The document analyzes several common selection methods used in hiring and evaluates them based on reliability, validity, generalizability, utility, and legality. It provides assessments of interviews, reference checks, biographical information, physical ability tests, cognitive ability tests, personalities inventories, work samples tests, honesty/integrity tests, and drug tests.
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0 ratings0% found this document useful (0 votes)
11 views2 pages
Analysis of Selection Methods
The document analyzes several common selection methods used in hiring and evaluates them based on reliability, validity, generalizability, utility, and legality. It provides assessments of interviews, reference checks, biographical information, physical ability tests, cognitive ability tests, personalities inventories, work samples tests, honesty/integrity tests, and drug tests.
Interviews Low when Low if Low Low, especially Low because of subjectivity and unstructured and unstructured and because of potential interviewer bias; also lack when assessing non- non-behavioral expense of validity make job-relatedness low observable traits Reference Low, especially when Low because of Low Low, although Those writing letters may be Checks obtained from letters lack of range in not expensive to concerned with charges of libel evaluations obtain Biographical High test-retest, High criterion Usually job High; May have adverse impact: thus Information especially for related validity; specific, but have inexpensive way often develop separate scoring keys verifiable low in content been successfully to collect vast based on sex and race information validity developed for amounts of many job types potentially relevant data Physical Ability High Moderate criterion Low; pertain only Moderate for Often have adverse impact on Tests related validity; to physically some physical women and people with disabilities; high content demanding jobs jobs; may need to establish job-relatedness validity for some prevent jobs expensive injuries and disability Cognitive Ability High Moderate criterion High; predictive High; low cost Research indicates adverse impact Tests related validity for most jobs, and wide on minority groups in the United content validation although best for application States although decreasing over inappropriate complex jobs across diverse time jobs in companies Personalities High Low to moderate Low; few traits Low, although Low because of cultural and sex Inventories criterion related predictive for inexpensive for differences on most traits, and low validity for most many jobs, except jobs where job-relatedness in general traits; content conscientiousness specific traits validation are relevant inappropriate Method Reliability Validity Generalizability Utility Legality Work- Sample High High criterion and Usually job High, despite High because of low adverse impact Tests content validity specific, but have the relatively and high job-relatedness been successfully high cost to developed for develop many job types Honesty/ Insufficient Insufficient Insufficient Inexpensive, but No apparent legislative barriers; Integrity Tests independent independent independent insufficient however, one human rights evidence evidence evidence independent complaint filed in Nova Scotia in the evidence late 1990’s Drug Tests Low; often unreliable Low due to lack of Low due to lack Expensive, but To meet legal scrutiny, testing policy and many are reliability of reliability and perceived to must have a clear and legitimate considered validity yield high purpose; highly invasive and violates inaccurate regarding payoffs for human rights unless a direct current impairment health and relationship to job performance or usage level; safety -related exits; also risks being discriminatory conditions under risks to which test is organization; administered can must first also affect reliability establish direct relationship to job to justify testing
Reference
Noe, Raymond, John Hollenbeck, Barry Gerhart, Patrick Wright and Linda Eligh. (2016) Strategic Human Resource Management. McGraw Hill Ryerson, Toronto, Canada.
Raza Et Al. (2021) - Citizen Journalism Practices During COVID-19 in Spotlight - Influence of User-Generated Contents About Economic Policies in Perceiving Government Performance