what constitutes appropriate job performance, as well as what
employee characteristics are associated with that performance. First, an employer needs to identify the
criteria associated with successful employee performance. Using these criteria as a generalized
definition, an employer must then determine the KSAs required for individuals to be successful on the
job. A selection criterion is a characteristic that a person must possess to successfully perform work.
Figure 8-1 shows that ability, motivation, intelligence, conscientiousness, appropriate risk, and
permanence might be good selection criteria for many jobs. Factors that might be more specific to
managerial jobs include “leading and deciding,” “supporting and cooperating,” “organizing and
executing,” and “enterprising and performing.”

To determine whether or not candidates might possess a certain selection criterion (such as ability or
motivation), employers try to identify predictors that are measurable or visible indicators of that
positive characteristic (or criterion). As Figure 8-1 indicates, three good predictors of “permanence”
might be individual interests, salary requirements, and tenure on previous jobs. If a candidate possesses
any or all of these predictor criteria, it might therefore be assumed that the person would stay on the
job longer than someone without those predictors.

The information gathered about an applicant through predictors should focus on the likelihood that the
individual will execute the job competently once hired. Predictors can also take many forms such as
application forms, tests, interviews, education requirements, or years of experience, but these factors
should be used only if they are found to be valid predictors of specifi c job performance. Using invalid
predictors can result in selecting the “wrong” candidate and rejecting the “right” one, affecting the
ability to accomplish operational objectives.
Validity

In selection, validity is the correlation between a predictor and job performance. In other words, validity
occurs to the extent that the predictor actually predicts what it is supposed to predict. Several different
types of validity are used in the selection function. For example, synthetic validity involves the degree to
which areas of a particular job are associated with assessments of the individual characteristics required
to complete these areas. Most validity decisions use a correlation coefficient, an index number that
gives the relationship between a predictor variable and a criterion (or dependent) variable. Correlations
always range from 1.0 to 1.0 with higher scores suggesting stronger relationships

Concurrent validity is one method for establishing the validity associated with a criterion variable.
Concurrent means “at the same time” and suggests that an employee’s performance information is
collected at one point in time and then compared statistically. As shown in Figure 8-2, concurrent
validity is measured when an employer tests current employees and correlates the scores with their
performance ratings on such measures as accident rates, absenteeism records, and supervisory
performance appraisals.

A disadvantage of the concurrent validity approach is that employees who have not performed
satisfactorily at work are probably no longer with the firm and therefore cannot be tested. Also,
extremely good employees may have been promoted or have left the company for better work
situations. Any learning on the job might also confound test scores.

Another method for establishing criterion-related validity is considered a “before-the-fact” approach. To

measure predictive validity, test results of applicants are compared with their subsequent job
performance (see Figure 8-2). Job success is measured by assessing factors such as absenteeism,
accidents, errors, and performance appraisal ratings. If the employees who had one year of experience
at the time of hire demonstrate better performance than those without such experience, as calculated
through statistical comparisons, then the experience requirement can be considered a valid predictor of
job performance. In addition, individual experience may be utilized as an important “selection criteria”
when making future staffing decisions.

In the past, the EEOC has favored predictive validity because it includes the full range of performance
and test scores. However, establishing predictive validity can be challenging for managers because a
large sample of individuals is needed (usually at least 30) and a significant amount of time must
transpire (usually one year) to facilitate the analysis. Because of these limitations, other types of validity
tests tend to be more popular in organizations.
Reliability

Reliability of a predictor is the extent to which it repeatedly produces the same results over
time. For example, if a person took a test in December and scored 75, then took the same
test again in March and scored 76, the exam is probably a reliable instrument.
Consequently, reliability involves the consistency of predictors used in selection procedures.

Combining Predictors
If an employer chooses to use only one predictor such as a pencil-and-paper test to select
the individuals to be hired, the decision becomes straightforward. If the test is valid and
encompasses a major dimension of a job, and the applicant does well on the test, he or she
should be given a job offer. When an employer uses predictors such as “three years of
experience,” “possesses a college degree,” and “acceptable aptitude test score,” job
applicants are evaluated on all of these requirements to identify the best-qualifi ed
candidates. In other words, multiple predictors are usually combined in some way. Two
approaches
for combining predictors are:

■ Multiple hurdles: A minimum cutoff is set on each predictor, and each minimum level must
be “passed.” For example, a candidate for a sales representative job must achieve a
minimum education level, a certain score on a sales aptitude test, and a minimum score on
a structured interview to be hired.

■ Compensatory approach: Scores from individual predictors are added and combined into
an overall score, thereby allowing a higher score on one predictor to offset, or compensate
for, a lower score on another. The combined index takes into consideration performance on
all predictors. For example, when admitting students into graduate business programs, a
higher overall score on an admissions test might offset a lower undergraduate grade point
average.

