6 C H A P T E R

1
6C H A P T E R

• STAFFING

• The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1998

Irwin/McGraw-Hill
2
Chapter 6 Staffing
6-1

• Objectives
• 1. Personnel tests.
• 2. Performance testing.
• 3.Validity evidence for testing and potential
  problems
• 4. Application blanks, reference checks, and
  biographical data
• 5. Drug testing.

• 6. Individual and situational factors distort
  the interview process.
• 7. Validity of different approaches to
  interviewing.
• 8. Structured interviewing
• 9. Interview discriminatory biases
• 10. Purposes of the interview.
• 11. Types of interview formats,

• The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1998

Irwin/McGraw-Hill
3
Important Terms for Chapter 6
6-2

• Validity
• Correlation coefficient
• Content validity
• Negligent hiring
• Cognitive ability tests

• Tests of specific abilities
• Validity generalization
• Race norming
• Personality Projective tests

• The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1998

Irwin/McGraw-Hill
4
Important Terms for Chapter 6 continued
6-3

• Self-report Inventories
• Five-factor Model
• Job Compaibility
• Questionnaire (JCQ)
• Weighted Application Blanks
• Biographical Info. Blanks

• Work sample
• Assessment Center
• In-basket
• Leaderless Group Discussion
• Role-Play Exercise
• Banding

• The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1998

Irwin/McGraw-Hill
5
Chapter 6 Important Terms continued
6-4

• Selective perception
• Stereotyping
• Rating bias
• Discriminatory bias
• Discriminatory intent
• Discriminatory impact

• Structured interviews
• Group/panel interviews
• Situational or behavioral interviews
• Incremental validity
• Functional utility

• The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1998

Irwin/McGraw-Hill
6
Figure 6.1 Steps in the Development and
Evaluation of a Selection Procedure
6-5

• Job Analysis/Human Resource Planning
• Identify KASOCs
• Recruitment Strategy Select/Develop Selection
  Procedures
• Review options for assessing applicants on each
  KASOCs
• Standardized tests (cognitive, personality,
  motivational, psychomotor)
• Application blanks
• Biographical data
• Performance tests, assessment centers
• Interviews
• Determine Validity for Selection Methods
• Criterion-related validation
• Expert judgement (content validity)
• Validity generalization
• Determine Weighting System for Selection Methods
  and Resultant Data

Irwin/McGraw-Hill

• The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1998

7
Figure 6.2 The Effectiveness of Staffing Methods
6-6

• Legal Applicants
• Method Validity Cost Defensibility
  Reaction
• Application blank Low Low ?
  Neutral
• Weighted applications High High High
  Neutral
• Biographical/interest blanks High High
  High Negative
• Letters of recommendation Low Low ?
  Positive
• Cognitive ability tests High Low Low
  Negative
• Job knowledge tests High High High
  Positive
• Performance tests/work samples High High
  High Positive
• Assessment Centers High High High
  Positive
• Interviews unstructured one rater Low Low
  Low ?
• Structured behavioral or situational High
  High High Positive

• The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1998

Irwin/McGraw-Hill
8
Figure 6.2 The Effectiveness of Staffing Methods
(continued)
6-7

• Legal Applicants
• Method Validity Cost Defensibility
  Reaction
• Personality Assessments
• Big-Five Tests Mod Mod High
  Neutral
• MMPI High High Mod
  Negative
• Honesty/Integrity Mod Low High
  Negative
• Graphology Low Mod ? ?
• Miner Sentence Completion Mod Mod High
  Positive

