Employee Selection as It Is - Essay Example

Employee Selection In my experience as a staffing supervisor for Nelson Staffing Solutions, a temporarystaffing company where I am currently employed, my job description requires me to interview applicants to determine their specific qualifications and if they would be a suitable fit for a particular company. The selection process includes many measured steps that begin before the application is filled out. Initial screenings that include reference, credit and background investigations only begin the lengthy, complex selection process. The manager or human resource officer must be able to combine the application, interview and verification process with a knowledge of what ‘red flags’ to look for in each part of that process. The person responsible for hiring determines, to a large extent, the success of their employer. This fact is especially magnified for small businesses that may not have a capable replacement on staff. Until the void is filled by a capable applicant, the entire business suffers adverse affects. The person in charge of hiring is an important responsibility in any company but large corporations are able to absorb a few judgment errors in employee selection. An employer of hundreds or thousands have few positions that only one person could do. A small business and other various organizations may have, for example, five employees each with a specific function. An analogy is a musical band that would likely have to replace a very integral part of the group such as the drummer with a stranger. Almost 80 percent of U.S. businesses employ less than 10 people. A majority of businesses must make the right call when hiring another team member and they must do it quickly. I have learned through experience and by research that by following a few guidelines, the employer can at least increase their odds for finding the right match for the position (Sloan, 2006). Pre-employment screenings ascertain basic information required for every job applicant. This procedure facilitates a systematic and orderly process from the beginning. In this phase, the employer documents the applicant’s identification and job classification for general record keeping purposes. Additionally, the applicant is classified as to their appropriateness for a particular position. Information is ascertained as to the applicant’s education, training and other qualifications. These initial groupings expedite the process and facilitate an increased propensity for a justifiable hire. Generally speaking, it is illegal for an employer to inquire as to an applicant’s ethnicity or religion and not recommended even while engaged in a casual conversation at any time during the hiring process. Discrimination, as defined by law, is a broad issue also encompassing gender and disabilities. A careful review of the employers’ responsibilities outlined under the Civil Rights or American Disability Acts is essential for whoever is involved in any step of the employee selection process. The application is used to categorize the applicant but often, it contains irrelevant questions. Though applications are fairly standard, the varied positions available in the job market are not. The selection process is streamlined by using forms that pertain more appropriately to the particular position. For example, asking the typing and office skills of an applicant for a welding job only serves to clutter and waste space on the application. Furthermore, using mass produced applications instead of those personalized by the company may contain questionable material from a legal perspective (Lindner & Zoller, 2001). Applications and resumes are the starting place for gathering information but the employer must verify these documents before making decisions based on this information. Studies have shown that almost half of resumes submitted to employers contain falsified qualifications, intentional omissions or outright lies. The finalists for the job should be given a second, brief application that again asks about any criminal activity and asks them to re-affirm that the information given is accurate, spelling out the consequences for making false representations to the company. The application should be perused in order to quickly identify items to be further investigated such as gaps of employment or hesitation to list the names of previous supervisors. All references should be contacted no matter how insignificant they may seem. I was reviewing the application of a seemingly bright and well-mannered young graduate who had very limited previous employment history and just one personal reference listed, his grandmother. A call to the grandmother revealed that this person had been a life-long thief and general trouble-maker. She asked me to keep her comments confidential which I did. Needless to say, the applicant was not retained by our company but may have been if the reference check was not performed. The candidate’s education and employment history must be thoroughly checked. If necessary ask the applicant to elaborate on their experience and education. “If possible, get a specialist to perform a background check. Consider that 1 in every 37 U.S. adults has been incarcerated” (Case, 2006). A brief interview can be held immediately following completion of the application. At this stage, both parties can make general assessments and determinations regarding whether or not this is a good fit (Mathis & Jackson, 1979). Typically, topics discussed range from career goals, job interests and salary requirements to location restrictions and availability. The interviewer will gain better information if the questions follow a structured format. The list of questions should be those that require a short answer and be limited to the topics just discussed. This pre-determined