Selection Methods

 

Once the job has been advertised and applications have flooded in, the next step is to filter out the people not suitable for the job. Then, when you have the right candidates, how do you eliminate the others to find the right candidate?

The main selection methods used are:

·         Mental and Physical Ability (IQ) Tests

·         Achievement Tests

·         Employment Interview

·         Reference Checks

·         Assessment Centres

Mental and physical ability tests (IQ)

When properly applied, ability tests are among the most useful and valid tools available for predicting success in jobs and training across a wide variety of occupations. Ability tests are most commonly used for entry-level jobs, and for applicants without professional training or advanced degrees. Mental ability tests are generally used to measure the ability to learn and perform particular job responsibilities.

Examples of some mental abilities are verbal, quantitative, and spatial abilities. Physical ability tests usually encompass abilities such as strength, endurance, and flexibility.

• General ability tests typically measure one or more broad mental abilities, such as verbal, mathematical, and reasoning skills. These skills are fundamental to success in many different kinds of jobs, especially where cognitive activities such as reading, computing, analysing, or communicating are involved.
• Specific ability tests include measures of distinct physical and mental abilities, such as reaction time, written comprehension, mathematical reasoning, and mechanical ability, that are important for many jobs and occupations. For example, good mechanical ability may be important for success in auto mechanic and engineering jobs; physical endurance may be critical for fire fighting jobs.

Although mental ability tests are valid predictors of performance in many jobs, use of such tests to make employment decisions often results in adverse impact. For example, research suggests that mental abilities tests adversely impact some racial minority groups and, if speed is also a component of the test, older workers may be adversely impacted. Similarly, use of physical ability tests often results in adverse impact against women and older persons.

 

Achievement tests

 

Achievement tests, also known as proficiency tests, are frequently used to measure an individual's current knowledge or skills that are important to a particular job. These tests generally fall into one of the following formats:

• Knowledge tests typically involve specific questions to determine how much the individual knows about particular job tasks and responsibilities. Traditionally they have been administered in a paper-and-pencil format, but computer administration is becoming more common. Licensing exams for accountants and psychologists are examples of knowledge tests. Knowledge tests tend to have relatively high validity.
• Work-sample or performance tests require the individual to actually demonstrate or perform one or more job tasks. These tests, by their makeup, generally show a high degree of job-relatedness. For example, an applicant for an office-machine repairman position may be asked to diagnose the problem with a malfunctioning machine. Test takers generally view these tests as fairer than other types of tests. Use of these tests often results in less adverse impact than mental ability tests and job knowledge tests. However, they can be expensive to develop and administer.

 

Employment interviews

 

The most common assessment tool, the interview can range from being totally unplanned, that is, unstructured, to carefully designed beforehand, that is, completely structured. The most structured interviews have characteristics such as standardized questions, trained interviewers, specific question order, controlled length of time, and a standardized response evaluation format.

 

At the other end of the spectrum, a completely unstructured interview would probably be done "off the cuff," with untrained interviewers, random questions, and with no consideration of time. A structured interview that is based on an analysis of the job in question is generally a more valid predictor of job performance than an unstructured interview. Keep in mind that interviews may contain both structured and unstructured characteristics.

 

Regardless of the extent to which the interview is structured or unstructured, the skill of the interviewer can make a difference in the quality of the information gathered. A skilful, trained interviewer will be able to ask job-relevant follow-up questions to clarify and explore issues brought up during the interview.

 

It is unlawful to ask questions about medical conditions and disability before a conditional job offer. Even if the job applicant volunteers such information, you are not permitted to pursue inquiries about the nature of the medical condition or disability. Instead, refocus the interview so that emphasis is on the ability of the applicant to perform the job, not on the disability. In some limited circumstances, you may ask about the need for reasonable accommodation.

Where disability is concerned, the law requires that employers provide reasonable accommodations (meaning a modification or adjustment) to a job, the work environment or the way things are usually done so that qualified individuals with a disability are not excluded from jobs that they can perform.

 

These legal requirements apply to all selection standards and procedures, including questions and rating systems used during the interview process.

Following a structured interview format can help interviewers avoid unlawful or inappropriate inquiries where medical conditions, disability, and age are concerned.

 

Reference checks

 

Reference checks are often used to verify education, employment, and achievement records already provided by the applicant in some other form, such as during an interview or on a resume or application form. This is primarily done for professional and high-level jobs.

These verification procedures generally do not help separate potentially good workers from poor workers. This is because they almost always result in positive reports. However, use of these measures may serve two important purposes

• They provide an incentive to applicants to be more honest with the information they provide
• They safeguard against potential negligent hiring lawsuits.

Assessment centres

 

In the assessment centre approach, candidates are generally assessed with a wide variety of instruments and procedures. These could include interviews, ability and personality measures, and a range of standardized management activities and problem-solving exercises. Typical of these activities and exercises are in-basket tests, leaderless group discussions, and role-play exercises. Assessment centres are most widely used for managerial and high level positions to assess managerial potential, promotability, problem-solving skills, and decision-making skills.

• In-basket tests ask the candidates to sort through a manager's "in-basket" of letters, memos, directives, and reports describing problems and scenarios. Candidates are asked to examine them, prioritise them, and respond appropriately with memos, action plans, and problem-solving strategies. Trained assessors then evaluate the candidates' responses.
• Leaderless group discussions are group exercises in which a group of candidates is asked to respond to various kinds of problems and scenarios, without a designated group leader. Candidates are evaluated on their behaviour in the group discussions. This might include their teamwork skills, their interaction with others, or their leadership skills.
• In role-play exercises, candidates are asked to pretend that they already have the job and must interact with another employee to solve a problem. The other employee is usually a trained assessor. The exercise may involve providing a solution to a problem that the employee presents, or suggesting some course of action regarding a hypothetical situation. Candidates are evaluated on the behaviour displayed, solutions provided, or advice given.

Assessors must be appropriately trained. Their skills and experience are essential to the quality of the evaluations they provide. Assessment centres apply the whole-person approach to personnel assessment. They can be very good predictors of job performance and behaviour when the tests and procedures making up the assessment centre are constructed and used appropriately.

 

It can be costly to set up an assessment centre. Large companies may have their own assessment centres; mid-size and smaller firms sometimes send candidates to private consulting firms for evaluation.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Advantages and Disadvantages of Different Types of Assessment Instruments
Type of assessment instrument	Advantages	Disadvantages
Mental Ability tests (IQ)	Are among the most useful predictors of performance across a wide variety of jobs Are usually easy and inexpensive to administer	Use of ability tests can result in high levels of adverse impact Physical ability tests can be costly to develop and administer
Achievement/ proficiency tests	In general, job knowledge and work-sample tests have relatively high validity Job knowledge tests are generally easy and inexpensive to administer Work-sample tests usually result in less adverse impact than ability tests and written knowledge tests	Written job knowledge tests can result in adverse impact Work-sample tests can be expensive to develop and administer
Employment interviews	Structured interviews, based on job analyses, tend to be valid May reduce adverse impact if used in conjunction with other tests	Unstructured interviews typically have poor validity Skill of the interviewer is critical to the quality of interview (interviewer training can help)
Reference checks	Can be used to verify information previously provided by applicants Can serve as protection against potential negligent hiring lawsuits May encourage applicants to provide more accurate information	Reports are almost always positive; they do not typically help differentiate between good workers and poor workers
Assessment Centres	Good predictors of job and training performance, managerial potential, and leadership ability Apply the whole-person approach to personnel assessment	Can be expensive to develop and administer Specialized training required for assessors; their skill is essential to the quality of assessment centres