1

SELEKSI DAN PENEMPATAN

PSIKOLOGI INDUSTRI DAN ORGANISASI

Dosen :
Laila Meiliyandrie I Wardani, PhD




Disusun Oleh :
De Ani cyntya 46113210010
Eky Yohana 46113210002
Ellenoor Tasya 46113210009




FAKULTAS PSIKOLOGI
UNIVERSITAS MERCU BUANA
BEKASI
2014

2

1. Pengertian

Pengertian seleksi adalah cara atau prosedur yang di pakai oleh perusahaan
untuk mencari dan menyaring calon pegawai untuk mengisi suatu lowongan
kerja.Pengertian penempatan adalah proses atau cara suatu perusahaan untuk
menempatkan calon disuatu kedudukan atau jabatan tertentu.
Seleksi dan penempatan merupakan fungsi batas atau fungsi dari
komponen rentang-batas dari sistem. (Munandar, 2001).
Seleksi dan penempatan adalah suatu proses yang berisi persyaratan dari
kebijakan suatu perusahaan atau instansi yang bersangkutan untuk menyaring para
pegawai yang akan melamar pekerjaan. Biasanya yang menyeleksi adalah bagian
personalia, cara menyeleksinya menggunakan alat ukur yaitu dengan tes,
kuisioner, wawancara dan lain-lain. Tugas seleksi dan penempatan sbb :
o Tugas Seleksi : Memilah dan menilai calon dengan alat ukur yang berisi
persyaratan perusahaan atau instansi tersebut dan menyaring untuk di
rekomendasikan kepada perusahaan.
o Tugas Penempatan : Menempatkan calon di suatu kedudukan
berdasarkan bakat, minat, dan kecocokan.

2. Perbedaan Individual

Perbedaan Individual sering sekali di golongkan dan di kaitkan dengan
perbedaan kelamin, perbedaan kebudayaan, status pendidikan, perbedaan usia,
maupun perbedaan agama. Yang terpenting sebenarnya bukan perbedaannya
tetapi dapat lulus dari persyaratan yang di berikan oleh perusahaan dan dapat
memenuhi kriteria perusahaan tersebut. Adapun perbedaan individual berdasarkan
kapasitas memori. Studi meneliti perbedaan individu dalam bekerja kapasitas
memori telah mengemukakan bahwa individu dengan kapasitas memori kerja
yang rendah menunjukkan penurunan kinerja dan tugas memori dibandingkan
dengan individu dengan kapasitas memori kerja yang tinggi. Memori kerja
terbatas ini dapat dipahami dari timbulnya 2 komponen : komponen perhatian
3

dinamis (primer memory) dan tergantung isyarat pencarian komponen
probabilistik (memori sekunder). (Engle, 2007). Kerangka kerja ini digunakan
untuk menguji perbedaan individu sebelumnya pada studi kapasitas memori kerja.
(Engle, 2007). Kapasitas memori seseorang sangat berpengaruh penting untuk
seorang pekerja dalam mengingat, memahami, dan mempertahankan informasi
apa saja dan dapat mencapai tujuan dari tugas yang diberikan.

3. Metode dan Strategi

Ada 2 macam strategi seleksi yang mendasar menurut (Munandar, 2001)
yaitu :
1. Pengumpulan data Mekanikal
Data yang dikumpulkan telah berpatokan pada pedoman, peraturan, dan
prosedur yang telah ada. Pengolahan data mekanikal dapat di lakukan
oleh siapa saja atau orang yang bukan sarjana psikologi
2. Pengumpulan data secara Klinikal
Data yang dikumpulkan boleh keluar dari pedoman yang ada, data
tergantung dari seorang psikolog yang mengumpulkannya. Pengolahan
data klinikal harus dilakukan oleh ahli sarjana psikologi dan lebih
bermanfaat jika dimanfaatkan oleh ahlinya.
Ada 6 strategi diteliti oleh Sawyer dan hasilnya di ringkas oleh
Campbel dkk (1970) :
o Interpretasi Profil. Mengumpulkan data secara mekanikal dan diolah
secara klasikal.
o Statistikal Murni. Mengumpulkan data dan mengolah secara mekanikal.
o Klinikal Murni. Mengumpulkan dan mengolah secara klinikal.
o Pengharkatan Perilaku (Behaviour Rating). Mengumpulkan data secara
klinikal dan mengolah data secara mekanikal.
o Gabugan Klinikal. Mengumpulkan data secara mekanikal dan klinikal
dan mengolah secara klinikal.
4

