Chapter 7 Part 1 PSY 2100

Recruitment

Attracting applicants who fit the job and culture, while meeting legal and diversity obligations

Three goals of recruitment

More applicants, more QUALIFIED applicants, more workforce diversity

Four recruitment methods

Career websites, social networking sites, employee referrals, career fairs

How recruitment methods differ

Cost, diversity of applicants, and how much job info they can share

Four factors that attract applicants

Job and organization traits, recruiter behavior, perceived fit, organization image

Why validity matters in selection

Low validity is pointless. High validity finds top talent. In the U.S. it defends tests that show adverse impact

Content validity

The test samples the KSAOs the job requires. Based on job analysis and expert (SME) opinion. Works with small samples

Construct validity

The test shows the expected pattern of relationships with other measures

Criterion-related validity

The test score is statistically related to job performance

Validity coefficient

The correlation between test scores and job performance

Why use multiple regression in selection?

To find the best way to combine several predictors

Predictive validity study

Test applicants, wait, then compare scores to the job performance of those hired

Concurrent validity study

Test current employees and compare scores to their current performance

Advantages of concurrent validity

Faster and easier. Results end up about as good as predictive

Advantages of predictive validity

Uses the real applicant group. Less hurt by range restriction

Range restriction

Test scores don't vary much, which weakens the observed correlation

Validity generalization

A test valid for one job is assumed valid for similar jobs

Situational specificity

A test valid in one setting can't be assumed valid in another, even a similar one

Who supports validity generalization vs. situational specificity?

Psychologists support generalization. Courts and the Uniform Guidelines support situational specificity

Uniform Guidelines (1978)

Rules on validating tests. Treated like law. Apply to employers with 15 or more employees

Title VII (1964) protects…

Race, color, sex, religion, national origin

Age Discrimination in Employment Act (1967) protects…

People over 40

Rehabilitation Act (1973) protects…

People with mental and physical disabilities

Immigration Reform and Control Act (1986) protects…

National origin

Americans with Disabilities Act (1990) protects…

People with mental and physical disabilities

Civil Rights Act of 1991

Covers the same groups as Title VII and banned within-group norming

Within-group norming

Adjusting scores within groups to reduce adverse impact. Banned in 1991

EEOC

The government agency that monitors equal opportunity in hiring and pay

EEOC's recent priorities

Unlawful DEI, "biological and binary" sex, anti-Christian bias, anti-American national origin bias

Protected group

Any group the law protects, like women or people over 40

Executive orders

Presidential orders covering federal contractors' employment practices

State laws

States can add extra protections

Three steps of an adverse impact case

1) Plaintiff shows adverse impact 2) Employer shows validity 3) Plaintiff shows equally valid, less discriminatory options existed

Adverse impact case, Step 1

Plaintiff shows adverse impact

Adverse impact case, Step 2

Employer shows the test is valid

Adverse impact case, Step 3

Plaintiff shows equally valid, less discriminatory options existed

4/5 (80%) rule

Protected group's selection ratio must be at least 80% of the other group's

Selection ratio (for the 4/5 rule)

Number hired divided by number who applied, for each group

How to do the 4/5 rule

1) Hired / applied for each group. 2) Divide protected group's ratio by the other group's. 3) Under 80% = violation

4/5 rule example 1

9 of 100 Black applicants hired (.09). 100 of 1,000 White applicants hired (.10). .09 / .10 = 90%, so no violation

4/5 rule example 2

70 of 100 Black applicants hired (.70). 900 of 1,000 White applicants hired (.90). .70 / .90 = 78%, so violation

Recruitment funnel (textbook)

More applicants lets the organization be more selective

Why recruit a diverse pool? (textbook)

You can't hire a diverse workforce from a pool that isn't diverse

Employee referrals (textbook)

Bring qualified applicants who know the organization, but may attract people just like current employees

Passive candidates (textbook)

Talented people not looking for work, often found through LinkedIn

Word of mouth and image (textbook)

Early positive word of mouth predicts applying. Ads alone can't manage an organization's image

Video vs. text testimonials (textbook)

Employee testimonials attract applicants better as video than as text

Validity as a unitary idea (textbook)

Best seen as one concept with several kinds of evidence, not three separate types

Documenting content validity (textbook)

SMEs sign off on items and rate how job-related they are

Concurrent validity limitation (textbook)

Current employees may be less motivated than applicants and have already learned job skills

Why range restriction hits concurrent studies (textbook)

The sample only includes people who scored high enough to be hired and performed well enough to stay

Cross-validation (textbook)

Confirming validity results with a second sample

Shrinkage (textbook)

The R-squared is smaller in the second sample than in the original

Empirical vs. statistical cross-validation (textbook)

Empirical = test the weights on a second sample. Statistical = use the software's adjusted R-squared

Sample size and validity studies (textbook)

Bigger original samples give more accurate results

Synthetic validity (textbook)

Jobs share a performance dimension (like dependability), so a test validated for one can be used for the other

Ghiselli vs. Schmidt and Hunter (textbook)

Ghiselli found validity varied by study. Schmidt and Hunter showed that was due to statistical issues like small samples

Test valid for one job, used for a different job (textbook)

Revalidate if the KSAs differ. A mechanical test validated for mechanics needs a new study for customer service reps

Case law (textbook)

Law created by court decisions

Griggs v. Duke Power (1971) (textbook)

First case to imply job analysis should be part of validating selection procedures

Who wrote the Uniform Guidelines? (textbook)

EEOC, Department of Labor, Civil Service Commission, Department of Justice

Age law size limits (textbook)

Federal age law covers employers with more than 20 employees. Michigan and some other states have no minimum

What counts as a "selection procedure"? (textbook)

Any procedure used for hiring, including promotion decisions and training that leads to hiring or promotion

Who does discrimination law protect? (textbook)

Everyone. For example both men and women, and any race

Disparate treatment vs. adverse impact (textbook)

Disparate treatment = intentional. Adverse impact = no intent needed, a test just favors one group

Why many illegal practices go unchallenged (textbook)

Applicants usually have to act first, like reporting to the EEOC

Limits of the 4/5 rule (textbook)

It is a simple court rule, not statistical theory. Better statistical tests exist

Best way to avoid adverse impact lawsuits (textbook)

Use valid procedures with low adverse impact, and monitor results

What employers can't do to reduce adverse impact (textbook)

Within-group norming, or give preferential treatment in hiring

Affirmative action in the U.S. (textbook)

Should mean extra recruiting, not preferential treatment

AI and adverse impact (textbook)

Algorithms trained on past decisions can repeat past bias