Irwin/McGraw-Hill

• The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1998

9
Figure 6.3 Examples of WAB and BIB
6-8

• WAB Examples
• How many jobs have you held in the last five
  years?
• a. none (0)b. 1 (5) c. 2-3 (1) d. 4-5 (-3)
  e. over 5 (-5)
• What distance must you travel from your home to
  work?
• a. less than 1 mile (5) b. 1-5 miles (3) c.
  6-10 miles (0) d. 11-20 miles (-3) and e. 21 or
  more miles (-5)
• BIB Examples
• How often have you made speeches in front of a
  group of adults?
• How often have you set long term goals or
  objectives for yourself?
• How often have other students come to you for
  advice?
• How often have you had to persuade someone to do
  what you wanted?
• How often have you felt that you were an
  unimportant member of a group?
• How often have you felt awkward about asking for
  help on something?
• How often do you work in "study groups" with
  other students?
• How often have you had difficulties in
  maintaining your priorities?
• How often have you felt "burnt out" after working
  hard on a task?
• How often have you felt pressured to do something
  when you thought it was wrong?
• Source Russell, C.J., Matson, J., Devlin, S.E.
  Atwater, D. (1990) Predictive validity of biodata
  items generated from retrospective life
  experience essays. Journal of Applied Psychology,
  75, 569-580. Reprinted with permission.

10
Figure 6.4 Some Examples of Personality/
Motivational Tests
6-9

• PROJECTIVE TECHNIQUES
• Thematic Apperception Test
• Miner Sentence Completion Scale
• Graphology
• Rorschach
• SELF-REPORT INVENTORIES
• The Big-Five Test
• Gordon Personal Profile Inventory
• Myers-Briggs Type Indicator
• Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory
• California Personality Inventory
• Sixteen Personality Factors Questionnaire
• Job Compatibility Questionnaire

• The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1998

Irwin/McGraw-Hill
11
Figure 6.5 Assessment Center Dimensions
6-10

• Decision Making
• Oral and Non-Verbal Communication
• Adaptability
• Decisiveness
• Written Communications

• Leadership
• Interpersonal
• Organizing and Planning
• Perception and Analysis

• The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1998

Irwin/McGraw-Hill
12
Figure 6.6 Description of Assessment Center
Exercises
6-11

• Customer Situation - meet in groups to devise a
  consensus strategy for dealing with the
  problem.
• Employee Discussion - 30 minutes to review
  information then have 15 minutes to prepare a
  brief report
• In-Basket - 90 minutes to review information to
  identify priorities and group related issues,
  as well as indicate courses of action to be
  taken. Then take part in a 15 minute interview
  with an assessor to clarify the actions taken
  and logic behind decisions made
• Problem Analysis - The participant will have 90
  minutes to review information and prepare a
  written recommendation. The participants will
  then meet in groups to derive a consensus.

• The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1998

Irwin/McGraw-Hill
13
Figure 6.7 Example of Assessor Rating Form
6-12

• Leadership Rating
• To direct, coordinate and guide the activities
  of others to monitor, instruct, and motivate
  others in the performance of their tasks to
  assign duties and responsibilities, and to
  follow-up on assignments to utilize available
  human and technical resources in accomplishing
  tasks and in achieving solutions to problems to
  follow through within organizational guidelines.
• Key Points
• Requested technical support when necessary
• Provided specific guidance to others through
  written means
• Took initiative to reallocate Branch I
  workforce personnel
• Assigned tasks to others
• POSITIVE NEGATIVE
• These are general points specific behaviors
  need to be listed by the assessor.

• The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1998

Irwin/McGraw-Hill
14
Figure 6.8 Discrepancies between Research and
Practice for Staffing Methods
6-13

• WHAT DOES RESEARCH SAY? WHAT IS THE
  PRACTICE?
• Use a WAB or BIB Less
  than 2 of companies use WAB or BIB
• Monitor methods for adverse impact
  Less than 10 of companies do
• Validate cognitive ability tests
  Less than 26 do
• Graphology is invalid
  Use is on the increase
• Weight personalityfactors based on job analysis
  Less than 5 do
• Use structured situational or behavioral
  interview Only 28 do
• Use formal interview rating system
  Only 16 do
• Use more than one interviewer
  Only 41 do
• use statistical model to combine data Less
  than 5 use actuarial model