o Gabungan Mekanikal. Mengumpulkan data secara mekanikal dan
klinikal mengolah secara mekanikal.
Keuntungan dan kelemahan metode statistikal dan klinikal
menurut (Munandar, 2001) ialah :
Keuntungan dari metode statistikal
Kecermatan dalam menyatakan besarnya kemungkinan timbulnya satu
taraf perilaku kerja tertentu.
Pengetahuan diperoleh dari belajar melalui pengalaman-pengalaman
yang tepat yang berkaitan dengan perilaku kerja yang berbeda-beda.
Kelemahan metode stastistikal
Kesulitannya untuk mengadakan kajian-kajian validasi dan validasi
silang.
Kesulitan untuk menggunakannya untuk memperoleh keputusan yang
benar-benar diindividualisasi
Keuntungan metode klinikal
Setiap orang ditangani dengan cara lebih sesuai dengan dirinya.
Psikologmenggunakan keterampilan khusus dan pengalamannya.
Kelemahan metode klinikal
Hanya ada sedikit pengetahuan sebelumnya tentang ketepatan
pengambilan keputusan tetntang di terima atau tolaknya berdasarkan
metode klinis.
Masalah pembentukan kesan-kesan, dan aturan optimal untuk
mengkombinasikan informasi dengan bentuk ramalan.

4. Proses Seleksi

Dibawah ini adalah tahap-tahap proses seleksi menurut (Munandar, 2001).

Tahap 1 Pencarian Calon Tenaga Kerja

Pencarian calon tenaga kerja dilakukan melalui :

A. Iklan di harian-harian, media cetak dan lainnya.
5

B. Pendekatan langsung kesekolah-sekolah atau lembaga pendidikan
kejuruan.
C. Para tenaga kerjanya sendiri yang mengajukan kenalan atau anggota
keluarganya yang dapat mereka jamin kebaikan kerja mereka.
D. Pencari kerja melamar sendiri ke perusahaan-perusahaan.

Tahap 2 Seleksi Calon Tenaga Kerja
Secara garis besar proses seleksi berlangsung sesuai dengan tahapan-tahapan berikut :
A. Tahap I : Seleksi Surat-surat Lamaran
B. Tahap II : Wawancara Awal
C. Tahap III : Ujian, Psikotes, Wawancara.
D. Tahap IV : Penilaian Akhir
E. Tahap V : Pemberitahuan dan Wawancara Akhir
F. Tahap VI : Penerimaan.
Penelitian melaporkan temuan data survei pada perekrutan dan metode seleksi
pra kerja yang digunakan oleh departemen sumber daya manusia di Perusahaan-
perusahaan besar di Amerika Serikat. Selain itu, data tentang penggunaan pra kerja secara
online tes, dalam waktu dekat ini, akan dikumpulkan. Analisis ini didasarkan pada
tanggapan dari 151 perusahaan. (Piotrowski, 2006). Temuan menunjukkan bahwa
sebagian besar perusahaan mengandalkan tradisional rekrutmen dan seleksi tenaga teknik
daripada penggunaan online tes. Tes kepribadian populer di sekitar 20% dari perusahaan
dan seperlima dari responden berencana untuk menerapkan secara online pengujian di
masa depan. Selain itu, skrining untuk kejujuran integritas (28,5%) dan potensi kekerasan
(22%) ditemukan menjadi agak populer. Ini akan sangat membantu jika penelitian masa
depan bisa menentukan pemesanan yang perusahaan memiliki sekitar tes pra-kerja online.
Tes psikologi dan instrumen penilaian yang ketuk calon kepribadian karyawan, gaya
interpersonal, dan respon terhadap stres situasi telah menerima peningkatan perhatian dari
kedua manusia profesional sumber daya dan peneliti di I / O psikologi selama masa 20
tahun lalu. (Piotrowski, 2006).
Dalam proses seleksi ada juga yang disebut dengan rekrutmen, yaitu penarikan
tenaja kerja bedasarkan kebutuhan dan proses bisnis perusahaan tersebut. Di bawah ini
adalah skema Rekrutmen & Seleksi.

