Developments in Selection Methods Have Led to a More Scientific Approach to the Design of Selection Events. Critically Evaluate the Contribution and Validity of a Range of Methods of Employee Selection.

Introduction

With technological advances, selection methods are becoming more and more scientific in order for employers to hire candidates who are better suited for specific job roles. This report will assess how developments that have occurred within selection methods have led to a more scientific approach to the design of selection events, whilst providing a critical evaluation of the validity and contribution of the chosen selection methods.

According to Leopold et al (2002), selection is defined as “the process of choosing the appropriate candidates both able and willing to fill the vacancy”. In order for an organisation to be successful, they must have employees who fit their specific job role well and can perform their job in an effective and efficient way at an optimum cost, and using the correct selection methods when recruiting will ensure that only candidates who are most suited for the job role are employed. In order to hire the right candidates, the selection methods that are chosen must have a high validity. The validity of selection methods is determined by face validity, content validity and predictive validity (Ree et al 2010). There are many different ways an employer may wish to select candidates such as assessment centers, ability tests, personality tests and interviews, all of which will be covered in this report.

Selection methods

Interviews

One of the most commonly used forms of selection methods are interviews, the most popular being competency interviews, followed by interviews used in conjunction with a CV or an application form, and then structured panel interviews (CIPD 2009). An interview when being used as a selection method is where a candidate and the interviewer exchange information in regards to the candidate themselves, the candidate's interest in the applied job role, and their suitability for the role. Even though the use of interviews are one of the oldest forms of selection methods used today, they are still the most popular because they serve a number of purposes. They provide the employer with the opportunity to learn more about a candidate, to assess the candidate's knowledge and skills and to assess the candidate's experience, whilst also benefiting the applicant by providing them with a greater insight into the job and the specific roles and tasks that are to be expected of them to perform should they succeed in their application, to which the candidates can then make a better decision as to whether or not they should accept the job role. (Banfield and Kay 2012).

Although interviews are one of the most popular selection methods used, many different studies and research carried out on this selection method shows that they lack in validity. Wagner (1949), carried out a study on interviews and his research showed that the validity of interviews, from 222 results gained, ranged from a correlation coefficient (r) of r = 0.09 to r = 0.94, with a median of r = 0.27 (Bratton and Gold 2012). Wagner concluded these results as unsatisfactory and believed that other forms of selection methods would be more beneficial to order for organisations to select the correct candidate.

One of the reasons as to why the validity of interviews are seen to be low is due to perceptual bias. According to Leopold et al (2012), it is widely believed that a decision as to whether the applicant is successful or not is usually made within the first 3 minutes of the interview due to their first impressions. Also known as the ‘halo effect’ when the first impression is positive, or the ‘horns effect’ when the first impression is negative, the interview outcome can be easily distorted dependant of the interviewers preferences and thus not giving the candidate a fair opportunity, decreasing the overall validity of the interview. This can be overcome by: having more than one interviewer which will add different perceptions and judgements to the overall decision, and also by giving the interviewer(s) the correct training on how to conduct interviews correctly in order to make a more informed decision based on information given throughout the interview, not just the beginning (Leopold et al 2012).

The way the interview is structured may also influence the validity of the selection method. If the interview is carried out in an unstructured format, the interviewer has the advantage of gaining a greater insight into the candidate, however using this method will decrease the validity of the interview as not all of the information that is needed may be obtained in order to make an informed decision. By having a structured format to the interview, the probability that the candidate is discriminated, whether it be race, gender, or sexual orientation is decreased (Zlatar 2015). Secondly, by using a structured format, the overall selection process will increase in reliability because every candidate will undergo the same interview with the same questions. When creating a structured interview, organisations tend to build their interview template using W.A.S.P, meaning: Welcome, Acquire information from candidate, Supply details of the job, Parting and what will happen next (Leopold et al 2012). By using this method, organisations will be able to obtain the same data from each candidate and will able to compare each of the candidates. The overall validity of interviews can be increased in many different ways, however, as John Leopold (2012) states “the main problems lie not with the interview as such, but the interviewer”.

Assessment centers

An assessment center is a selection method whereby a number of other different selection methods are used in conjunction with one another in order to assess many different aspects of candidates applying for a specific job. The assessment normally involves a number of assessors overseeing the performances of candidates whilst they perform different exercises and tasks chosen by the organisation. The contents of assessment centers can vary from each organisation depending on what they feel is necessary to include in regards to the job they are offering. The IRS (2007) state in their report that the majority of assessment centers take place during just one day of intense testing, however in some cases they can take up to five days to complete. Some of the activities that occur within assessment centers include:

Group exercises/ discussions.

Psychological tests.

Interviews.

Peer/ self assessment.

Work simulations