Week 2: Recruitment & Selection

Strategic Recruitment & Selection Cycle

Recruitment side: Business strategy → HR forecasting → Recruitment → Selection.

Selection side: Business strategy → Job analysis → Selection.

Underlying idea: people are a source of competitive advantage (valuable, unique, hard to copy).

HR Planning Process

Definition: estimating future supply & demand for employees, based on past & present data. | 4 stages: Forecasts of labour → Goal setting & strategic planning → Implementation → Evaluation.

Quantitative vs Qualitative Forecasting

Quantitative (3 types): trend analysis, ratio analysis, regression analysis. | Qualitative: expert knowledge.

Labour Surplus vs Shortage

Surplus strategies: hiring freeze, early retirement, downsizing. | Shortage strategies: overtime, outsourcing, hiring new workers. | Choice depends on: speed vs impact.

Attractiveness vs Fit

Attractiveness: what draws a candidate to the job/organization. | Fit: how well a candidate matches the job and organization. | Key warning: being attracted does not equal being a good fit.

Four Criteria for Judging a Recruiting Method

Cost: cost-per-hire = total recruiting cost ÷ new hires. | Speed: time-to-fill = job announced → new person starts. | Diversity: how different applicants are from current staff. | Efficiency: yield ratio.

Yield Ratio

Formula: "hirable" applicants ÷ total applicants (from one method). | Job boards: many applicants, low yield. | Referrals: few applicants, high yield.

External vs Internal Recruiting

External: print ads, internet job boards, campus recruiting, search firms, employment agencies. | Internal: job posting/intranet, employee referrals, rehiring former employees.

Recruiting Methods Compared (Table 2.1)

External methods: more diversity, but a poorer yield ratio. | Internal methods: cheaper, higher yield ratio, but low diversity. | Fastest: internet-based recruiting. | Slowest: former employees / campus recruiting.

Passive Job Seekers

Definition: not actively job hunting, but open to the right opportunity. | Significance: the biggest untapped part of the labour market. | Reach them via: social media, events, your own customers, profile-search tools.

Employer Branding – Definitions

Carberry & Cross (2018): how far the organization is recognized as a desirable employer. | Walker (2007): distinctive qualities that promise a certain employment experience. | Shaped mostly by: indirect cues, not explicit messaging.

Instrumental vs Symbolic Employer Brand

Instrumental: objective facts – location, products, pay & benefits (judges fit to the JOB). | Symbolic: intangible "personality" traits of the organization (judges fit to the ORGANIZATION). | Common mistake: most job ads overuse instrumental info and neglect symbolic info.

Low vs High Involvement Recruitment

Low involvement: relies on an already-known, positive brand; a bare-bones ad. | High involvement: actively shows off reputation, values & culture. | Used when: building a brand from scratch.

Writing a Better Job Ad

Keep it short: applicants spend under 90 seconds reading a job ad. | Applicant's perspective: focus on what THEY gain, not just what's required of them. | Be specific: concrete numbers beat vague promises. | Avoid masculine-coded words: (boast, competitive, dominant) – they discourage female applicants.

Realistic Job Preview (RJP)

Definition: giving applicants honest info on a job's positives AND negatives. | Effect: lower turnover, higher satisfaction & performance, fewer thoughts of quitting. | Why it works: people scared off by an RJP are the ones who'd have quit anyway.

Employee Referrals

Definition: employees get a bonus for referring successful hires. | Strength: very high yield ratio (accurate informal pre-screening). | Risk: tends to produce a more homogeneous workforce.

Boomerang Employees

Definition: rehiring former employees who left on good terms. | Strength: faster to recruit; both sides already know the fit. | Research finding: boomerangs tend to outperform other new hires, especially in coordination/interpersonal-heavy roles.

Internal Job Posting

Definition: advertising openings to current employees. | Strength: extremely high yield ratio. | Weakness: no boost to diversity or workforce size; unpredictable speed.

Why Internal Applicants Have Better Yield

Reason: they already have a clear picture of the job, so they've pre-judged their own fit. | Fix for external recruiting: give applicants fit feedback early so poor fits opt out themselves.

Choosing a Recruiting Method

Need people fast: print/internet ads. | Can wait for quality: intermediaries, referrals, internal posting. | Tight budget: internal methods. | Want diversity: external methods.