6







Seleksi Daftar Riwayat
Hidup
Test
Aptitude Test Personality Test Work Sample Test Assesment Center
Wawancara
Tahap-tahap
Wawancara
Jenis
Wawancara
Metode Wawancara
Perilaku
Persiapan Wawancara
Membuka Wawancara
Pokok Wawancara
Penutupan Wawancara
Wawancara
Biasa
Wawancara
Panel
Identifikasi Kompetensi
Jabatan
Mengumpulkan STAR
Menilai STAR
Cek Referensi
Pemeriksaan Kesehatan
Penawaran Pekerjaan
7

Gambar 4.1 Skema Rekrutmen & Seleksi.
Sumber : Pedoman Lengkap Profesional SDM Indonesia. Jakarta: PPM. Hal : 266


5. Pusat-pusat Penaksiran (Assessment Centers)

Metode Pusat Penaksiran merupakan prosedur yang komprehensif dan
baku dimana banyak teknik-teknik assessment digunakan dalam kombinasi untuk
menilai orang-orang dengan berbagai tujuan. (Munandar, 2001)
Metode Pusat Penaksiran pada awalnya dilaksanakan dengan dasar penuh
waktu (full time) di satu lokasi khusus. Sekarang istilah pusat penaksiran
digunakan untuk menguraikan satu situasi dimana metodologi assessment yang
sama digunakan tanpa memperhatikan dari pusat derajat pelaksanaan atau lokasi
dari proses. (Bender, 1973)
Tujuan-tujuan dari pusat penaksiran menurut Kraut (1976) adalah sebagai
berikut :
a) Seleksi dari tenaga kerja dengan kecakapan yang baik untuk
dipromosikan ke kedudukan manajeral.
b) Penemukenalan (identification) dari tenaga kerja yang memiliki
potensi manajemen pada permulaan dini dari karier mereka.
c) Penempatan diri para tenaga kerja ke dalam kedudukan yang akan
menggunakan bakat-bakat mereka, dan untuk pengembangan para
tenaga kerja selanjutnya.
d) Pengembangan pribadi agar membantu orang/tenaga kerja
mengenali kemampuan-kemampuan mereka dan untuk membantu
mereka untuk meningkatkan kemampuan-kemampuan tersebut.

Assessment Center mengukur kompetensi peserta dengan menggunakan
alat-alat tertentu yaitu, analisis kasus, diskusi kelompok, role play, in basket,
presentasi, pengumpulan fakta, penilaian dan wawancara. Dibawah ini beberapa
penjelasan tentang alat ukur Assessment Center menurut (Aprinto & Jacob, 2013)
:
8

a) Diskusi Kelompok : Cara diskusi kelompok adalah menggumpulkan peserta
untuk membuat kelompok yang terdiri dari 5-7 orang. Sebelum memulai diskusi
para asesor memberi waku para peserta untuk membaca lembaran bahan diskusi
yang telah diberikan. Mereka berdiskusi untuk memecahkan masalah, asesor
mengamati dan mencatat perilaku para peserta sebagai bukti penilaian
kompetensi.
b) Wawancara : Wawancara yang digunakan adalah wawancara perilaku,
wawancara ini disebut juga wawancara terstruktur yang digunakan untuk
mengumpulkan informasi di masa lalu. Maksudnya adalah wawancara yang
pernah dihadapi , tugas yang pernah dikerjakan serta tindakan yang diambil
terhadap situasi/tugas tersebut beserta hasilnya. Teknik yang digunakan adalah
teknik STAR (situation, talk, action, result).
c) Bermain Peran (role play) : Biasanya antara peserta dan asesor bermain peran
dan asesor ikut dalam peran tersebut dan dalam saat yang bersamaan asesor
mewawancarai, mengamati, dan membuat catatan tentang prerilaku selama dialog
itu berlangsung sebagai bukti penilaian kompetensi.
d) In Basket : Peserta diminta untuk mengerjakan/mengolah satu set dokumen
dalam waktu yang telah ditentukan. Kemudian peserta merumuskan,membuat
rencan yang telah di intruksikan dalam dokumen-dokumen tersebut. Dan asesor
menilai tindakan yangsesuai dengan perilaku kompetensi.
e) Analisis Kasus : Peserta diberikan sejumlah informasi tertentu dan kemudian
dimintya membuat jadwal sesuai tugas. Peserta diberi kesempatan untuk
memeperlihatkan kemampuan perencanaan, mengorganisasi, pemecahan masalah
dan perhatian pada hal-hal mendetail.
f) Pengumpulan Fakta : Peserta diminta untuk mengajukan pertanyaan kepada
seseorang yang memiliki informasi yang dibutuhkan.
g) Presentasi : Penyampaian informasi kepada lebih dari satu orang dan menilai isi
dari bahan presentasinya sehingga dapat menghasilkan penilaian perilaku yang
menyeluruh.
h) Penilaian : Penilaian level kompetensi dinilai sesuai hasil pengamatan dan catatan
penilaian bukti perilaku disetiap alat tes.
9

