Validity and Reliability in Selection Process - Coursework Example

Validity and Reliability in Selection Process Introduction Selection is the most significant phase of employment, where the concept of “the right candidate for the right position” is materialized (Selection 2003, p.84). Selecting the wrong candidate and rejecting the right one are avoidable mistakes which can turn out to be very costly for the organization. The process of choosing the most appropriate candidate from available candidates is called selection, which involves several steps that determine the candidates’ suitability for the job as regards his/her knowledge, qualifications, experience, aptitude, etc. The steps begin with collection of all relevant information about the applicants and conclude with induction of the right candidate into the organization. The selection process in an organization is determined by the organization’s strategy, goals and objectives, the tasks and responsibilities of the job and the organization, and the attributes required in the prospective candidates. The selection criteria for evaluation of candidates should be compliant to the organizational objectives. The selection methods should be designed in such a way that they evaluate candidates based on these criteria. To enable an accurate prediction of the candidates’ success in the prospective job, the selection methods should meet the standards of reliability and validity. Reliability A selection method can be considered reliable if it produces consistent results across different situations and times (Selection 2003, p.88). When a test taken by the same individual at different times produces results that are remarkably different, that test cannot be considered reliable. There are a few tests using which the reliability of a selection method can be measured. The first test is the repeat or test-retest approach (Selection 2003, p.88). In this approach, a group of candidates is given a test which is repeated after an interval of 2-3 weeks. The similarity in the results obtained and an analysis of the scores determine the reliability of the test. The alternate-form or the parallel-form method is another way of measuring the reliability of a selection method (Selection 2003, p.88). In this approach, instead of testing the candidates twice, two similar but separate forms are given to the candidates at the same time. If the scoring pattern is similar for both, then the test is reliable. The split-halves procedure is a method where the same test is divided into two parts and given to the candidates. Again, the degree of similarity in the results determines the degree of reliability of the selection method. Validity The degree to which the success in the selection method reflects the candidate’s success in the job is the measure of its validity. There are three general methods which can be used to measure or ensure the validity of a selection method, namely, the criterion validity, content validity and construct validity (Selection 2003, p.89). Criterion validity refers to the correlation between the test scores and the job-performance scores. If the correlation is substantial, then the selection method can be considered valid. Content validity refers to the degree to which the content of a selection procedure represents the important aspects of job performance. Construct validity evaluates how well a selection method measures those characteristics in the candidates that are essential for his/her successful performance in the job. Depending on the jobs and the organizational factors, these methods can be used in different combinations to evaluate the validity of the selection methods. Validating a test The validation process comprises of five steps including analysing the job, choosing the tests, administering the tests, relating the test scores and the criteria, and cross-validating and revalidating (Dessler 2003, p.167). Analysing the job involves identifying job descriptions and specifications. For this, human traits and other skills necessary for a job - for example, whether a person should possess people skills or whether he/she should possess technical skills for the successful performance in the job - are given due consideration. These form the predictors. Success should be defined and the standards of success form the criteria. Taking an assembler’s job as example, predictors could be manual dexterity and patience, while criteria could be quantity and/or number of rejects produced per hour (Dessler 2003, p.168). The next step is to choose the tests that measure the attributes or the predictors that are important for the successful performance of the job. Usually a test battery is chosen to measure an array of predictors. To choose a test, it would be best to take professional advice like that of a licensed industrial psychologist or that of a firm that provides employment tests that measure the candidates for their intellectual ability, technical skills, aptitude, clerical skills, telemarketing ability, service ability, management ability, team skills, service ability, sales skills, etc. The third step is to administer the test. This step offers two options. One is administering the test to employees presently