• The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1998

Irwin/McGraw-Hill
15
Figure 6.9 Applicant Attributes that Cause
Rating Bias
6-14

• Factors Examples of Research Findings
• Gender Bias Female candidates lower moderated
  by job type and competence Females rate
  higher.
• First impression effect Early impression more
  important that facts.
• Hire decisions attibuted to past outcomes.
• Contrast effect Evaluation on previous
  candidates.
• Nonverbal communication Higher evaluations for
  applicants who looked straight ahead, greater
  eye contact and head movement, and smiled.
• Physical attractiveness More attractive
  applicants receive higher evaluations.

• The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1998

Irwin/McGraw-Hill
16
Figure 6.10 Interviewer Attributes that Cause
Rating Bias
6-15

• Factors Examples of Research Findings
• Similarity Effect More positive if perceived to
  be similar. Resisted more information if
  similarity perception.
• Likability More positive to those liked. If
  liked, influenced perception of
  qualifications
• Ideal stereotype Judged applicants against
  ideal. Ideal stereotype may be unique to one
  interviewer or shared by group of raters.
• Information favorability Weighed negative
  information more. Interviewers talked more
  when already favored candidate.
• Information utilization Weighting system
  idiosyncratic. Discrepancies between
  intended and actual weights used.

• The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1998

Irwin/McGraw-Hill
17
Figure 6.11 Situational Attributes that Cause
Rating Bias
6-16

• Job information
• Applicant information
• Decision Time
• Self-Perceptions
• Communication
• Impressions of Interviewer
• Impression Management

• The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1998

Irwin/McGraw-Hill
18
Figure 6.12 Sample Situalional Interview
Questions
6-17

• 1. A customer comes into the store to pick up a
  watch he had left for repair. The repair was
  supposed to have been completed a week ago, but
  the watch is not back yet from the repair shop.
  The customer is very angry. How would you handle
  the situation?
• 1 (low) Tell the customer the watch is not
  back yet and ask him to check back with you
  later.
• 3 (average) Apologize, tell the customer that
  you will check into the problem and call him
  or her back later.
• 5 (high) Put the customer at ease and call the
  repair shop while the customer waits.
• 2. For the past week you have been consistently
  getting the jobs that are the most time consuming
  (e.g., poor handwriting, complex statistical
  work). You know it's nobody's fault because you
  have been taking the jobs in priority order. You
  have just picked your fourth job of the day and
  it's another "loser." What would you do?
• 1 (low) Thumb through the pile and take
  another job.
• 2 (average) Complain to the coordinator, but do
  the job.
• 3 (high) Take the job without complaining and
  do it.
• Source Jeff A. Weekley and Joseph A. Gier,
  "Reliability and Validity of the Situational
  Interview for a Sales Position,"Journal of
  Applied Psychology 3 (1987) 484-487.
• Source Gary P. Latham and Lise M. Saari, "Do
  People Do What They Say? Further Studies on the
  Situational Interview," Journal of Applied
  Psychology 4 (1984) 569-573.

19
Figure 6.13 Model of the Selection Process for
Overseas Assignments
6-18

• START THE SELECTION PROCESS
• Can the position be filled by a Select local
  national and subject him or her to
• local national? YES training basically
  aimed at improving technical
• NO and managerial skills
• Identify degree of interaction
• required with local community
• LOW
• HIGH
• Is candidate willing? Emphasis on task
  variables. Is he/she willing
• to serve abroad?
• NO YES NO YES
• Probably not suited for Probably not suited for
  Start oreintation
• position position
• Identify degree of similarity/
• dissimilarity between cultures
• VERY SIMILAR HIGHLY DIVERSE
• Emphasis on task variables Emphasis on
  relational abilities and Source R.L.
  Tung. Selection and family situation
  factors training for overseas
  assignment
• Start orientation Start orientation
  Columbia Journal of World Business, 16,
  68-78, 1981.

