SEGISMUNDO, ISABELLE

CHAPTER FIVE I METHODS FOR ASSESSING AND SELECTING EMPLOYEES

EMPLOYEE SCREENING-process of reviewing information about job applicants to select individuals for the job
- Evaluation of Written Materials
o Evaluation of written materials (application forms and resumes)
 Standard application forms=lower level positions
 Resume=higher level positions (provide biographical data and other information)
 Impressions from written materials are very important
 Should only collect information related to the job
o Main Purpose: collect biographical information
o Submitted online
o Data are believed to be among the best predictors of future job performance
o Research: work experience can be measured qualitatively and quantitatively
o Difficulty: evaluating and interpreting information obtained to determine who is most qualified
o Weighted Application Forms- forms that assign different weights to the various pieces of
information provided on a job application
 Weights are determined by research (relationship between specific bits of biodata and
criteria of success on the job)
o Work Sample- consists of written sample (or a portfolio)
- References and Letters of Recommendation
o Provides four types of information:
 Employment and educational history
 Evaluations of the applicant’s character
 Evaluations of the applicant’s job performance
 Recommender’s willingness to rehire the applicant
o Limits:
 Unlikely that applicants will ask people that might give them bad recommendations
(tended to be distorted in a positive direction)
 Companies refuse to provide any kind of reference for former employees (organizations
forgo the use of reference check and recommendations)
o Still widely used in graduate schools
 Improving the effectiveness:
 Forms that ask the recommender to rate the applicants on different dimensions
 Graphic rating scales to help quantify recommendation
 Having the applicants waive their rights to see the letter
o Background checks
 Positions in law enforcement, jobs with children and other vulnerable positions,
government agencies
 Routinely done to protect employers from litigation
- Employment Testing
o Use some form of employment tests to measure a wide range of characteristics that are
predictive of successful job performance
 Examples: Specific skills/abilities, general cognitive skills, personality dimensions
 SEGISMUNDO, ISABELLE

o Considerations in Developing and Using of Personnel Screening and Testing Methods

 Reliability
 The consistency of a measurement instruments or its stability over time
 Agreement between two or more assessments made of the same
event/behavior
 Can we depend on a set od measurements to be stable and consistence
 Methods to establish:
 Test-Retest Reliability: a particular test/other measurement instrument is
administered to the same individual at two different times, usually
involving a one-to two week interval between testing sessions
 Parallel Forms: two equivalent tests are constructed, each of which
presumably measures the same construct but using different
items/questions
 Time consuming and difficult to create 2 equivalent tests
 Internal Consistency: Examines how various items of the instrument
correlate
 Split-Half Reliability: divide the items into two parts and correlate
the summed score on the first half with the second half
 Cronbach’s Alpha: average intercorrelation among all the items of
the test
 Validity
 Accuracy of inferences or projections we draw from measurements
 Whether a set of measurements allow accurate inferences/projections about the
construct
 Quality of specific inferences or projections
 Can depend on what criterion is being predicted
 Facets:
 Content Validity: the ability of items in a measurement instrument to
measure adequately the various characteristics needed to perform a job
 Established by having experts judge the appropriateness of test
items
 Construct Validity: whether an employment test measures what it is
supposed to measures
 Convergent Validity: tests correlate with the results of other tests
of the same construct
 Divergent Validity: test should not correlate with tests or
measures of constructs that are totally unrelated to it
 Criterion-related Validity: the accuracy of a measurement instrument in
determining the relationship between scores on the instrument and
some criterion
 Follow-Up Method: screening test is administered without
interpreting scores and without using them to select applicants -->
test scores should correlate with criterion measure
 SEGISMUNDO, ISABELLE

 Advantage: demonstrates how scores relate to future job

performance
 Drawback: time consuming
 Present-Employee Method: test is given to current employees and
their scores are correlated with criterion of their current
performance
 Advantage: quicker estimate of validity
 Drawback: may not be as accurate
 All measures should be reliable and valid
o Types of Employee Screening Tests
 Majority are standardized tests, most contain information to ensure that they are
administered, scored and interpreted in a uniform manner
 Alternative: Construct a test (time consuming and expensive)
 Test Formats:
 Individual VS Group Tests
 Individual: only one person at a time, administrator is more involved,
typically require some sophisticated apparatus
 Group: given simultaneously, administrator only monitors
 Advantage: reduced cost of administrator time
 More are administered online
 Speed VS Power Tests
 Speed: fixed time limit, number of items completed in the time period
 Power: have sufficient time to complete all items, focus on the
percentage of items answered correctly
 Paper-and-pencil VS Performance Tests
 Paper-and-pencil: both paper versions and online tests
 Performance: involve the manipulation of physical objects
 Classify according to: characteristics/attributes they measure, cognitive abilities,
mechanical abilities, motor and sensory abilities, job skills and knowledge, personality
traits
 Biodata
 Background information and personal characteristics that can be used in
employee selection
 May include items designed to measure basic biographical information
but may also include personal ones
 No standard biodata instruments
 Designed to screen for certain jobs (typically higher level ones)
 Problem: personal nature of many questions, possibility of unintentional
discrimination
 Only be developed and administered by professionals
 Cognitive Ability Tests
 Range from tests of general intellectual ability to tests of specific
cognitive skills
 SEGISMUNDO, ISABELLE