on the job and comparing their scores with their current performance. This is called concurrent validation. The advantage of concurrent validation is that data on performance are readily available and the disadvantage is that the employees have undergone training and have already been screened by the existing selection methods. Predictive validation involves administering the test to candidates before they are hired, then hiring them based on the existing selection techniques, and after they have been on the job for some time, comparing their performance with the earlier test scores (Dessler 2003, p.169). The next step is to relate test scores or predictors to performance or criteria. This can be done by determining the statistical relationship using correlation analysis. If there is a correlation between the test scores and job performance, an expectancy chart can be drawn which gives a graphical representation of the correlation between the data, which will help in selecting the high performers (Dessler 2003, p.168). The last step involves cross-validation and revalidation of the test. This can be done by repeating the test on a different set of employees. The tests have to be revalidated by an expert periodically. Reliability versus validity “A selection method must first be reliable to be valid, but it is not necessary that all reliable selection methods are valid” (Selection 2003, p.89). However, “reliability is the result of a process that produces a consistent and predictable result over and over” (Martin 2005). To enhance or ensure reliability of a process, the number of variables considered has to be reduced with the use of more quantitative, bias-free measurements. The Stanford-Binet IQ test, which when taken over and over, can produce identical results. To increase the validity of a selection method, a wide range of relevant variables must be taken into account. Goleman’s EQ focuses on more qualitative considerations and judgement with a view to produce higher validity. Both reliability and validity are important for a good selection process and both can be ensured up to a point “by being more thoughtful and less sloppy” (Martin 2005). But beyond that, reliability requires fewer variables and hence has less validity, and vice versa. While selection methods for jobs in the design area calls for more focus on validity, those in the investment area calls for more focus on reliability. A test that scores high on validity may score very modestly on reliability, as reliability needs proof, and vice versa. An example is the Aeron chair that was launched by Herman Miller. The chair, which nobody could prove before it was launched whether it would succeed at all, has become the most successful office chair of all times (Martin 2005). This points to the fact that both reliability and validity, while being equally important, conflict each other and hence there is a probability of either or both getting lost during a selection process. The UK context According to a survey conducted by IDS in 1999, interview is a selection technique used by 100% of UK firms (Brannan, n.d.). Assessment centres and aptitude tests are being increasingly used. Across Europe, different selection methods are popular in different countries; for example, biodata and graphology are common in France and work samples are popular in Sweden. The factors that affect the choice of selection methods are the cost involved, requirement of more scientific and objective methods, and legislations. There are different legislations that affect recruitment in Europe in general and in the UK in particular. According to Storey (cited in Brewster, Mayrhofer & Morley 2004, p.49), “developments in the realm of selection in the UK lend some support to those who propound the HRM thesis, where a key feature has been the increase in selection testing, designed explicitly to assess behavioural and attitudinal characteristics.” The most widely studied and the most widely criticised selection instrument is the interview. It is considered not favourable in that it lacks reliability and predictive validity. According to Plumbley (cited in Brewster, Mayrhofer & Morley 2004, p.49), interviewers are prone to inaccurate recollection which lead them to make “snap” judgements subject to “halo horns” effects. Nevertheless, the interview continues to be used as a selection tool by UK organisations, as mentioned earlier, and by Irish companies. The interview has been ranked the third most popular selection tool among organisations studied in these countries, the first and the second being reference checking and application forms (Brewster, Mayrhofer & Morley 2004, p.49). According to Muchinski, the application forms are considered to be open to misinterpretation, as it can give the applicants a false persona (cited in Brewster, Mayrhofer & Morley 2004, p.49). Reference, though its predictive ability is low, is found to be the most popular selection tool. In 1999/2000, three-quarters of the UK and Irish organisations used references for their appointments. Among the more sophisticated and scientific selection tools, using assessment centres and psychometric testing are considered to be valid behaviour predictors, with the former