20
Exercise 6.1 Should Tenneco use the Wonderlic
Test?
6-19

• OBJECTIVES
• Implications of using cognitive ability tests.
• Rationale for using under specfic circumstances

Irwin/McGraw-Hill

• The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1998

21
Exercise 6.1 Should Tenneco use the Wonderlic
Test?
6-20

• Table 6.1.1 Answers to Form 6.1.1
• 1. Assuming that only 20 candidates are to be
  selected for the training program, is adverse
  impact likely against minorities if the Wonderlic
  Personnel Test is to be used as the sole basis
  for entry into the training? Explain you answer.
• Black and white differences are about one
  standard deviation
• (whites outscore blacks 75 to 63 on the
  Wonderlic)
• Adverse impact if Wonderlic used as sole basis
  for selection
• Adverse impact against Hispanics although less.

Irwin/McGraw-Hill

• The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1998

22
Table 6.1.1 Answers to Form 6.1.1
6-21

• 2. Given your response to Question 1, what are
  the policy options for this situation? What
  policy do you recommend that Tenneco adopt for
  the use of the Wonderlic? Defend your response by
  considering the job situation, the need for
  further research, legal and social implications,
  and alternative methods of selection. Provide a
  detailed recommendation and a rationale for
  action.
• Options 1 Drop the use of the test
• 2 Develop a more job-related test
• 3 Low cut off score for more ethnic groups
• 4 Adopt some other means of assessment
  (performance appraisals)

Irwin/McGraw-Hill

• The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1998

23
Table 6.1.1 Answers to Form 6.1.1
6-22

• 3. What if you conducted a PAQ analysis which
  indicated that the Wonderlic was a valid test for
  this job? Do you believe that this result
  established the legality of the Wonderlic?
  Explain your answer.
• Cannot find another test as valid as the
  Wonderlic with less adverse impact.
• Examination of other valid tests with regard to
  adverse impact may be necessary to prove
  legality.
• The process by which the Wonderlic was
  recommended based on the PAQ analysis will be
  closely examined.

Irwin/McGraw-Hill

• The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1998

24
Exercise 6.2 Hiring a Plant Manager At Dynamo
Industries
6-23

• Objectives
• Distinguish between valuable information
  information which should be ignored.
• Articulate your rationale for decisions.
• Suggestions for improved process.
• Dynamics of a leaderless group discussion.

• The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1998

Irwin/McGraw-Hill
25
Exercise 6.2 Hiring a Plant Manager At Dynamo
Industries
6-24

• Procedure
• Part A Individual Analysis
• Write report as VP of HR to VP of Production and
  President
• 1 page executive summary
• 3 pages of supporting information
• a. Rank order top four choices
• b. In depth rationale
• c. How selection process should be changed

Irwin/McGraw-Hill

• The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1998

26
Exercise 6.2 Hiring a Plant Manager At Dynamo
Industries
6-25

• Part B Group Analysis
• Step 1 Observers review discussants' reports.
  Discussants review observer's reports.
• Step 2 Rate "written communications" competency
• Step 3 Discussants reach consensus
• Step 4 Complete of self-assessment and assessment
  forms
• Step 5 Discussants and observers reverse roles.
  Discussants reach consensus on changes
• Step 6 Complete self-assessment and assessment
  forms
• Step 7 (Optional) Pair off and compare self- and
  peer assessments.
• Step 8 Answer assessment questions

Irwin/McGraw-Hill

• The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1998

27
Exercise 6.2 Ranking of Candidates for Plant
Manager Job Listed in order of ranking
6-26

• The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1998

Irwin/McGraw-Hill
28
Exercise 6.2 Hiring a Plant Manager At Dynamo
Industries
6-27

