STAFFING

KEY ASSUMPTIONSKEY ASSUMPTIONS

People differPeople differ Jobs differJobs differ Goal?Goal?

RequiresRequires

EVALUATING METHODS/PREDICTORS

EVALUATING METHODS/PREDICTORS

PracticalityPracticality LegalityLegality AccuracyAccuracy

ReliabilityReliability ValidityValidity

Applicant reactionsApplicant reactions

CORRELATION COEFFICIENTCORRELATION COEFFICIENT

How Big is Big Enough?How Big is Big Enough?

Sample Size Minimum r 5 .88 10 .63 15 .51 20 .44 25 .40 30 .36 35 .33 40 .31 50 .27 70 .23 100 .19

RELIABILITYRELIABILITY

How accurately the tool measures the attributeHow accurately the tool measures the attribute The extent to which it is free of errorThe extent to which it is free of error

The degree of dependability, consistency or The degree of dependability, consistency or stability of measurement of a measurestability of measurement of a measure

Reliability coefficient = % of obtained score Reliability coefficient = % of obtained score due to true scoredue to true score

TYPES OF RELIABILITYTYPES OF RELIABILITY

Test-retest reliabilityTest-retest reliability Assesses stability over time/situationsAssesses stability over time/situations

Internal consistency reliabilityInternal consistency reliability Assesses sampling error/consistency of contentAssesses sampling error/consistency of content

Parallel forms reliabilityParallel forms reliability Assesses equivalence of measuresAssesses equivalence of measures

VALIDITYVALIDITY

The extent to which a staffing method The extent to which a staffing method predicts one or more important criterion predicts one or more important criterion

Primary method of demonstrating job-Primary method of demonstrating job-relatednessrelatedness

Reliability vs. validity?Reliability vs. validity?

METHODS OF VALIDATIONMETHODS OF VALIDATION

Criterion (Empirical)Criterion (Empirical) Showing a statistical relationship between scores and job Showing a statistical relationship between scores and job

performance.performance. Two approaches: Concurrent or predictiveTwo approaches: Concurrent or predictive Limitations?Limitations?

ContentContent Showing a logical relationship between predictor content and Showing a logical relationship between predictor content and

job contentjob content Limitations?Limitations?

Validity generalizationValidity generalization

APPLICANT REACTIONSAPPLICANT REACTIONS

Applicants perceptions of fairness influence Applicants perceptions of fairness influence job acceptance and subsequent performancejob acceptance and subsequent performance

What influences perceived fairness?What influences perceived fairness?

True Validities of Predictors For Entry-Level Jobs

Cognitive Ability Test .51 Job Knowledge Test .48 Work Sample .46 Interview (structured) .44 Biographical Inventory .35 Reference Checks .26 Personality Inventories ~.23 Experience Ratings .18 Interview (unstructured) .14 (.31) Academic Achievement .11 Interest Inventories .10

For Promotions Work Sample .54 Cognitive Ability Test .53 Peer Ratings .49 Experience Ratings .49 Job Knowledge Test .48 Assessment Center .43

Arguments Against Personality

Conscientiousness

Descriptors:Descriptors: Organized, Systematic, Thorough, Practical, Organized, Systematic, Thorough, Practical,

Neat, Efficient, Careful, SteadyNeat, Efficient, Careful, Steady NOT Careless, Undependable, Haphazard, NOT Careless, Undependable, Haphazard,

Sloppy Sloppy Most consistent personality predictor of Most consistent personality predictor of

performanceperformance Also predicts lack of problem behaviorAlso predicts lack of problem behavior

Emotional Stability

DescriptorsDescriptors NOT Anxious, Moody, Temperamental, NOT Anxious, Moody, Temperamental,

Emotional, Nervous, Touchy, FearfulEmotional, Nervous, Touchy, Fearful May predict job performance in jobs…May predict job performance in jobs…

Agreeableness

DescriptorsDescriptors Kind, Cooperative, Sympathetic, Warm, Kind, Cooperative, Sympathetic, Warm,

Trustful, Considerate, Pleasant, HelpfulTrustful, Considerate, Pleasant, Helpful May predict job performance in jobs…May predict job performance in jobs…

Extraversion

DescriptorsDescriptors Talkative, Assertive, Verbal, Energetic, Bold, Talkative, Assertive, Verbal, Energetic, Bold,

Active, DaringActive, Daring May predict job performance in…May predict job performance in…

The Cognitive Ability Test Dilemma

1. Differences between groups’ average test scores1. Differences between groups’ average test scores ~1 SD difference for Blacks~1 SD difference for Blacks ~.75 SD for Hispanics~.75 SD for Hispanics

But what do these differences mean?But what do these differences mean?

Definitions of Test “Fairness”

•Differential Validity?•Test Bias?•Test is fair

Definitions of Test “Fairness”

2. 2. Differential ValidityDifferential Validity: Group differences in : Group differences in validity of testvalidity of test

White

Black

Test Scores

JobPerf

Definitions of Test “Fairness”

3. Test Bias3. Test Bias: Group differences in predicted : Group differences in predicted job performance with same cutoff scorejob performance with same cutoff score

Black

Test Scores

JobPerf

White

Typical CA Test Situation

Adverse ImpactAdverse Impact No differential validityNo differential validity No test biasNo test bias

White

Black

Test Scores

JobPerf

OPTIONS?

Basic Assumptions

Negligent Hiring

A violation of an employer’s common law A violation of an employer’s common law duty to protect its employees and customers duty to protect its employees and customers from injury by hiring an employee it knew from injury by hiring an employee it knew (or should have known) posed a threat of (or should have known) posed a threat of risk.risk.

Defamation of Character

The offense of injuring a person’s character, The offense of injuring a person’s character, fame, or reputation by fame, or reputation by falsefalse and and maliciousmalicious statementsstatements

Negligent ReferralNegligent Referral

Companies may be liable for not fully and Companies may be liable for not fully and truthfully disclosing knowledge about a past truthfully disclosing knowledge about a past employee’s potential for causing harmemployee’s potential for causing harm

Recommendations -Reference Seekers

Ask for only job-related informationAsk for only job-related information Obtain from knowledgeable sourceObtain from knowledgeable source Document procedures & informationDocument procedures & information Obtain written permission of applicantObtain written permission of applicant Check multiple referencesCheck multiple references Verify negative informationVerify negative information

The Paradox of Interviews

The most widely-used hiring tool among The most widely-used hiring tool among practitionerspractitioners

Yet are widely criticized by researchersYet are widely criticized by researchers unreliableunreliable susceptible to biassusceptible to bias poor validitypoor validity

Why are Interviews So Popular?

Problems with Interviews

Lack of structure/standardization Lack of structure/standardization Opportunity for biasOpportunity for bias Impression drivenImpression driven Interview behavior may not reflect KSAs Interview behavior may not reflect KSAs

Recommendations

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Types of Structured Interviews

Behavior Description interviewingBehavior Description interviewing How have you handled situations before?How have you handled situations before?

Situational interviewingSituational interviewing How would you respond to hypothetical job How would you respond to hypothetical job

situation?situation? Case interviewsCase interviews

Can you demonstrate reasoning skills in logic Can you demonstrate reasoning skills in logic puzzle questions?puzzle questions?

Benefits of Structured Interviews

Increases job relatednessIncreases job relatedness Ensures that interviewers are aware of KSAsEnsures that interviewers are aware of KSAs Also easier to document if neededAlso easier to document if needed

Reduces disparate treatment Reduces disparate treatment Increases reliabilityIncreases reliability Reduces problems of coachingReduces problems of coaching