Kesimpulan
Seleksi dan penempatan pada suatu instansi atau perusahaan
sangat penting karena jika hanya menerima pegawai saja tanpa ada
ada seleksi yang ketat dan penempatan yang tepat menurut bakat dan
minat akan berdampak buruk bagi suatu perusahaan. Bakat dan ilmu
yang tepat akan membantu memajukan perusahaan yang
bersangkutan. Tentu seleksi dan penempatan harus pada tahap-tahap
dan syarat-syarat yang sesuai dengan kebijakan perusahaan tersebut.
Metode dan proses seleksi juga sangat penting untuk menyaring para
calon pekerja.

10

Daftar pustaka

Aprinto, B., & Jacob, F. A. (2013). Pedoman Lengkap Profesional SDM Indonesia.
Jakarta: PPM.

Engle, N. U. (2007). The Nature of Individual Differences in Working Memory
Capacity:Active Maintenance in Primary Memory and Controlled Search From.
Psychological Review , 104132.

Munandar, A. S. (2001). Psikologi Industri dan Organisasi. jakarta: Penerbit Universitas
Indonesia (UI-Press).

Piotrowski, C. (2006). Current Recruitment and Selection Practices:A National Survey of
Fortune 1000 Firms. North American Journal of Psychology , 8, 489-496.




11

Jurnal
Active Maintenance in Primary Memory and Controlled
Search From Secondary Memory
Nash Unsworth and Randall W. Engle
Georgia Institute of Technology
Studies examining individual differences in working memory capacity have suggested
that individuals with low working memory capacities demonstrate impaired performance
on a variety of attention and memory tasks compared with individuals with high working
memory capacities. This working memory limitation can be conceived of as arising from
2 components: a dynamic attention component (primarymemory) and a probabilistic cue-
dependent search component (secondary memory). This framework is used to examine
previous individual differences studies of working memory capacity, and new evidence
is examined on the basis of predictions of the framework to performance on immediate
free recall. It is suggested that individual differences in working memory capacity are
partially due to the ability to maintain information accessible in primary memory and the
ability to search for information from secondary memory. Researchers have long been
interested in the scientific study of
memory processes (Ebbinghaus, 1885/1964) as well as individual differences in memory
abilities (e.g., Jacobs, 1887; see also Blankenship, 1938). Although these two research
areas have flourished over the past 100 years, there have been few attempts to integrate
experimental and differential approaches as has been advocated by several researchers in
both fields (Cohen, 1994; Cronbach, 1957; Underwood, 1975). One research area that has
embraced the combining of what Cronbach (1957) called the two disciplines of scientific
psychology is that of individual differences in working memory capacity (WMC). In this
article, we continue this integrative approach by examining individual differences in
WMC in terms of a general framework of memory that combines a flexible attentional
component with a cue-dependent search mechanism (e.g., Davelaar, Goshen-Gottstein,
Ashkenazi, Haarmann, & Usher, 2005; Raaijmakers & Shiffrin, 1980, 1981). We
combine our previous work arguing for a link between active maintenance and WMC
(Engle & Kane, 2004) with newer work arguing for a link between controlled cue-
dependent search and WMC (Unsworth & Engle, in press). Below, we review the
importance of individual differences in WMC and present a general framework within
12