• Martin Rated high in all categories except
  Intelligence (119 score exceeds cutoff score) and
  ability to resolve conflict external candidate
  - new ideas needed? 44, BA, MA, PM of small
  plant of competitor 6 yrs, nonunion.
• Joyce Rated high or moderate in all categories.
  Internal candidate may lose her if not
  transferred dual career family. 36, BA, PM
  Little Rock 2 yrs, lateral transfer, enhance
  opportunities for husband.
• Davis With high rating from Atlanta PM
  supervisor, interview rating is moderate. Work
  sample and interpersonal skills are low. BA/MBA
  Harvard, Asst PM Atlanta, Dynamo 10 years.
• Caciopo Although rated high by psychologist, his
  work sample and intelligence scores are low (but
  above intelligence cutoff of 115) HS, Asst PM
  Providence 10 yrs, recvrd heart attack4 yrs ago,
  no to PM job 10 yrs ago due to wifes health.

Irwin/McGraw-Hill

• The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1998

29
Exercise 6.2 Hiring a Plant Manager At Dynamo
Industries
6-28

• Hall Although rated low on intelligence (lower
  than 115 cut-off), work sample score is high and
  he does have chemistry degree. Low rating on
  stress may explain reason why he is willing to
  take a demotion. BS chemistry, VP of Prod for
  competitor, outstanding trade pub reviews, wants
  to travel less.
• Doyle Although interview and performance are
  high, interpersonal and work sample are low.
  Ineffective in previous position as PM in Little
  Rock. BA/MBA Chicago, sp asst to VP prod, Asst
  PM LR 2 yrs, removed as PM (youngest PM).
• Jackson Is Low or moderate in all categories
  except performance. Intelligence is below
  cutoff.
• BA Howard, MBA Northwestern, Asst PM Pittsburgh,
  Acting PM Pittsburgh 2 months.
• Fein All ratings are low or moderate. AS, Was
  PM large unionized textile plt, let go
  discontinued product, excellent reference letters.

Irwin/McGraw-Hill

• The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1998

30
Table 6.2.2 Recommended Changes and Information
Needed for Future Hiring at Dynamo
6-29

• 1. Develop a policy on internal and external
  hiring/transfers
• 2. Conduct a job analysis
• 3. Determine the relative validity of methods
• 4. Reduce the number of tests and weight
  personality factors based on job analysis
• 5. Adopt more job related approach to references
  and judgments of promotability.
• 6. Critique the interview for job
  relatedness/validity.
• 7. Adopt an actuarial approach to aggregating
  data.

Irwin/McGraw-Hill

• The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1998

31
Exercise 6.2 Hiring a Plant Manager At Dynamo
Industries
6-30

• Table 6.2.1
• Issues to Consider at Dynamo
• PHILOSOPHY IN APPROACHING THIS CASE
• no one best answer for this case
• all of the various factors considered (e.g.,
  selection device validity and utility).
• evaluate analyses on scientifically grounded,
  legally defensible, and cogently argued.

Irwin/McGraw-Hill

• The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1998

32
Exercise 6.2 Expected Validity of the Selection
Devices
6-31

• 1. Interviews semistructured, interviewers
  familiar with job, trained,considerable weight
  given to the interview ratings
• 2. Work Sample Ratings key aspects of the PM's
  job,
• heavily weighted in making a decision.
• 3. Performance and Promotability Ratings less
  evidence of validity for selection however
  should not be ignored
• 4. Intelligence Test valid, but does it add
  unique information?
• 5. Education should not be weighted heavily
• 6. Work Experience Consider (1) plant manager
  (2) union experience and (3) differences
  between internal and external candidates.

Irwin/McGraw-Hill

• The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1998

33
Exercise 6.2 Expected Validity of the Selection
Devices (continued)
6-32

• 7. Other Devices/Consideration
• a. Personality Profiles modest weight
• b. Handwriting Analysis no weight.
• c. Internal vs. External Candidates preference
  to internal candidates.
• d. Lateral Transfers
• OTHER FACTORS TO CONSIDER Why was Fein let go if
  he was so good? Is Jackson perceived as part of
  the problem in Pittsburgh? Is Jackson too young?
  If we let Joyce transfer, can we put our second
  choice in Little Rock? Given Doyle's failure in
  Little Rock, is Pittsburgh too tough of a next
  assignment? How was the information used
  (compensatory vs. noncompensatory selection
  system)?