Expanding the Applicant Pool

Who: which groups fall outside your usual applicant pool? | How: what new channels can reach them? | What: what inducements would attract them?

Inducements

Goal: find the ONE benefit that makes you more attractive than competitors to a specific group. | Note: flexible work (timing/location) is consistently among the most valued benefits.

Alternatives to Recruiting

When demand spikes temporarily: consider overtime, subcontracting, or temporary workers instead of permanent hires. | Temp assignment: works as an extended realistic preview for both sides.

Manager's Knots (Ch. 2)

Diverse recruiting: supplement mainstream channels, don't replace them; avoid exclusionary-looking searches. | Poor-fit candidates from recruiters: give them detailed job info, reward quality over quantity. | Small business vs big employers: sell hands-on experience & flexibility instead of competing on pay.

Why Objective Selection?

Reason: to limit gut feeling & unconscious bias in hiring. | Key finding: most managers' guts are less accurate than they think.

Legal vs Valid Hiring

Legal: doesn't result in discriminatory decisions. | Valid: accurately predicts job performance. | Link: valid procedures are your first line of defense against discrimination claims.

Selection Quality Criteria

Legality/adverse impact: a neutral-looking practice shouldn't disproportionately hurt a protected group. | Reliability: gives consistent results. | Validity: measures what it claims to measure.

Reliability vs Validity (Target Analogy)

Reliable but not valid: tightly grouped, but off target. | Valid but not reliable: centered on target on average, but scattered. | Best tools: both reliable AND valid.

Disparate Treatment vs Disparate Impact

Disparate treatment (direct): treating groups differently on purpose. | Disparate impact (indirect): the same rule for everyone, but it hits one group harder. | Note: slides call disparate impact "adverse impact."

Bias in "Fair-Looking" Procedures

Finding: both men & women rate identical work as lower quality when attributed to a woman. | Lesson: always review hiring OUTCOMES, even when a process looks fair on paper.

Three Types of Validity

Criterion-related validity: does the test predict job performance? (correlation, –1.0 to +1.0) | Content validity: does the test directly sample the job's actual skills? | Construct validity: does the test line up with other measures of the same trait?

Three Stages of Hiring Assessments

Initial assessments: screen OUT the least qualified. | Evaluative assessments: rank & shortlist the best. | Contingent assessments: find red flags before the offer. | Note: interviews follow this same 3-stage pattern.

Table 3.1 – Validities & Applicant Reactions

Cognitive ability tests: 0.29 (highest single-test validity), moderate reaction. | Work sample tests: .12–.16, favourable reaction. | Situational judgment tests: .20, favourable reaction. | Personality tests: .04–.17, moderate reaction. | Integrity tests: .20–.22, unfavourable reaction.

The .21 Validity Benchmark

US EEOC guideline: a raw validity above 0.21 is "likely to be useful." | Note: even .11–.20 can still add value.

Cognitive Ability Tests

Strengths: cheap, highest single-test validity, predicts across nearly all jobs, hard to fake. | Weaknesses: can cause adverse/disparate impact; applicants tend to dislike them.

Work Sample Tests

Definition: applicants do part of the real job (in-basket, simulation, or audition). | Strengths: high content validity; applicants like them (an "opportunity to perform"). | Weaknesses: expensive to design; lower validity than cognitive tests due to rater error.

Situational Judgment Tests (SJTs)

Definition: a short work dilemma with multiple-choice response options. | "What would you do": measures behavioral tendency. | "What should you do": measures knowledge. | Strength: higher validity than work samples (fixed right answers = less rater error).

Combining Tests

Good combo: cognitive ability + a work sample involving other people. | Bad combo: cognitive ability + an in-basket or SJT (redundant). | Best combo overall: cognitive ability + a covert integrity test (~0.35 validity).

Personality Tests

Type-based tests (e.g. Myers-Briggs): NOT appropriate for hiring decisions. | Big Five tests: capture stable traits and predict typical behavior. | Risks: can be faked; may discriminate against applicants with disabilities.

Big Five Personality Traits

Extraversion: talkative & sociable – predicts performance in social jobs. | Agreeableness: tolerant & cooperative. | Conscientiousness: dependable & organized – predicts performance across ALL jobs. | Emotional stability: secure & calm. | Openness: curious & insightful.

