Todays Selection Processes Are Impartial, Rational and Effective - Essay Example

Today’s selection processes are impartial, rational and effective. To what extent is this ment a myth? Introduction To begin with, there are allforms of selection regimes in place at the moment. The world of business has seen new employees getting hired and fired all at the same time. This has meant that selection and recruitment processes have been weighed in a proper manner over a period of time. Selection and recruitment processes have been impartial, rational and effective – however there are exceptions to this rule. One might not agree with this statement completely but there could be a lot of weight behind the same if seen within the proper contexts (Tyson & York 2000). In this paper, the focus will be on the selection processes of present times and whether or not these have turned out to be effective, rational and impartial with the passage of time. It will be taken care of by providing a balanced perspective – one that is in line with the thinking ideologies of the people who matter the most. Analysis It is indeed a myth that today’s selection processes are impartial, effective and rational in their intent. One shall believe that selection processes of late have turned out to be a myth more than anything else. This is because they are usually filled with people who are either someone’s relatives or close friends. There seems to be little impartiality attached with the notion of selection and recruitment as should be the case in the perfect scenario. The selection processes usually require a great deal of input from the human resources management department and without its due role within the thick of things, the different processes can go haphazard. This is a reality that has dawned upon different organizations as far as their selection processes are concerned. It would be correct to state that selection processes are usually marred with issues which are unethical in nature as well (Smith & Robertson 1993). What this means is the fact that these selection regimes have been unable to understand how different nuances of hiring the right people are followed and thus made a benchmark in their own right. There are problems which must be resolved in an amicable manner so that the newly hired employees have a better feel of how things will shape up in the times to come (Laser 1994). What is most important here is to realize that the selection processes should be fair in their existence and give each and every candidate a chance to prove his mettle. If this does not come about in a proper manner, there could be issues which could mar the very basis of the selection that is being done under the aegis of an organization. It is necessary to ascertain the exact basis of success within the selection processes because these would speak quite a lot about the ethical ways and means under which an organization operates, and tries to make its mark at the local as well as the global levels. Such understandings are quintessential to have, and more so when there is cut throat competition and rivalry within the business circles as of today (Mckinney 1991). Therefore it is always pertinent to comprehend that selection processes should be impartial, rational and effective yet this is not always the case. Fortunately or the lack thereof, there are efforts being made to address such qualms on different levels within the organizations in the current times. Impartiality and rationality seem to be a thing of the past as far as selection processes are concerned. This is because the organizations have started to understand the true meaning of selecting and recruiting the most appropriate and qualified individuals. The manner in which this has come about as a myth is all the more logical because the reasoning for the same is present in recent examples and cases. There are many disgruntled employees and aspiring ones who have seen uncanny attitudes at the hands of their potential employers (D’Souza 1996). There are people who have their immense dislike based on such selection processes because they feel that they have been hard done by, by these organizations over a period of time, and that these organizations are doing their best to hide their talents and abilities, which is a very shameful act in the real sense of the word. Selecting individuals is after all a prerogative of an organization and the human resources management department knows it best how to exploit its resources in line with its wishes and requirements (Smith & Robertson 1989). But then again it is the duty of this human resources management department to make sure that the proper procedures are being followed and that each and every candidate is given a fair and impartial chance to showcase his truest talents and skills. After all, it is the company’s loss if it is unable to find individuals who are the most perfect ones within their line of business. If they fail to galvanize such a team of strong individuals who have their innate talent sets, it is indeed the fault of the organization more than anything else. In essence, it also speaks a great deal about the shortcomings that exist within the human resources management department so to speak (Aguinis 2004). Once again, it is important to realize that impartiality and rationality of the claim that whether or not today’s selection processes are bringing the desired results is a myth. This is because there is hardly a scenario within organizations when the most apt regime is in full function. In other words, it would be correct to state that organizations of the present times have devised ways and means through which they can reach the people who they desire to make them a part of their congenial work environments. Impartiality is a much desired state of being that an organization can strive for (Nelson 1997). What it must do is in essence a part of what this ideology beckons. The implication for the same is provided by a number of different factors, all of which have their important say within the making up of beliefs, traditions and customs that an organization wishes to inculcate within the minds of its employees. After all, culture plays a very strong role within the coining up of different attributes and characteristics within the organization. There is a good amount of understanding that goes into developing the eventual ideology that has been thus erected and chalked out (Ryan 1999). On the same token, there are points which suggest that the close coordination of the human resources management department with not only the organizational top heads but also the aspiring candidates is something that can be looked forward to, especially when the organization is willing to explore its truest basis. The manner in which this myth has come about is a staggering one. There are times when employees are told as to what exactly they can look forward to receiving at the hands of the organization while at others, there are stringent codes of conduct and policies in place that essentially dictate the ways and means through which success can be envisaged over a period of time, both for the sake of the organizational top heads as well as the employees themselves. The myth is also very interesting to decipher because companies are doing very little when it comes to comparing the same with the expectations of their employees and the ones who are about to join the same bandwagon. These companies believe that they are indispensable and any one would be more than willing to be a part of their set up (Ogilvie 2000). This is a very negative and diktat form of approach that would not bring sanity within the related ranks. It could be possible that such a perspective might yield optimism in the short run but from a long term standpoint, there could be serious issues which could come to the surface. It is always a good exercise to get well-acquainted with such topics beforehand so that an organization does not find itself muddled into problematic areas so to speak. Conclusion In the end, any organization would believe in the ideology of having a selection process which is impartial, allows rationality and is effective in the long run. However this is hardly the case and the problems do come in from all sides (Bierman 2002). The selection processes of today might be better off than these were in the past but then again there is a great amount of work that still needs to be done. The approach is right but the mechanics have gone somewhat wrong, and there is reason enough to believe in such a hypothesis which has stood the test of time and gone on to prove its own self. The role of the human resources management department within the entire equation is a significant one because it dictates exactly as to how things would be done and completed in a proper way. All said and done, one can decipher the impartiality, rationality and effectiveness to come about in the selection process regimes of an organization if and only if there are concerted efforts made by all concerned to nip the evil in its bud and that too without taking a lot of time. Bibliography Aguinis, Herman (2004). Test-Score Branding in Human Resource Selection: Technical, Legal and Societal Issues. Praeger Bierman, Luke (2002). Beyond Merit Selection. Fordham Urban Law Journal, Vol. 29 Laser, Stephen. (1994). Personnel Selection in Organizations. Personnel Psychology, Vol. 47 D’Souza (1996). America’s Multicultural Dilemma, The World & I Mckinney, William (1991). The Impact on Utility, Race, and Gender Using Three Standard Methods of Scoring Selection Examinations. Public Personnel Management, Vol. 20 Nelson, Jodi (1997). The Boundaryless Organization: Implications for Job Analysis, Recruitment, and Selection. Human Resource Planning, Vol. 20 Ogilvie, John. (2000). Managing Selection in Changing Organizations. Personnel Psychology, Vol. 53 Ryan, Ann. (1999). An International Look at Selection Practices: Nation and Culture as Explanations for Variability in Practice. Personnel Psychology, Vol. 52 Smith, M, and Robertson, I. T (1993). The Theory and Practice of Systematic Personnel Selection, 2nd ed. Macmillan Press Smith, M, and Robertson, I. T (editors). (1989). Advances in Selection and Assessment. John Wiley Tyson, Shaun and York, Alfred (2000). Essentials of HRM. Butterworth-Heinemann; 4th Edition Read More