• The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1998

Irwin/McGraw-Hill
34
Exercise 6.2 Hiring a Plant Manager At Dynamo
Industries
6-33

• RANKING THE CANDIDATES no one best ranking
• Eliminate
• based upon work sample scores, interview
  scores, performance and promotability ratings -
  Fein, Davis, Caciopo and Doyle
• Joyce successful plant manager in a trouble spot
• may quit if not transferred - best candidate
  when data aggregated, internal preference, and
  experience taken into consideration.
• If new ideas from outside important - Martin is a
  strong candidate

• The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1998

Irwin/McGraw-Hill
35
Exercise 6.2 Assessment Questions
6-34

• 1. To what extent do you agree with the peer
  assessments which were made on your group
  performance? What steps could be taken to
  increase the level of agreement between your
  self-assessment and the peer assessment?
• Use pairing process recommended in the text
• Define criteria for evaluation more clearly
• Use standardized rating forms
• Indicate up front what behaviors are to be
  assessed
• Train the observers

Irwin/McGraw-Hill

• The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1998

36
Exercise 6.2 Assessment Questions
6-35

• 2. Do you think that the leaderless group
  discussion (LGD) is a useful tool for personnel
  assessment? What changes in the exercise should
  be made in order to increase its validity as a
  personnel assessment tool?
• Consider in the context of the purpose for
  which the data from the method are to be used.
• LGD is a valid and useful tool which is almost
  always a part of managerial and supervisory
  assessment centers.

Irwin/McGraw-Hill

• The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1998

37
Exercise 6.2 Assessment Questions
6-36

• 3. Could Dynamo successfully defend a lawsuit
  brought by one of the candidates not selected
  under the Civil Rights Act or the ADEA? Explain
  your answer.
• Process of getting to the candidates must be
  known before one can draw any conclusions
  regarding civil rights violations.
• Ethnic and gender composition of the workforce
  may be relevant to prima facie evidence of
  discrimination against minorities or women.
• More information must be known about the
  selection procedures before assessments of
  possible EEO violations can be made.

Irwin/McGraw-Hill

• The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1998

38
Exercise 6.3 What Questions Should You Ask in an
Interview?
6-37

• Objectives
• Identify interview questions which are of
  questionable legality or potentially problematic.
• Know the major law and legal implications which
  may affect the interview process.

Irwin/McGraw-Hill

• The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1998

39
Exercise 6.3 What Questions Should You Ask in an
Interview?
6-38

• Procedure
• Part A Individual Analysis
• Complete Form 6.3.1
• Write justification for illegal and potentially
  illegal questions
• Part B Group Analysis
• Compare responses with group members
• Prepare group response with justification
• Assign members to report group positions
• Compose response to assessment questions

Irwin/McGraw-Hill

• The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1998

40
Suggested Correct Answers for Form 6.3.1
6-39

• L 1.
• L 2.
• UL 3.
• UL 4.
• L 5.
• L 6.
• UL 7.
• UL 8.
• UL 9.
• UL 10.
• L 11.

• The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1998

Irwin/McGraw-Hill
41
Suggested Correct Answers for Form 6.3.1
6-40

• L 12.
• L 13.
• UL 14.
• UL 15.
• UL 16.
• L 17.
• L 18.
• L 19.
• UL 20.
• UL 21.
• UL 22.
• UL 23.
• L 24.