which to interpret individual differences in WMC. Finally, we present evidence from a
new experiment supporting such a view.
Individual Differences in WMC
Given the need to keep information accessible over brief intervals, several memory
theorists have given considerable thought to how a system might go about maintaining
information and in what tasks such a system would be needed. Atkinson and Shiffrin
(1971) and Baddeley and Hitch (1974), among others, argued for a dynamic memory
system where the function of immediate memory was to carry out cognitive operations
important for a wide variety of tasks. Specifically, Baddeley and Hitch (1974) argued for
a memory system that could simultaneously manipulate the current contents of memory
as well as update
information in memory to accomplish task goals. The functional nature of this system is
apparent when one needs to maintain information over the short term in such diverse
tasks as reading comprehension and matrix reasoning. Given the need for such a system
for higher order cognitive processes like reasoning and reading, researchers began to
hypothesize that individual variation in the system should be related to performance on
other cognitive tasks. Beginning with the work of Daneman and Carpenter (1980),
researchers have attempted to examine aspects of the working memory model by
examining individual differences in working memory and their relation to higher order
cognition. Daneman and Carpenter created a complex memory span task known as
reading span in which participants were required to read a series of sentences and try to
remember the last word of each sentence for later recall. Thus, the task required
participants to store information (words) over a short time span while at the same time
engaging in a processing activity (reading). The idea was that this task measured the
working memory system that gives rise to complex behavior better than a simple memory
span task in which. Participants are required to remember items without a secondary
processing task (e.g., word span). Daneman and Carpenter showed that the complex
reading span task did a better job of predicting reading comprehension scores than did the
simple memory span task. Accordingly, Daneman and Carpenter argued that working
memory was a better predictor of complex cognitive activities than simple short-term
memory. Following the lead of Daneman and Carpenter (1980), additional work has
shown that these complex memory span tasks predict performance on a number of higher
order cognitive tasks. These included demonstrations that variation in WMC is related to
variation in vocabulary learning (Daneman & Green, 1986), computer language learning
13

(Kyllonen & Stephens, 1990; Shute, 1991), as well as performance on standardized
aptitude tests such as the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT; Turner & Engle, 1989).
Furthermore, a large body of literature has been devoted to examining the link between
measures of WMC and measures of fluid abilities (Ackerman, Beier, & Boyle, 2002;
Conway, Cowan, Bunting, Therriault, & Minkoff, 2002; Engle, Tuholski, Laughlin,&
Conway, 1999; Kane et al., 2004; Kyllonen & Christal, 1990; Unsworth & Engle, 2005).
Each of these studies has shown that variation in WMC is important in a host of higher
order cognitive tasks.
The Working Memory Problem
Although the previous review suggests that WMC is important in a number of domains,
working memory as a system is not needed in all cognitive operations. For instance, many
cognitive operations that people engage in on a daily basis can be carried out in a fairly
automatic fashion with little or no reliance on a working memory system (e.g., James,
1890; Posner & Snyder, 1975; Schneider & Shiffrin, 1977). Take, for instance, the simple
example of driving to work. Chances are that one generally takes the same route nearly
every day to work. After many days, weeks, months, and even years, driving to work
becomes fairly automatized. One does not need to think about what lane to get in or
where to turn and so forth. These basic routines can be retrieved almost effortlessly from
memory and allow one to talk on a cell phone, fiddle with the radio, or adjust the levels of
heat while driving. A general working memory system is needed, however, when current
task goals conflict with these automatic tendencies. For example, assume that today one is
supposed to drive to the dentist office before going to work. In such a case, it is critically
important to keep the task goal actively maintained in order to override the automatic
response of driving to work. If one loses maintenance to the task goal of driving to the
dentist while captured by a song on the radio, it is likely that one will find oneself
halfway to work. In a broad sense then, working memory is engaged when control is
needed to overcome automatic tendencies. In particular, working memory is needed to
maintain new and novel information in a heightened state of activity. This is particularly
needed when there is considerable external (e.g., music on the radio, child in the backseat
crying, etc.) and internal (e.g., ruminations about a fight with ones spouse last night,
what to have for dinner tonight, etc.) distraction and interference. Additionally, given that
it is unlikely that people can maintain a great deal of information indefinitely, working
memory will also be needed to retrieve information that could not be maintained. In
particular, this information will likely have to be retrieved in the presence of irrelevant
14