 Example: Otis Self-Administering Test of Mental Ability, Wonderlic

Personnel Tests
 Designed to screen applicants for jobs such as clerks, assembly workers,
machine operators and frontline supervisors
 Criticism: measure cognitive skills that are too general to be effective
predictors of specific job-related skills (research does not support this)
 Some evidence that tests may favor the economically and educationally
advantaged (fear of discrimination)
 Mechanical Ability Tests
 To measure identifying, recognizing, and applying mechanical principles
 Screen: positions that require operating/repairing machinery,
construction jobs and engineering positions
 Example: Bennett Mechanical Comprehension Test
 Motor and Sensory Ability Tests
 Measure specific motor skills or sensory skills
 Example: Crawford Small Parts Dexterity Test, Purdue Pegboard
 Sensory ability tests include tests of hearing, visual acuity and perceptual
discrimination
 Example: Snellen Eye Chart
 Job Skills and Knowledge Test
 Assess specific job skills or domains of job knowledge
 Example: Judd Tests
 Work Sample Tests- measures applicants’ abilities to perform brief
examples of some of the critical tasks that the job requires
 Adv: Job related
 Dis: Expensive to develop and time consuming
 Also serves as Realistic Job Preview
 Job Knowledge Tests- instruments that assess specific types of knowledge
required to perform a job
 Personality Tests
 Designed to measure certain psychological characteristics of workers
 Match personality characteristics of applicants with those of successful
workers
 Examples: Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory, California
Psychological Inventory
 Asses the “normal” characteristics that are deemed to be important for
the performance of certain jobs
 Trend: toward developing personality tests that more specifically
measure job-related aspects of personality; use of personality tests in
screening and selection
 Emotional Intelligence-ability to understand, regulate and communicate
emotions and use them to inform thinking
 Honesty and Integrity Tests
 SEGISMUNDO, ISABELLE

 Polygraphs- instruments that measure physiological reactions presumed

to accompany deceptions
 Not valid
 Integrity Tests- measures of honest or dishonest attitudes and/or
behaviors
 Typically ask about past honest/dishonest behavior or about
attitudes condoning dishonest behavior
 Other Employee Screening Tests
 Drug Use
 Handwriting Analysis
o Effectiveness of Employee Screening Tests
 Critics: low validity coefficients of certain tests
 Supporters: comparison of all screening methods reveals that they are the best
predictors of job performance
 Most effective when a number of instruments are used in combination
 Test Battery- a combination of employment tests used to increase the ability to predict
future job performance
 Validity Generalization- the ability to predict performance in a job or setting different
from the one in which the test was validated
 High Validity Generalization= Increase usefulness
 Test Utility- value of a screening test in determining important outcomes
 Determines the success of a test
 Issues:
 Ethics (protecting the privacy of the person taking it)
 Faking-purposely distorting one’s responses to a test to try and beat it
 Not easily done:
 Subscales exist to determine faking
 Difficult which is the correct response
 High Validity
- Assessment Centers
o A detailed, structured evaluation of job applicants using a variety of instruments and
techniques
o Used to select managers and used for managerial development purposes
o Applicants are evaluated on a number of job-related variables using a variety of techniques
o Situational Exercises- assessment tools that require performance of tasks that approximate
actual work tasks
 In-Basket Test-applicants deal with a stack of memos, letters and other materials
 Dis: difficult to score and interpret
 Leaderless Group Discussion-how each applicant handles the situation and who
emerges as a discussion leader
 Others: Make a presentation, role-play, engage in team exercises
o Result: Vary detailed profile of each applicant
o Dis: huge investment of time and resources
 SEGISMUNDO, ISABELLE

- Hiring Interviews
o Problem with validity: interviews are conducted haphazardly, no structure
o Situational Interview-asks interviewees how they would deal with specific job-related
hypothetical situations
o Behavior Description Interview-asks interviewees to draw on past job incidents and behaviors
to deal with hypothetical future work situations
o Increase in use of videoconference
o 3 Objectives:
 Fill in gaps of information and to measure factors available in face to face encounters
 Provide applicants with realistic job previews
 Public Relations functions
o Concerns:
 Free-wheeling affairs
 Interviewers do more of the talking
 Reliability
 Different interviewers->different evaluations
 Fatigue may impact applicants’ performance
 Validity
 Interviewer Bias
 Snap judgment-arriving at a premature, early overall evaluation of an
applicant in a hiring interview
 Contrast Effect-all subsequent applicants may be evaluated by comparing
them to earlier applicants
 Affected by communication/social skills