Irwin/McGraw-Hill

• The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1998

42
Exercise 6.3 Assessment Questions
6-41

• 1. How would you design a training program so
  that future interviewers would understand what
  can and cannot be asked in an employment
  interview?
• Quiz similar to 6.3.1
• Knowledge of EEO, ADEA, and ADA necessary
• Cases similar to those in Chapter 3 which
  describe employment interview formats

Irwin/McGraw-Hill

• The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1998

43
Exercise 6.3 Assessment Questions
6-42

• 2. If your organizational research had clearly
  established (with data) that women with children
  under the age of 5 are much more likely to be
  absent from work than others, could the company
  then use this infomation to make decisions?
• "No!"
• Such questions should not be asked
• Information should not be used as a basis of
  decisions about anyone

Irwin/McGraw-Hill

• The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1998

44
Exercise 6.3 Assessment Questions
6-43

• 3. How would you design a structured interview
  for an overseas assignment?
• Much like the development of a work sample
• Use expatriates who can develop situations
  which are likely to occur on such assignments.
• Expatriates can also assist in writing
  suggested answers and in developing scoring key.
  

• The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1998

Irwin/McGraw-Hill
45
Exercise 6.3 Assessment Questions
6-44

• 4. Discuss the ethical and legal implications of
  asking applicants for the health histories of
  family members. Setting the possible legal
  issues, should a company take family health into
  consideration when evaluating an applicant?
• Illegal under the ADA
• Illegal under several state statutes before
  ADA passed.

• The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1998

Irwin/McGraw-Hill
46
Power Interview Skills Will Find 'The Best'
Quickly
6-45

• Walk me through your progression with your
  present company leading me up to what you do now
  on a day-to-day basis.
• Why did you leave your present position?
• In retrospect, why is ABC Corp. a better
  company for your having worked there?
• What would your past employer say on a
  reference if we asked what your greatest
  contribution to the organization was?
• What makes you stand out among your peers?

Irwin/McGraw-Hill

• The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1998

47
Interviewing Guidelines
6-46

• Know what is authorized
• Review "essential functions of job."
• Review employment application and/or resume
• Control interruptions
• Practice posing questions and listening
• Differentiate "open" and "closed" questions
• Avoid implied contracts
• Let applicant know steps following meeting
• Avoid making notes on application or resume
• Understand objective of interview

Irwin/McGraw-Hill

• The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1998

48
Factors which influence perceptual processes of
interview
6-47

• Attributes of the applicant.
• Attributes of the interviewer or interviewers
• Attributes of the situation

Irwin/McGraw-Hill

• The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1998

49
Chapter 6 Discussion Questions
6-48

• 1. Are cognitive ability tests more trouble than
  they are worth? Given that minorities are more
  likely to score lower on such tests, would it be
  advisable to find some other method for
  predicting job success?
• Increases in productivity and costs savings
• Inexpensive
• Quick screening device
• Used in combination with other devices
• Determine most valid selection method for
  specific job
• Requirements of Civil Rights Act of 1991

Irwin/McGraw-Hill

• The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1998

50
Chapter 6 Discussion Questions
6-49

• 2. Should personality tests be regulated with
  restrictions on what can and cannot be asked?
• The Civil Rights Act of 1991
• burden of job related or a business necessity
• conduct validation studies
• certain personalities outperform the other
  types of personalities.
• Companies may have to prove validity
• certain questions on personality tests (ADA)
• mental health and/or physical abilities
• Question if medical exams
• Avoid litigation and defensibility
• examine selection tests

Irwin/McGraw-Hill

• The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1998

51
Chapter 6 Discussion Questions
6-50

• 3. Under what circumstances would mental ability
  tests be appropriate for promotion decisions?
  Are there other methods that might be more valid?
• Valid predictor of performance and no other test
  is valid, with less adverse impact then cognitive
  ability tests should be used with caution.
• A combination of cognitive and motivational test
  are more valid
• and results in a more complete assessment of the
  individual.
• Determine selection method most valid for
  specific job
• Use of other methods may tap other individual
  difference variables important to job success
  (e.g., motivation levels, leadership ability).
• Combination strategy increases competitive
  advantage and reduces litigation

Irwin/McGraw-Hill

• The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1998

52
Chapter 6 Discussion Questions
6-51

• 4. If you were given a personality test as part
  of an employment application process, would you
  answer the questions honestly, or would you
  attempt to answer them based on your image of the
  "correct" way to answer? What implications does
  your response have for the validity of
  personality testing?
• May be hired for unsuitable job
• Questionable validity if all applicants are
  "faking good"
• Validity of self report measures threatened by
  response bias or the possibility of deliberate
  faking of answers.