information that interferes proactively with the relevant information. For instance, in the
above example, information associated with driving to work is not relevant for driving to
the dentist office, but because it usually is relevant, it competes for access with the
currently relevant information of driving to the dentist. Thus, what is critical is the ability
to correctly discriminate between relevant (e.g., routines associated with driving to the
dentist) and irrelevant (e.g., routines associated with driving to work) information in
regard to a current task goal. This discrimination process likely relies on contextual cues
to determine what is relevant versus irrelevant (e.g., Capaldi & Neath, 1995). On most
days, driving to work is the correct response; however, in the current context of needing
to drive to the dentist, information associated with driving to work becomes the irrelevant
information. Thus, the current context defines what is relevant versus irrelevant. In such a
situation, it is critically important that the contextual cues activate only that information
that is currently relevant. Any noise in the contextual cues increases the probability that
the relevant information is not found and instead irrelevant information is retrieved.
Working memory limitations arise, then, from the inability to actively maintain
information and the inability to retrieve task relevant information in the presence of
highly interfering competitors.


15

Jurnal
Current Recruitment and Selection Practices:
A National Survey of Fortune 1000 Firms
Chris Piotrowski
University of West Florida, USA
This study reports the findings of survey data on recruitment and preemployment
selection methods in use by human resources departments in, major companies in the
USA. In addition, data on use of online preemployment tests, currently and in the near
term future, were also collected. The analysis is based on responses from 151 firms. The
findings indicate that the majority of companies rely on traditional recruitment and
personnel selection techniques over the use of online assessment instruments. Personality
testing is popular in about 20% of the firms and one-fifth of the respondents plan to
implement online testing in the future. Furthermore, screening for honesty-integrity
(28.5%) and violence potential (22%) was found to be somewhat popular. It would be
helpful if future research could pinpoint the reservations that companies have about
online preemployment tests. Psychological tests and assessment instruments that tap
prospective employees' personality, interpersonal style, and response to stress situations
have received increased attention from both human resource professionals and
researchers in I/O psychology over the past 20 years (e.g., Gatewood & Feild, 1998; Ryan
& Sackett, 1987). Indeed, the nexus between personality factors and personnel selection
and placement has spawned major investigatory efforts, conceptual reformulations, and
pragmatic applications in both research and practice (Hogan, 2001; Landy et al., 1997).
Moreover, to enhance the chances for successful recruitment and long-term benefits for
employers, a plethora of
research studies has investigated and endorsed the utility of the 'person-fit' paradigm
(Anderson et al., 2004; Chan, 2005; Hollenbeck et al., 2002). However, there has been
recent concern and thoughtful discussion on the potential threat of unscientific claims
about personnel selection methods that include personality testing on the Internet and the
use.
490 NORTH AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGY
online testing for selection purposes specifically (see Anderson et al., 2004, for a
discussion). At the same time, and largely based on the public's acceptance of the Internet
and related technological applications, both public and private companies, including
governmental agencies, are re-thinking traditional personnel selection processes and
16

recruiting methods (e.g., Mooney, 2002). Yet several feature articles in human resource
publications, while touting the benefits of online testing of job applicants, caution that
online selection firms are not regulated. Moreover, most person job-fit tests have not been
standardized, lack norms, and developers have not presented predictive validity data on
their selection measures (Barbian, 2001; Bates, 2002). Undoubtedly, these concems about
personnel testing on the World Wide Web have attracted the attention of rigorous
research efforts by scholars worldwide and the findings are receiving coverage in peer-
reviewed journals (e.g.,Bartram, 2004; Ployhart, Weekley, Holtz, & Kemp, 2003).
However, in the contemporary business environment, companies are faced with a critical
challenge to recruit and retain qualified employees (Langan, 2000). Thus, it appears that
companies now have at their disposal a conceptually sound framework (person job-fit)
and a cost-effective, speedy, and convenient system (online testing) to meet their
personnel selection needs in a highly competitive environment. However, recent reviews
of the literature report that employers continue to rely on traditional (i.e., general IQ,
integrity, structured interviews, wbrksamples, references, official transcripts) methods for
personnel selecition (see Schmidt & Hunter, 1998; Wilk & Cappelli, 2003). To obtain a
clearer perspective on these issues, the current study was designed to obtain empirical
data from major companies in the U.S.A. on the extent of their use of traditional selection
techniques and use (if any) of online personality testing for selection and hiring purposes.
Since companies tend to be guarded on sharing information about practices and policy
regarding personnel selection, our intent was to keep queries short and direct.
Accordingly, our results, by design, are conceptually limited and the findings should be
considered exploratory in nature.