论文部分内容阅读
1. Introduction
Employer decisions about the selection of employees are central to the operation of organisations and to outcomes that matter to both individuals and organizations. Organisations use various methods to collect information about applicants. Therefore， the validity of selection methods is crucial.
So far as the validity of selection methods is concerned， the rational decision-making model ， which prescribes the only goal of selection is to ensure accurate measurement in order to identify a fixed type of person for a particular job， has been dominated by normative research. Based on this model， three types of selection methods， namely biographic data， structured interview and psychometric test， have been proved to be highly valid methods.
2. Discussion
2.1 Work-Based Selection Methods
2.1.1 Biodata
It has become more common for companies to use application forms to recruit workers， especially with the growth of the internet. A UK study found that the growth in preference for online applications has grown from 44 percent in 1998 （Park， 1999） to 78 percent in 2001 （Reed， 2002） . One type of these applications is biographical data （biodata）， which is used to find out applicants life history. It is a means to test an applicant using their past experiences to assess how they would react in varying scenarios.
2.1.2 Structured Interview
The interview is the most common selection tool used within organisations across many countries. To improve the validity of interviews all candidates are asked the same questions， in the same order， and in exactly the same way. Structured interviews also mean that every candidate’s responses are evaluated and scored.
2.2 Worker-Based Selection Methods
References are used in 96 percent of cases in the UK . It has been suggested that in some form or another， every company will use references to check an applicant for a job.
This type of selection tool differs from many of the others because it is based on a third party opinion. Many other selection tools are based on the applicant themselves， or the opinions of those interviewing the applicant. It is a ‘referee’ who makes an evaluation on the applicants’ skills and abilities， and then it is up to a manager to assess whether these skills would be suitable in their company. The main problem with references is that in most cases it is the applicant who decides who shall write the reference， and therefore the opinion won’t necessarily be objective or impartial. Given a choice， applicants will choose people who are going to write them glowing references， rather than someone who will speak negatively about them. Employers try to work around this by asking for a reference from a previous employer， but equally there are flaws in this. The previous employer could write a good reference if they were looking to help out an old colleague， or if they were troublesome， try to offload them with minimal fuss and costs. References can be both verbal and written. Often in positions involving a security risk a face-to-face interview with the referee may be needed. This doesn’t help with the errors that references make， but it can be reasoned that they are less prone to them， mainly because “referees are more likely to be candid when their judgements are not committed to paper” and “the exchange allows the interviewer the opportunity to assess the weight that should be given the report”. 3. Conclusion： Validity Generalisation versus Situational Specificity
Insight into both the theoretical and the practical side of selection and recruitment shows that the numbers of selection tools are vast. We have found that the theory and the practice vary greatly， while one may seem to work in one circumstance， it may not in another. What seems to be the most crucial point for employers is that to be efficient at selecting the correct applicant for a position it is best to use a number of tools. This way it makes sure the most suitable people are selected. Therefore we must conclude by looking at different situations for the organisational use of selection tools to assess their impact.
Journal：
Brunsson， N. （1982） “ the irrationality at action and action rationality： decisions， ideologies and organizational actions”， journal of Management Studies， 19（1）： 29-44.
Brown， D. （2003） “Fit more important than skills”， Canadian HR Reporter. 16（13）：17-23.
Campion， M.A.， Palmer， D. & Campion， J.E. （1997）. “A review of structure in the selection interview”. Personnel Psychology， 50： 655-702.
Employer decisions about the selection of employees are central to the operation of organisations and to outcomes that matter to both individuals and organizations. Organisations use various methods to collect information about applicants. Therefore， the validity of selection methods is crucial.
So far as the validity of selection methods is concerned， the rational decision-making model ， which prescribes the only goal of selection is to ensure accurate measurement in order to identify a fixed type of person for a particular job， has been dominated by normative research. Based on this model， three types of selection methods， namely biographic data， structured interview and psychometric test， have been proved to be highly valid methods.
2. Discussion
2.1 Work-Based Selection Methods
2.1.1 Biodata
It has become more common for companies to use application forms to recruit workers， especially with the growth of the internet. A UK study found that the growth in preference for online applications has grown from 44 percent in 1998 （Park， 1999） to 78 percent in 2001 （Reed， 2002） . One type of these applications is biographical data （biodata）， which is used to find out applicants life history. It is a means to test an applicant using their past experiences to assess how they would react in varying scenarios.
2.1.2 Structured Interview
The interview is the most common selection tool used within organisations across many countries. To improve the validity of interviews all candidates are asked the same questions， in the same order， and in exactly the same way. Structured interviews also mean that every candidate’s responses are evaluated and scored.
2.2 Worker-Based Selection Methods
References are used in 96 percent of cases in the UK . It has been suggested that in some form or another， every company will use references to check an applicant for a job.
This type of selection tool differs from many of the others because it is based on a third party opinion. Many other selection tools are based on the applicant themselves， or the opinions of those interviewing the applicant. It is a ‘referee’ who makes an evaluation on the applicants’ skills and abilities， and then it is up to a manager to assess whether these skills would be suitable in their company. The main problem with references is that in most cases it is the applicant who decides who shall write the reference， and therefore the opinion won’t necessarily be objective or impartial. Given a choice， applicants will choose people who are going to write them glowing references， rather than someone who will speak negatively about them. Employers try to work around this by asking for a reference from a previous employer， but equally there are flaws in this. The previous employer could write a good reference if they were looking to help out an old colleague， or if they were troublesome， try to offload them with minimal fuss and costs. References can be both verbal and written. Often in positions involving a security risk a face-to-face interview with the referee may be needed. This doesn’t help with the errors that references make， but it can be reasoned that they are less prone to them， mainly because “referees are more likely to be candid when their judgements are not committed to paper” and “the exchange allows the interviewer the opportunity to assess the weight that should be given the report”. 3. Conclusion： Validity Generalisation versus Situational Specificity
Insight into both the theoretical and the practical side of selection and recruitment shows that the numbers of selection tools are vast. We have found that the theory and the practice vary greatly， while one may seem to work in one circumstance， it may not in another. What seems to be the most crucial point for employers is that to be efficient at selecting the correct applicant for a position it is best to use a number of tools. This way it makes sure the most suitable people are selected. Therefore we must conclude by looking at different situations for the organisational use of selection tools to assess their impact.
Journal：
Brunsson， N. （1982） “ the irrationality at action and action rationality： decisions， ideologies and organizational actions”， journal of Management Studies， 19（1）： 29-44.
Brown， D. （2003） “Fit more important than skills”， Canadian HR Reporter. 16（13）：17-23.
Campion， M.A.， Palmer， D. & Campion， J.E. （1997）. “A review of structure in the selection interview”. Personnel Psychology， 50： 655-702.