having a prediction rate of 0.6 and the latter having a prediction rate ranging between 0.3 and 0.6. Though traditionally, the use of these techniques has been seldom in the UK and Ireland, and there has been hardly any change in this pattern, the UK organisations are found to have begun using these techniques more, especially the psychometric testing, with 27% of UK organisations and 13% of Irish organisations using this method (Brewster, Mayrhofer & Morley 2004, p.49). The application form, the reference checks, and the interviews, mostly one-to-one interviews, remain the most popular and common selection methods in the UK and Ireland. Factors affecting selection There are several factors that affect the recruitment function and the selection process of an organisation. The factors may be internal or external where internal factors are those that can be controlled by the organisation and external factors are those that cannot be controlled by the organisation. The factors affecting recruitment are the recruitment policy, human resource planning, size of the firm, cost, and growth and expansion factors (Internal factors affecting recruitment 2007). The recruitment policy specifies the objectives of the recruitment and the framework for effecting the recruitment. The main factors that affect a recruitment policy are the organizational objectives, the government policies and the financial implications. Human resource planning mainly defines the required manpower and their eligibility. The size of the organisation and its plans for expansion are other factors that significantly affect recruitment. There are several external factors also that affect the recruitment and selection process of an organisation. They are the supply and demand of manpower, the labour market, the goodwill and reputation of the organisation, the current political-legal-social environment, the unemployment rate and the competitors (External factors affecting recruitment 2007). The availability of manpower both within and outside the organisation is a deciding factor in its recruitment and selection processes. When the availability of manpower is low, the organisation has to depend on its own internal resources. The labour markets, employment conditions and the unemployment rate have significant effect on recruitment. Oftentimes, organisations have to change their methods of recruitment in tune with their competitors to help face competition. The political, social and legal environment is a very significant force or factor influencing an organisation’s recruitment functions. Different countries have different legislations regarding disability, discrimination, etc. In a country like India, trade unions also interfere with the recruitment functions of an organisation. Such factors restrict the freedom of the organisation to make suitable selections, and they limit the management’ ability for finding the right people for the right jobs. In addition, changing economic and technological environment and related changes in the labour market, like changing skill requirements, skill shortages, slow growth of workforce and/or more diverse workforce, influence the selection process to a great extent (Topic 10 n.d., p.2). There are various laws that bar discrimination with respect to race, colour, age, religion, sex, disability and national origin. The selection processes chosen by an organisation should comply with these laws in addition to being reliable and valid (Dessler 2003, p.170). Test takers have the right to privacy and information under the American Psychological Association’s standards for educational and psychological tests. They have the right to confidentiality as well as informed consent as regards use of the results. They have the right to expect fairness in the interpretation of the results. In the UK, there are several legislations that protect the labour force against several kinds of discrimination. The Sex Discrimination Act 1975, the Disability Discrimination Act 1996 and the Race Relations Act 1976 are the main legislations that disallow discrimination. The other legislations that the UK has incorporated in response to directives from the European Union are the 1998 Data Protection Act and the Human Rights Act. All these legislations affect the recruitment and selection processes (Gold 2003, p.2). Additionally, different nations, based on their social and business cultures and the nature of their economies, have different factors affecting their selection processes. Japan has a homogenous culture and the Japanese are very hard working people with a strong sense of duty and obligation. The US, however, is diverse in its cultural background. Americans are independent, ambitious and individualistic, having a high value for freedom. They are hard working and believe that they can shape and control their own destinies. Unlike the Japanese, they prefer moving from one job to the next in pursuit of success and their companies also are ready to dispense with them for their own betterment. The British, like the Americans, are individualistic and value their freedom. They are also ready to switch jobs for better prospects. A significant feature of Japanese companies is job rotation (Tayeb 