ENTRY LEVEL HIRING STANDARDS IN RURAL CENTRAL MINNESOTA

In order to determine the hiring standards for entry level jobs used by employers in rural central Minnesota, a rating scale was developed. On the rating scale, 15 characteristics that seemed important for hiring purposes were included. The rating scale was mailed to 20 employers hiring over 30 employees. All 20 employers returned the rating scales. The results indicate that 100 percent of the employers consider attitude as very important or most important for hiring purposes. Ability (aptitude) was considered very important by 90 percent of the employers. Interests, appearance, and references were considered to be of average or more importance by 90 percent of the employers for hiring purposes. The results should assist entry level job seekers in making more effective applications for work.     

EXPERIENCED HIRING VERSUS COLLEGE RECRUITING: PRACTICES AND EMERGING TRENDS

Although much professional and managerial hiring involves experienced workers, previous recruitment research has focused almost exclusively on new college graduates. To remedy this imbalance, 251 staffing professionals were surveyed concerning experienced-versus-college hiring practices in their organizations. Results suggest that a majority of positions requiring a college degree are filled with experienced workers. Experienced hires are evaluated more highly than new graduates on most characteristics (understanding business, knowledge of competition, realistic expectations, technical skills, interpersonal skills, writing skills, work ethic, likelihood of success, personal ethics), although new graduates are evaluated more highly on open-mindedness and willingness and ability to learn new things. Higher proportions of experienced hiring are associated with organizational growth, short-term staffing strategies, older workforces, and less dynamic business environments. Perceived success of experienced hiring is associated with greater use of effective recruitment sources, older workforces, and more competitive salary offers.     

SUPREME COURT DECIDES HIRING AND PLACEMENT PROCEDURES MUST BE VALID

The U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Griggs v. Duke Power Company (1971) will have important effects on industrial personnel practices that in time will be felt in government, schools, colleges, and other institutions and eventually will touch almost all Americans. In its decision the court admitted that tests are useful but stipulated that they must be valid or job related. The decision will do much to make qualification the all important factor in hiring and selection, and will tend to make race, religion, nationality, and sex irrelevant factors.     

NEGLIGENT HIRING AND DEFAMATION: AREAS OF LIABILITY RELATED TO PRE-EMPLOYMENT INQUIRIES

Research on pre-employment inquiries has not been extensive. The limited validity and utility of employment references has been documented, but other types of background checks have not been adequately discussed. However, recent legal trends in the areas of negligent hiring and defamation are leading employers to reevaluate their use of pre-employment inquiries and, particularly, references in hiring. Principles of law in these two areas are discussed and issues of concern to I/O psychologists are presented.     

ACCESS DECISIONS BY PERSONNEL DIRECTORS: SUBTLE FORMS OF SEX BIAS IN HIRING

Midwestern personnel and management association members rated bogus job applications which had identical background qualifications but varied by sex of applicant, sex-role related attributes of applicant, and degree of fit of applicant credentials to job demands. The applicants were rated on their qualifications and likelihood of being considered for the position, expected performance, and expected success in the job. A significant triple interaction was found for the variable that measured the likelihood of the applicant being considered for the position (i.e., access to the position). Higher access ratings were given to the sex–stereotypical applicant when the applicant's credentials matched job demands. When the applicant's credentials did not fit the job demands, raters tended to favor non–stereotypical applicants. Practical and research implications are discussed.     

CORRECTING THE 16PF FOR FAKING: EFFECTS ON CRITERION-RELATED VALIDITY AND INDIVIDUAL HIRING DECISIONS

The effects of correcting a personality measure for faking were evaluated within an organizational context. Two possible repercussions of score correction were studied using the 16PF personality inventory: the effect on criterion-related validity and the effect on individual hiring decisions (i.e., which applicants would or would not be hired). Results indicated that correction for faking had little effect on criterion-related validity. However, depending on the selection ratio, correction of scores would have resulted in different hiring decisions than those that would have been made on the basis of uncorrected scores. Implications for organizations using personality measures for selection and recommendations regarding the use of faking corrections are discussed.     

STATUS AND ORGANIZATIONAL ENTRY: HOW ORGANIZATIONAL AND INDIVIDUAL STATUS AFFECT JUSTICE PERCEPTIONS OF HIRING SYSTEMS

Despite the fact that cognitive ability tests are highly predictive of job applicants’ future performance, these tests are often viewed as procedurally unfair by both hiring managers and job applicants. In this paper, we build on existing rationales by theorizing that status—both personal and organizational—may affect individuals’ procedural justice perceptions of selection tests. In 2 quasi‐experimental studies representing 435 managers and executives across both the United States and United Kingdom, we demonstrate that status is a double‐edged sword: helpful for high‐status organizations that use demanding selection tests to choose applicants but harmful because high‐status job applicants view these selection tests as more procedurally unjust than low‐status applicants.     

MULTI-STAGE SELECTION STRATEGIES: A MONTE CARLO INVESTIGATION OF EFFECTS ON PERFORMANCE AND MINORITY HIRING

This study explores alternative selection strategies available when a firm has two valid predictors that differ in the magnitude of subgroup differences. We examine 14 different selection rules (e.g., select on a composite of the two predictors versus screen on the first and then select on the second versus screen on the first and then select on a composite of the two), and document through a Monte Carlo simulation that the various selection rules can produce markedly different consequences in terms of the level of job performance achieved and the level of minority representation achieved. The selection rules examined include the use of within-group norming, whichwas restricted by the Civil Rights Act of 1991, and the study examines how selection rules that do and do not include within-group norming fare in terms of the tradeoffs between performance and minority representation. The study shows that the preferred selection strategy will depend on the relative value the firm places on performance and on minority representation, and that the effects of different screen-then-select selection strategies vary as a result of the selection ratios at the screening and selection stages, thus precluding simple conclusions about the merits of each selection strategy.     

SEX DISCRIMINATION IN HIRING: THE INFLUENCE OF ORGANIZATIONAL CLIMATE AND NEED FOR APPROVAL ON DECISION MAKING BEHAVIOR

It was hypothesized that an organization's climate could inhibit or encourage discriminatory behavior, and that subjects' need for approval would interact with climate to influence their decisions. One hundred and sixty-one male business students read one of two sets of materials intended to manipulate company climate, and then evaluated a fictitious resume of a male or female applicant for a managerial position within the company. Decisions regarding hire, salary, applicant fit with the company, and anticipated longevity were dependent measures. The hypothesis regarding organizational climate received partial support. In a discriminatory climate women applicants were evaluated less favorably than men in terms of likelihood of hire and degree of fit between the applicant and the organization. Although not statistically significant, a similar pattern of results was obtained on the salary measure and on the measure of applicant predicted longevity. Contrary to expectations, approval motivation was not related to the dependent measures.     

A TALE OF TWO JOB MARKETS: ORGANIZATIONAL SIZE AND ITS EFFECTS ON HIRING PRACTICES AND JOB SEARCH BEHAVIOR

Small firms employ half the U.S. private sector workforce, yet recruitment research has traditionally focused on large firms. The present study attempts to advance knowledge on how recruitment practices vary with firm size. Results suggest that the recruitment practices of larger firms are generally more formal and bureaucratic than those of smaller firms. In addition, the study demonstrates that many job seekers have distinct preferences regarding firm size, and that preferred firm size is related to job search behavior. Taken together, these findings suggest that firm size is an overlooked and important aspect of the recruitment/job search context. The processes involved in matching employers and applicants differ so much as a function of firm size that one might argue that large and small firms comprise separate labor markets.