MBA 537 – Human Resource Management

GROUP II - TEAM I2011/MBA/WE/44 MKPSL Perera2011/MBA/WE/62 SMH Sooriyabandara2011/MBA/WE/79 EMKWS Ekanayake2011/MBA/WE/74 DS Weerasekara2011/MBA/WE/43 MDC Perera

Road MapRoad MapAbstractKey WordsIntroductionMethodologyFindingsConclusion

Future Perspectives on Employee Future Perspectives on Employee Selection:Selection:

Key Directions for Future Research and Key Directions for Future Research and PracticePractice

Neil AndersonUniversity of Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Filip LievensGhent University, Belgium

Karen van DamTilburg University, The Netherlands

Ann Marie RyanMichigan State University, USA

A future-oriented perspective for selection and assessment research is presented. Four superordinate themes of critical import to the development of future research are identified;1.Bimodal prediction2.Multilevel fit 3.Applicant reactions and decision making4.Tensions between research and practice in employee selection

Implications for practice and the ongoing advancement of the sub-field of selection, traditionally one of the most

robust core disciplines in international IWO psychology, are discussed

Key wordsKey words

Selection Research

Job Role

Psychology

Applicant

IntroductionIntroduction Selection research has been one of the

central pillars of the scientific foundations of IWO psychology

authors attempting a future-oriented, prospective

review is therefore a daunting oneThis research has addressed few overarching

issues related to this disciplineIt presents constructively critical, prospective,

state of the science selection research

MethodologyMethodologyOverviewed recently published narrative

reviews in personnel selection Anderson, 2003; Cooper & Robertson, 2002; Hough & Oswald,

2000; Ryan & Ployhart, 2000; Salgado et al., 2001)

Contacted researchers internationally active in the field in order to obtain relevant in press, submitted, and in progress manuscripts.

(e.g. Ployhart & Schneider, in press; Ployhart et al., submitted; Salgado, Anderson, Moscoso, Bertua, & De Fruyt, in press, a; Salgado, Anderson, Moscoso, Bertua, De Fruyt, & Rolland, in press, b).

Incorporated the recently published findings of Lievens, van Dam, and Anderson (2002) which presents a comprehensive review of future-oriented themes of importance as determined by a sample of personnel practitioners in Europe

Four perspectivesFour perspectives1. Bimodal prediction2. Multilevel fit in selection3. Applicant reactions and decision making4. Tensions between research and practice

Bimodal prediction Bimodal prediction Applicants suitability is evaluated by

considering the relative stability of the Job role (Job Function)

(Here priority is given to analyzing Job role and then finding a suitable applicant)

Job role means Job’s actual work activities (Cleaning, Selling, Teaching or Painting)

This is a traditional way and commonly practiced by many organizations to find what kind of people the firm should hire For jobs.

Does this system needs Does this system needs improvements ? improvements ?

The organization structures are changing rapidly with the change of the business environment.

Due to the rapid environmental changes, research and practice in selection began to be developed and used .

a) FOJA (Future – Oriented Job analysis)

As a result followings are examined in selection of candidates.

Flexibility Adaptability Openness to change Innovation potential Trainability

We believe that selection psychologists have much to do to respond in a professional and evidence based manner to the challenges of bimodal prediction.

They need to focus on (G.M.A) General Mental Ability of candidate for future selection of new employees.

Work smartWork smartGMA test has used to identify that these individuals cope better with changing work role and also to be more adaptive and innovative.

Therefore HR practitioners to evaluate cognitive ability during the selection process.

Recommendation for Recommendation for future researchfuture researchHow can organisations select members for highly

changeable job roles, newly created jobs, and flexible forms of work organisation?

How can future-oriented job analysis techniques be developed to scope the likely future task elements and KSAOs for changeable job roles?

To what extent can the traditional, predictivist paradigm in selection address increasingly unstable criterion measure problems?

What is the criterion-related validity of measures of cognitive ability in selecting for changeable work roles rather than for stable, rule-governed jobs?

MULTILEVEL FIT IN SELECTIONMultilevel Fit in Selection will look at three level of fit from a prospective candidate

1.Person Job Fit ( P-J fit )Ability to express their views ( cognitive) in

simple manner , Sociability ,innovation potential and Detail consciousness in task performance .

Selection predictor method will be through GMA test, Test of cognitive abilities, Interviews , personality instruments, Leaderless group discussion, Situational judgment test, work sample test or References.

