Studied by 0 people
Looks like no one added any tags here yet for you.
study done on how diversity changes peoples perspectives
holding people accountable was the greatest effect to change peoples perspectives on diversity
not shown on graph but things that werent effective was diversity training,
gut feel and intuition
When we have a gut feeling of we don’t like it or like the person it’s a result of what we’ve picked up from in the past and what weve formed to be as a conclusion
can be Rewarding
his reccommendation on gut feel and intuition
If you have a red flag. Maybe get a personality assessment do a background check
Differnet contexts where they can be valid:
Ex: nurses and firefighter says floors gonna fall idk why it just is and it’s the preconsious like I have been in this situation before I recoginxe patterns and this is what is going to happen
Hiring situations: not very valid because theyre so artificial and don’t usually represnet what happens day to day on the job. Might not represent how that person is going to perform on the job.
Get more info
Figure out what the cues were specifically
Ex: the way the guy was looking at him, so we do another interview and 3 people and see if theres something other people notice.
Don’t ignore figure out whats causing it
more hiring experience does not mean you have better gut feelings
percent concordant statistic
this explains that doing several different selection methods for ex: cognitive, work sample, interview)
has a probability of 70%. And this is as good as were going to get too. Because theres always measurement error and unpredictable things that people have happen in their life
satisficing
employers often deal with several constraints and demands when making a selection decision so they will make the most acceptable or adequate choice rather than the best choice
Maybe they’ll be just good enough
implicit theories
when employers think they have a special power for making good selection decisions
Ex: they put salt on their fries they always strive to make things better im gonna hire them
or unwavering eye contact means honesty
pure judgement approach
Using no structure. just formed a general impression. I like this person.
trait rating approach
Actually did ratings turned things into numbers from interview resume, references and then combbine them, weigh them etc
profile interpretation
Scores on tests and assessments and you make a judgement
pure statistical approach
Scores on tests and assessments and comibine it statistically like an average
judgement composite
What we did wehen we decided who to draft. Had coached rating and pyshcial tests and personality and combined it all
statistical composite
Don’t make a judgements use an alogirthim to combine it all - what we want
Using a statistical approach leads to better decions than using a judgemental approach.
incremental validity
when employers use various sources of information applicants to make a selection decision
ex from picture:
Adding an ability test seems to overlap with job performance, might not be worth it as it’s evaluating the same thing
IQ test and a good interview both correlated of 0.5 but not with each other. You will be able to predict job performance that much better because its evaluating different things overall increasing job performance
unit weighting
averaging all scores all same weighting and make who ever has highest score that’s who you hire
rational weighting
Experts look and determine weighting (this assessment more valid it gets a weight of 0.8 and other one gets 0.3 multiply by the weight and add them up
multiple regression model
take the weights and multiply then from each score
need to be careful of low scores
to fix this do a validity study
multiple cutoff model
Determine cutoff scores and required a validation study. Absolute minimum score for assessment.
difficult to determine a cut off score- ex: scoring at the cutoff and one point below the cutoff
multiple hurdle model
Like cutoff excpet give assessments to applicants in sequence, meet score move on. If they don’t eliminated. Do this if you have lot of applicants and timeconsuming and expensice to put applicants thorugh all assessments
combination model
Still left with a pool of applicants and then total their scores
profile matching model
Take a group of higher performing employees and give them your assessments calc mean score and then you take the applicant score and subtract it from the mean you square it and add all up all of the different scores. The person with the highest scores are the worst applicants because they have the biggest difference. Looking for low scores.
simplest to implement but can punish high performers
making selection decisions recommedations
use valid systems
dont encourage gut feelings or intuition
Help them make a list of when they made good and bad decisions
Train managers to help them make a structured evaluation
evalute or audit decisions for feedback
is a years of experience qualification good
It can sometimes be a tactic to screen employees out
this is a problem because:
some groups are less likely to feel confident to apply when they know they dont have the qualifications whereas other are opposite
Reduce validity of hiring
Screening out on trainable elements
Some people don’t have opportunities to apply for degrees
what are we actually hiring for?
Do a job analysis
Exactly what were hiring for and skills needed for the job
frankensteined: new skills added without removing outdated ones
how do we attract talent
Emphasize information about the image and reputation of the org
ex: autonomy purpose psychological needs
diversity recuriting
equal employement opportunity statements
skill based screening
WAB
job knowledge tests/ work sample
overclaiming assessments
self reports
forced choice exams
enhanced reference checking
this is a way better way of checking references rather than the regular phone call ask these questions…
Give them a forced choice self report to applicants and also send it to references to fill out
This is more valid
You can see this more clearly
You could see a façade( lack of self awareness) applicants said this but all of the references said no
digital wallets
Verified
Applicant owns them and the appplicants can provide this of a verified record of what skills the applicant possesses
Built on a blockchain
actual skill mastery with certificates etc
verifiable job skills
updated continuously in real time
digital wallet concerns
data owner privacy
standardizaiton- Who actually owns the data? Biggest concern is standardization- across organizations
adoption and awareness- not all people aware of them yet
integration with hiring systems may not be able to read or import data to their systems
drawbacks and potential good things of AI
potential
job analysis less onerous due to langauge models
screen in for skills to glance through
automated generation of validity for jobs industires
perils
bias
legality
applicant responses
skill bases hiring - the most extreme form of it
Companies wont ask for resume or degree or years of experience
Here's where the job is can you do that
Email address
Here's assessments you need to do
Form here screening and interviews