• The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1998

Irwin/McGraw-Hill
53
Chapter 6 Discussion Questions
6-52

• 5. Discuss the advantages and disadvantages of
  banding. Under what circumstances would such a
  practice be most appropriate?
• Advantages of banding
• results scores produce less adverse impact than
  top-down
• utility of the test more than cut-off
• Disadvantages
• higher rate of adverse impact than cut-off
• utility less than the top-down raw scores
• However, banding may be the best alternative
  given that both adverse impact is decreased while
  utility is increased.

• The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1998

Irwin/McGraw-Hill
54
Chapter 6 Discussion Questions
6-53

• 6. Given that the validity of assessment centers
  and work samples is not significantly greater
  than that reported for mental ability tests, why
  would an organization choose the far more costly
  approach?
• Risk of adverse impact
• Assessment center approach shown to be fair to
  minorities, women, and older workers
• Performance tests focus on observation of
  actual behaviors.
• Assessment centers provide opportunity to
  demonstrate job related skills across a variety
  of exercises.
• Ability to assess applicant motivation
• Provide developmental information
• Face validity
• Wealth of performance feedback

• The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1998

Irwin/McGraw-Hill
55
Chapter 6 Discussion Questions
6-54

• 7. It has been proposed that students be asked to
  do work simulations similar to those used in
  managerial assessment centers. Assessments would
  then be made on students' competencies in
  decision making, leadership, oral communication,
  planning and organizing, written communication,
  and self objectivity. What other methods could
  be used to assess student competencies in these
  areas?
• Scenarios or case studies
• Written communication exercises

Irwin/McGraw-Hill

• The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1998

56
Chapter 6 Discussion Questions
6-55

• 8. What is stereotyping? Give examples of legal
  and illegal stereotypes.
• Impression based on group membership rather
  than on unique individual attributes
• Categorizing people into groups according to
  the match between the individual and group's
  traits.
• Stereotyping that results in discrimination
  based on race, sex, age, religion, national
  origin, or disability is illegal.
• Stereotyping on basis of past work performance
  is legal.

Irwin/McGraw-Hill

• The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1998

57
Chapter 6 Discussion Questions
6-56

• 9. Describe how an organization might improve the
  reliability and validity of interviews.
• Use standardized interview
• Control for situational factors
• Provide interviewer training
• Periodically evaluate purpose of interview
• Establish purpose of interview
• Standardize interview with respect to the
  content

• The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1998

Irwin/McGraw-Hill
58
Chapter 6 Discussion Questions
6-57

• 10. Contrast an unstructured interview with a
  situational or behavioral interview.
• Unstructured
• Interviewer asks different questions of
  different applicants
• Different interviewers are used for different
  applicants
• No basis for comparison
• Situational/behavioral interview
• Structured
• Contains same situations for each applicant
• Better basis for comparison
• Requires applicant to describe how he or she
  would act in a hypothetical situation.

• The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1998

Irwin/McGraw-Hill
59
Chapter 6 Discussion Questions
6-58

• 11. "The most efficient solution to the problem
  of interview validity is to do away with the
  interview and substitute paper and pencil
  measures." Do you agree or disagree? Explain.
• Increase usefulness of interviews
• Use structured formats
• Control for extraneous variables (e.g.,
  interview setting
• Provide interviewer training
• Use multiple interviewers
• Focus on past behaviors
• Interview very effective for assessing
  motivational and interpersonal skills

• The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1998

Irwin/McGraw-Hill