The Selection Process

Selection activities follow a standard pattern, beginning with an initial screening interview and
concluding with the final employment decision. The selection process typically consists of eight
steps: (1) initial screening interview, (2) completion of the application form, (3) preemployment
tests, (4) comprehensive interview, (5) conditional job offer, (6) background investigation, (7)
medical or physical examination, and (8) permanent job offer. Each step represents a decision
point requiring affirmative feedback in order for the process to continue. Each step in the process
seeks to expand the organization’s knowledge about the applicant’s background, abilities, and
motivation, and it increases the information that decision makers use to make their predictions
and final choice. However, some steps may be omitted if they do not yield useful data, or if the
cost of the step is unwarranted. Applicants should also be advised of any specific screening, such
as credit checks, reference checking, and drug tests. The flow of these activities is depicted in
Exhibit 7-1. Let’s take a closer look at each.
Initial Screening
The first step in the selection process involves initial screening of potential candidates. This
initial screening is, in effect, a two-step procedure: (1) screening inquiries and (2) screening
interviews. If the company’s recruiting effort has been successful, they will have a pool of
potential applicants. The organization can eliminate some of these respondents based on the job
description and job specification. Perhaps candidates lack adequate or appropriate experience, or
adequate or appropriate education. Other red flags include gaps in the applicant’s job history, a
listing of numerous jobs held for short periods of time, or courses and seminars listed instead of
appropriate education. The screening interview is also an excellent opportunity for HRM to
describe the job in enough detail so the candidates can consider if they are really serious about
applying. Sharing job description information frequently encourages the unqualified

Completing the Application Form

After the phone screening interview, applicants may be asked to complete the organization’s
application form. This may be as brief as requiring only the applicant’s name, address, and
telephone number. Most organizations, on the other hand, may want a more comprehensive
employment profile. In general terms, the application form gives a job-performance-related
synopsis of applicants’ life, skills, and accomplishments (see Diversity Issues in HRM).
Applications obtain information the company wants and needs in order to make a proper
selection. Completing the application also serves as another hurdle. If the application requires
following directions and the individual fails to do so, that is a jobrelated reason for rejection.
Finally, applications require a signature attesting to the truthfulness of the information given and
giving permission to check references. If, at a later point, the company finds out the information
is false, it can justify immediate dismissal.

Selection Process
Through personnel selection, organizations make decisions about who will or will not be
invited to join the organization. Selection begins with the candidates identified through
recruitment and with attempts to reduce their number to the individuals best qualified to
perform the available jobs. At the end of the process, the selected individuals are placed in
jobs with the organization.
The process of selecting employees varies considerably from organization to organization
and from job to job. At most organizations, however, selection includes the steps illustrated
in Figure 6.1. First, a human resource professional reviews the applications received to see
which meet the basic requirements of the job. For candidates who meet the basic
requirements, the organization administers tests and reviews work samples to rate the
candidates’ abilities. Those with the best abilities are invited to the organization for one or
more interviews. Supervisors and team members often are involved in this stage of the
process. By this point, the decision makers are beginning to form opinions about which
candidates are most desirable. For the top few candidates, the organization should check
references and conduct background checks to verify that the organization’s information is
correct. Then supervisors, teams, and other decision makers select a person to receive a job
offer. In some cases, the candidate may negotiate with the organization regarding salary,
benefits, and the like. If the candidate accepts the job, the organization places him or her in
that job.

Nowadays, the ease of applying online has made this processing overwhelming for many
recruiters. A simple job posting online could generate hundreds of résumés in one day. Many
employers are coping by automating much of the selection process with an applicant-
tracking system. Typically, the system starts by receiving the data provided in
electronically submitted résumés and matching it against the company’s selection criteria.
The system might find that half the résumés lack necessary keywords, so it sends those
applicants a polite “no thank you” e-mail. The applications that survive the automated
screening go to a hiring manager, often ranked by how well they meet preset criteria. The
manager reviews these applications and selects candidates to contact for a telephone or
face-to-face interview and/or testing.
As with any automation, an applicant-tracking system is only as good as the process it
automates. A system that just matches a few keywords between résumés and job
descriptions might screen out high-potential employees who didn’t use exactly the same
term. The problem is even worse if the employer didn’t bother to carefully analyze which
keywords are really associated with success on the job. However, a well-designed system
has many attractive features that provide the ability to initiate background checks; store
past applicants in the system who might be a good fit for a future position; maintain all job
candidate documents in one place (e.g., résumés, cover letters, and additional information);
allow the hiring manager, HR, and the job candidate to coordinate interview schedules; and
allow hiring managers to review and store their comments about each candidate. The
system may also support decision making by measuring the performance of the hiring
process—for example, time to hire and steps in the process where bottlenecks most often
occur. Some even predict outcomes of hiring candidates with particular qualities.

How does an organization decide which of these steps to use and in what order? Some
organizations simply repeat a selection process that is familiar. If members of the
organization underwent job interviews, they conduct job interviews, asking familiar
questions. However, what organizations should do is to create a selection process in support
of its job descriptions. In Chapter 3 we explained that a job description identifies the
knowledge, skills, abilities, and other characteristics (KSAOs) required for successfully
performing a job. The selection process should be set up in such a way that it lets the
organization identify people who have the necessary KSAOs. This not only helps the
company choose the right people, it offers a basis to build positive experiences for job
hunters. According to surveys, job candidates want to understand what is happening during
the selection process, but few organizations are responsive to that desire. 3 Those who have
a great process and communicate about it should gain an edge in the market for talent.