psychology methods in staff recruitment

Authors Avatar

In today’s competitive recruiting environment, organisations are challenged with utilising optimal screening methods in order to find the best candidate for job vacancies. Whilst selection techniques such as obtaining references, interview or application from have been employed for many years, the use of various tests within the process is on the increase (Newell & Shackleton, 1994). This essay will examine the extent to which common selection methods have been influenced by psychological research on the subject.

The function of recruitment is to ensure that an organisation is adequately and effectively staffed. Developments, both technical and economic, have meant that job functions are constantly evolving. To this end, for recruitment to be successful, it is critical that job analyses are maintained. When valid they become the main source of information both about any position which should become vacant (job description), and the competencies and attributes of the person required to fill it (person specification) (Stone, 2002). Research has shown that although the job analysis tool is commonly used in large organisations, this is not the case in smaller firms, where job descriptions are reported as vague and out of date (Carroll, Marchington, Earnshaw & Taylor, 1999). This can result in poor candidate selection, as the criteria applied may not reflect the scope of the job.

There are a wide variety of selection criteria available to employers today. The method used is dictated as much by tradition and personal preference, as the reliability and validity of the technique. The validity refers to the extent to which the selection method provides a prediction of future job performance. Robertson & Smith (2001) report work sample tests as the single predictor of performance with validity 0.54, closely followed by cognitive ability and structured interview. Interviews are still the method of choice for employee selection for many organisations. A recent study of 16 European countries reported over 99% of those polled used interviews in their recruitment process (Doving, 2005).

Many types of interview exist, and they take a variety of formats. Early research (Wagner, 1949, cited in Harel, Arditi & Janz, 2003) found interviews to be of low and variable validity. However interviews at this time lacked basic structure, making it difficult to reasonably predict future job performance. Questions differed for each candidate, and interviewers often maintained their own question set, used regardless of the position to be filled. This format led to both incorrect and misguided assumptions, with subjective decisions strongly influenced by the interviewer’s beliefs, judgement and stereotypes (Compton, Morrissey & Nankervis, 2002). How interviewers reached decisions has been the subject of much research. Webster (1964) found interviewers reached a decision within minutes, spending the rest of the interview confirming this original view. This was later validated by Tucker & Rowe(1977), who believed a final decision was reached in only 9 minutes.

Join now!

More recently interviews have become much more structured in format, with the frame of reference very much based closely on the job analysis. All candidates are asked the same predetermined questions with answers scored by the interviewer. Where the questions are situational or job simulating in nature, higher scores represent a more successful the interview, indicating potentially good future job performance.

Harel et al (2003) report increased fairness and standardisation in addition to improved validity and reliability with this method. Interviews which are structured and job-related can be good gages to ascertain cognitive ability and job knowledge, whilst unstructured interviews ...

This is a preview of the whole essay