2. Person Team Fit ( P-T fit )Special ability or skill require to team working, Team citizenship behavior or Expert knowledge relevant to team’s present task. Predictor method could be Unstructured interviews, Work sample test, Leaderless group discussion or References / Testimonials

3. Person Organization Fit ( P-O fit)Refers to ability or skill require to Internationalization of core organizational values , To present an organization at external events, Commitment to organizational goal as articulated in its mission statement and loyalty to the organization.Predictor method will be same as P-J fit and P-T fit above. In addition to that Personal value inventory, Bio data inventory, Presentation exercise or motivation questionnaire could be performed.

Multilevel fit in selectionMultilevel fit in selectionNot like traditional but multilevel selection will

try t0 optimize fit at all three level simultaneously.There are thee possible types of interaction

effects

1. Complementary effects Where social skills at the person job-level of analysis are notably similar to the team working skills required for person team fit.

2. Neutral effectsWhere declarative knowledge needed for job performance (P-J fit) is assessed in addition to personal values and attitudes needed to fit to the company culture ( P-O fit )

3. Contradictory effects Where high levels of independence of thought

and thus propensity to innovate are needed for P-J fit, whereas value conformity and adherence to the company culture is desired at the P-O level fit

1. How can organizations select for a person –job ( P-J) , Person team (P-T) and person-Organization ( P-O) fit concurrently?

2. How can theories and models of selection be expanded from the traditional single level of analysis (P-J fit) to incorporate notions of multilevel analysis and decision making?

3. In anticipating pragmatic challenges of complementary neutral ,and contradictory fit in interaction effects between these three level of analysis, What advice can be given to selectors attempting to balance these multiple concerns?

Future perspectives on employee Future perspectives on employee selectionselection

Selection research on Selection research on applicant reaction & decision applicant reaction & decision makingmakingOver the years Selection research has been

mostly focused from an organizational perspective

Applicant-oriented research has been very low

IWO psychology - appropriate to address the applicant perspective in greater detail & to reduce the imbalance in between the two perspectives

Though research on recruitment, job search & occupational choice has been done. The focus is more towards recruitment process

Effects on the applicant perception on the selection process is not much considered

What should be What should be addressed???addressed???How applicants are impacted by

organizational recruitment and selection procedures

How they reach decisions on whether or not to remain a candidate

How this might affect their future job-related motivational states and expectations

How can this be done???How can this be done???More research should be focused on applicant

perception on selection process from;A behavioral outcome such as applicant

withdrawal, actual decision to accept the job offer, etc

A criteria such as criterion-related validity, construct validity (i.e. nature of constructs measured), adverse impact & even utility

Recommendation for future Recommendation for future researchresearch1) How do applicants process information and

reach outcome decisions in selection processes?

2) How do applicant perceptions relate to traditional criteria such as criterion-related validity, construct validity, adverse impact, and even utility?

Selection field isSelection field isScience based professional practice

(Salgado and Anderson, 2001) But research and practice have been edging

further in IWO psychologyBut personal practices that are often not well

supported by empirical research are often popular

And personal practices that have been shown to be effective are less frequently used(Terostra & Rozzel, 1997)

Addition to Anderson’s earlier Addition to Anderson’s earlier modelmodel

2 x 2 Grid

Practical relevance Vs Methodological rigor

Four quadrants (Popularist, Pragmatic, Pedantic & Puerile science)

Types of research in Types of research in selection psychologyselection psychology

Methodological Rigor

Practical Relevance

High

Low

Low High

Popularist SciencePopularist Science

Practical relevance high but methodological rigor is low

Studies address important and current themes but fail to do so with scientific rigor

Pragmatic SciencePragmatic Science

Both Practical relevance and methodological rigor is high

Research findings of value to all are generated based upon robust scientific designs

Pedantic SciencePedantic Science

Methodological rigor is high but Practical relevance low

Case studies are scientifically designed but lack of validity in practice

Puerile SciencePuerile Science

Both Practical relevance and methodological rigor is low

Which one is more Which one is more important?important?

Earlier authors argue that only Pragmatic science will serve the future of selection psychology

In IWO psychology, Anderson argue that popularist and pedantic science become more prevalent

Recommendation for future Recommendation for future researchresearchIs there a dysfunctional divide between research

and practice in selection?

If so, what professional and pragmatic mechanisms can be implemented to ensure synergistic exchange between the two wings of our discipline?

How can research and practice stimulate new research agendas in international selection psychology?

SummarySummary

Four PerspectivesBimodal predictionMultilevel fitApplicant reactions and decision makingTensions between research and practice

in employee selection

ConclusionConclusionIn Sri Lankan context, up to what extent new

selection methods are used?

Job hunting

Different Interviews

Social networking

QuestionsQuestions…???…???

Thank You…!!!Thank You…!!!