Integrity Tests: Overt vs Covert

Overt tests: ask directly about attitudes toward theft & dishonesty. | Covert tests: measure integrity indirectly (via conscientiousness, dependability, thrill-seeking). | Both predict: theft and counterproductive work behaviour. | Downside: unfavourable applicant reactions to both types.

References & Background Checks

Purpose: confirm employment info and catch red flags. | Balance needed: safety concerns vs collecting only job-relevant information. | "Ban-the-box" laws: prohibit asking about criminal records early in the process.

Social Media Screening

Risk: mostly non-job-relevant info; online presence varies a lot, making it arbitrary. | Best practice: only screen AFTER a conditional offer, and with the applicant's permission.

Multi-Hurdle Selection

Definition: cheap/easy tests first; pricier steps only for those who pass. | Over-testing fix: drop the lowest-validity tests first, then any redundant ones.

Can / Will / Has Framework

Can they do the job? → cognitive ability & job knowledge tests. | Will they do the job? → personality & interest tests. | Has this person done it before? → CVs & interviews.

Validity Coefficients (Slides Version)

Job-specific (highest to lowest): structured interview .42, job knowledge .40, biographical data .38, work sample .33, assessment centre .29. | General (highest to lowest): cognitive ability .31, integrity .31, emotional intelligence .30, conscientiousness .25, interests .24.

Validity Numbers: Slides vs Textbook (Trap!)

Slides: structured interview (.42) = best predictor overall. | Textbook: cognitive ability (.29) = best single test; structured interviews land at .24–.31. | Rule: if a question specifies "textbook," use the book's numbers.

Interviews – The Basics

Popularity: among the most-used selection methods; applicants like them too. | Cost: roughly 2–3 person-hours per candidate. | 3 types: initial/prescreening → evaluative → contingent/follow-up.

What Interviews Do Really Well

Best used to assess: applied thinking and social skills (not raw IQ or work history). | "Puzzler" questions: test the reasoning PROCESS, not the actual answer.

What's Wrong With Interviews?

Common issue: interviewers make snap judgments – many decide within the first 5 minutes. | Unstructured interview validity: around 0.18 (below the .21 usefulness benchmark).

Structured vs Unstructured Interviews

Unstructured: random path, different questions per applicant → validity ~.18. | Structured: same questions/order, consistent evaluation → validity .24–.31. | Core rule: more structure = higher validity + less bias + stronger legal defense.

How to Structure an Interview (2 Steps)

Step 1 – Content: build a protocol from the job's requirements; same questions/order for everyone. | Step 2 – Evaluation: use anchored rating scales and structured notes.

Going Off-Script & "Illegal" Questions

Key point: there's no actual list of "illegal" interview questions – the real problem is USING demographic info in the decision. | Fix: always link every question to a specific job requirement.

Situational vs Behavioural Questions

Situational: hypothetical ("What would you do if…") → measures job knowledge. | Behavioural: past-focused ("Tell me about a time…") → measures past behavior. | Note: neither type is consistently more valid than the other.

When to Use Situational vs Behavioural Questions

Situational works best for: experienced hires, well-defined roles. | Behavioural works best for: applicants with limited experience, or roles needing adaptability.

Anchored Rating Scales

Definition: example answers that "anchor" specific points on a rating scale. | Purpose: keeps interviewers focused on job-relevant info, especially with multiple interviewers. | Note: only the interviewer sees the scale; applicants just answer normally.

Panel & Team Interviews

Panel interview: several interviewers, one applicant (more than ~4 gets clunky). | Team interview: applicant meets team leaders and future coworkers. | Interviewer vs evaluator split: separating who interviews from who decides adds objectivity.

Technology-Administered Interviews

Includes: video interviews and recorded phone interviews. | Strengths: forces standardization, allows a wider geographic net, avoids inappropriate/skipped questions. | Weakness: applicants prefer face-to-face; less opportunity for PR & fit exploration.

Manager's Knots (Ch. 3)

Over-testing: check each test's validity, and drop the ones that test the same thing twice. | Vague reference checks: give the reference more context about the job so they can judge fit properly. | Budget for background checks: use a multi-hurdle approach – cheap tests first, expensive checks only for finalists.

Manager's Knots (Ch. 4)

Job needs long hours/travel: describe requirements clearly to ALL candidates equally. | Want integrity info without a formal test: use situational or behavioral questions about ethics. | Hiring technical experts you can't assess: bring in a panel with technical staff, and admit your own knowledge gap.