2007, p.68). Instead of recruiting to fill specialised job slots, Japanese companies select candidates based on broad qualifications and take them through an induction period where they are socialised into their corporate community. The candidates then undergo in-house training in the different departments by rotation which allows them job flexibility and by the end of the training the candidates are capable to undertake different jobs. This system allows long-term employment for regular, core employees, which is seen as a common practice in Japan. In Japan, trade unions are company-based. For example, Toyota, Nissan and Hitachi have their own trade unions. These unions are instilled with the company culture and they function harmoniously with the management (Tayeb 2007, p.67). On the contrary, the American culture is generally and predominantly against trade unionism. Here the power of the employers is very high and in the non-unionised sector, the employers can lay off redundant workers in whatever order they wished and terminate contracts whenever they chose (Tayeb 2007, p.71). A stark exception to this general rule is the approach adopted by Mazda in the face of bankruptcy in the early 1980’s. Mazda decided to retain its employees with the managers agreeing to 25% salary cut and foregoing bonuses for four years. The nature of employment is almost wholly determined by the employer, limited only by labour market forces and protective labour legislations like the minimum wage law. In the US, the jobs and the skills required are clearly defined. In the Arab Middle East, expatriates are selected extensively for both the high, professional jobs and the low, menial tasks. This is both because of the shortage of locals with professional expertise as well as their reluctance to do low-paid, low-esteemed jobs. “There is also widespread discrimination against women, both domestic and expatriates, especially in terms of job opportunity, recruitment, promotion prospects and pay” (Tayeb 2007, p.78). In countries where trade unions are permitted, they are organised and controlled by the ruling single-party system or the government. In India, trade unions wield a great deal of power. Besides, there are several laws that provide job reservations for the lower castes, women, and minority population. Until the opening up of the Indian economy to the world market, it was virtually impossible for the management to remove a worker from his/her position or reduce his/her wages even in the face of a breach of contract due to the tight protection these laws provided them. Other standards Other than the standards of reliability and validity, there are factors like generalizability, utility and legality that can ensure accurate prediction of a candidate’ success in his/her future job (Selection 2003, p.88). Generalizability is the extent to which the validity of a selection process in one context reflects its validity in other primary contexts like different jobs, different organizations, different sets of applicants and different time periods. A selection method has to be valid to be generalized, but all valid methods need not necessarily be generalized. Utility is the extent to which the value provided by a selection method enhances the effectiveness of the organization. “The more reliable, valid and generalizable the selection method, the more its utility” (Selection 2003, p.90). However, utility is susceptible to change with changes in the job market. Legality reflects the compliance of the selection method to the laws and legislations prevailing in the country. Each country has its own legislations, as mentioned earlier in this essay, based on its economic, social and cultural environment, to protect its workforce against various kinds of discrimination. Hence, this standard has grown to be of utmost importance in the selection scenario across the world. References Brannan, M. n.d., MAN 30001 Human Resource Management: 5. Recruitment and Selection, viewed 24 November 2008, http://www.keele.ac.uk/schools/ems/business/students/5%20recruitment%20and%20selection%2008.pdf Brewster, C., Mayrhofer, W. & Morley, M. 2004, Human resource management in Europe: Evidence of convergence?, Butterworth-Heinemann. Gold, J. 2003, Chapter 7: Recruitment and selection, viewed 24 November 2008, http://www.palgrave.com/business/brattonandgold/students/docs/chapter 7 student.doc Dessler, G. 2003, Human resource management, Pearson (Singapore) Pte. Ltd., Delhi, India. External factors affecting recruitment 2007, viewed 24 November 2008, http://recruitment.naukrihub.com/external-factors.html Internal factors affecting recruitment 2007, viewed 24 November 2008, http://recruitment.naukrihub.com/internal-factors.html Martin, R. L. 2005, Reliability vs. Validity, viewed 24 November 2008, http://www.businessweek.com/innovate/content/sep2005/id20050929_872877.htm ‘Selection’ 2003, Human resource management, ICFAI Centre for Management Research, Hyderabad, India, pp.83-102. Tayeb, M. H. 2007, National context of HRM: The case of seven major economies, Oxford University Press Inc., New York, pp.63-91. Topic 10 n.d., viewed 24 November 2008, in.geocities.com/noel_hrindia/Rec_sel_and_ass_overview_predicitivist.pdf Read More