STAFFING
KEY ASSUMPTIONS
People differ
 Jobs differ
 Goal?



Requires

EVALUATING
METHODS/PREDICTORS
Practicality
 Legality
 Accuracy

 Reliability
 Validity

Applicant reactions
CORRELATION COEFFICIENT





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
RELIABILITY

How accurately the tool measures the attribute



The extent to which it is free of error
The degree of dependability, consistency or
stability of measurement of a measure
Reliability coefficient = % of obtained score
due to true score
TYPES OF RELIABILITY
 Test-retest
 Assesses
 Internal
stability over time/situations
consistency reliability
 Assesses
 Parallel
reliability
sampling error/consistency of content
forms reliability
 Assesses
equivalence of measures
VALIDITY
The extent to which a staffing method
predicts one or more important criterion
 Primary method of demonstrating jobrelatedness
 Reliability vs. validity?

METHODS OF VALIDATION

Criterion (Empirical)



Showing a statistical relationship between scores and
job performance.
Two approaches: Concurrent or predictive
Limitations?



Content



Showing a logical relationship between predictor
content and job content
Limitations?
Validity generalization
APPLICANT REACTIONS
Applicants perceptions of fairness influence
job acceptance and subsequent performance
 What influences perceived fairness?






True Validities of Predictors
For Entry-Level Jobs
Cognitive Ability Test
Job Knowledge Test
Work Sample
Interview (structured)
Biographical Inventory
Reference Checks
Personality Inventories
Experience Ratings
Interview (unstructured)
Academic Achievement
Interest Inventories
For Promotions
Work Sample
Cognitive Ability Test
Peer Ratings
Experience Ratings
Job Knowledge Test
Assessment Center
.51
.48
.46
.44
.35
.26
~.23
.18
.14 (.31)
.11
.10
.54
.53
.49
.49
.48
.43
Arguments Against Personality




Conscientiousness

Descriptors:
 Organized,
Systematic, Thorough, Practical,
Neat, Efficient, Careful, Steady
 NOT Careless, Undependable, Haphazard,
Sloppy
Most consistent personality predictor of
performance
 Also predicts lack of problem behavior

Emotional Stability

Descriptors
 NOT Anxious,
Moody, Temperamental,
Emotional, Nervous, Touchy, Fearful

May predict job performance in jobs…
Agreeableness

Descriptors
 Kind,
Cooperative, Sympathetic, Warm,
Trustful, Considerate, Pleasant, Helpful

May predict job performance in jobs…
Extraversion

Descriptors
 Talkative, Assertive,
Verbal, Energetic, Bold,
Active, Daring

May predict job performance in…
The Cognitive Ability Test
Dilemma


Definitions of Test “Fairness”
1. Differences between groups’ average test scores


~1 SD difference for Blacks
~.75 SD for Hispanics
But what do these differences mean?
•Differential Validity?
•Test Bias?
•Test is fair
Definitions of Test “Fairness”
2. Differential Validity: Group differences in
validity of test
White
Job
Perf
Black
Test Scores
Definitions of Test “Fairness”
3. Test Bias: Group differences in predicted
job performance with same cutoff score
Job
Perf
Black
White
Test Scores
Typical CA Test Situation
Adverse Impact
 No differential validity
 No test bias

White
Job
Perf
Black
Test Scores
OPTIONS?




Basic Assumptions


Negligent Hiring
A violation of an employer’s common law
duty to protect its employees and customers
from injury by hiring an employee it knew
(or should have known) posed a threat of
risk.
Defamation of Character
The offense of injuring a person’s character,
fame, or reputation by false and malicious
statements
Negligent Referral
Companies may be liable for not fully and
truthfully disclosing knowledge about a past
employee’s potential for causing harm
Recommendations
-Reference Seekers
Ask for only job-related information
 Obtain from knowledgeable source
 Document procedures & information
 Obtain written permission of applicant
 Check multiple references
 Verify negative information

The Paradox of Interviews
The most widely-used hiring tool among
practitioners
 Yet are widely criticized by researchers

 unreliable
 susceptible
to bias
 poor validity
Why are Interviews So Popular?







Problems with Interviews
Lack of structure/standardization
 Opportunity for bias
 Impression driven
 Interview behavior may not reflect KSAs

Recommendations
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Types of Structured Interviews

Behavior Description interviewing
 How

have you handled situations before?
Situational interviewing
 How
would you respond to hypothetical job
situation?

Case interviews
 Can
you demonstrate reasoning skills in logic
puzzle questions?
Benefits of Structured Interviews

Increases job relatedness
 Ensures
that interviewers are aware of KSAs
 Also easier to document if needed
Reduces disparate treatment
 Increases reliability
 Reduces problems of coaching