set of questions will not only streamline the process but help avoid questions deemed discriminatory. Investigating the background of an applicant begins with the level of practical information obtained during the interview. This includes questions concerning their character, health, education, experience and activities and hobbies enjoyed outside work. Information should be confirmed by someone other than the applicant including their credit, driving and criminal history along with confirmations from previous employers and the contacting of all personal references no matter how seemingly insignificant. Background checks are a tedious chore but the effort is much easier to tolerate when taking into consideration the high cost of not performing these checks. Taking an extra hour or more out of the work day to thoroughly investigate a potential employee could and most probably will save many hundreds of hours wasted on training a bad employee followed by a possibly lengthy termination and re-hiring process. Background checks must be strictly limited to job-related functions and to avoid potential litigation. Checks should always be documented to be able to later prove that the hiring decision was based on appropriate information. Standards of information should be applied uniformly within any job classification. “If one item is grounds for denial of a job to one person, it should be the same for any other person who applied for the same job” (Deland, 1983). For additional consideration, background checks are inclined to give a less favorable impression of some minority applicants. For this statistically relevant reason, all applicants should have the chance to further explain why they may have received a less than favorable recommendation from a reference. Credit checks are a measure of a person’s sense of financial responsibility. This may be a useful bit of knowledge for the employer especially if the applicant will be handling company funds. Of the two types, an investigative credit report is the more comprehensive. The very detailed and costly investigation includes interviewing the person’s past employers as well as personal and professional references. It requires that the applicant give their written consent whereas the more widely used method of checking the applicant’s consumer credit report does not. This method involves obtaining the applicant’s credit report from a credit agency. Performing a check of the possible criminal record of an applicant may be necessary if the sensitivity of the position necessitates it. Examples include jobs involving law enforcement, banks and day cares. Generally, criminal checks are legal and are commonly used by employers. “Many states have laws pertaining to the rights of employers to secure and use criminal records in making an employment decision” (Lindner & Zoller, 2001). Selecting the best employee should be an efficient, systematic process which can be accomplished to a greater degree than commonly assumed. Effective selection procedures should comprise testing, interviewing, and the checking of references, none of which should be given a disproportionate amount of weight over the other. The person(s) responsible for hiring would be much more effective if their approach was adaptive and streamlined. Many, however, are either are unaware of or simply ignore several aspects of selection that are vital to making quality hiring decisions. First and most importantly, the past job performance of a candidate is a good indicator of future performance. If an applicant has proved to be a self motivated individual, the skills needed for the new job can be taught. Those that lack this quality will likely be applying for another position soon. Employers also tend to overlook one negative aspect of an applicant’s employment history or personality if other aspects are positive. This is a common mistake made in many relationships on and off the job. The ‘negative factor’ must be carefully considered in regard to its importance to a particular position. Success on the job is a product of many features but failure could be the product of just one. Focusing in on one particularly good aspect of an applicant is another common mistake. Just because an applicant is willing to work weekends or has a winning personality should not be the determining factor in making a job offer. The person they are replacing may have refused to work overtime and was a bit surly. The employer, eager to alleviate these problems, may invite a new set of bigger problems by concentrating on one or two appositive aspects of the applicant. Employers should also realize that the expectations of potential employees have changed over the past few years. What used to be coveted, pay and position, has been replaced by overall job satisfaction. Employees today desire a challenge and want additional responsibility in addition to a comfortable relationship with their supervisor. Generally, these aspects of employment take precedence over the amount of pay (Witkin, 1980). The implementation of effective hiring procedures saves the company or organization money, time and aggravation. Employing the wrong individual wastes many dollars in terms of advertising for a replacement, the interviewing process and subsequent training. There is also the negative impact to the overall morale of other employees. Any time and costs lost in the implementation of an effective hiring procedure is by far offset by the resulting benefits. References Case, Linda. (2006). “Hiring Employees: Background Checks.” Start Up Nation. Retrieved October 13, 2006 from Deland, R. (1983). “Reference Checking Methods.” Personnel Journal. Vol. 62. Lindner, James & Zoller, Chris. (July 6, 2001). “Selecting Employees for Small Businesses: Doing it Right the First Time.” Ohio State Fact Sheet. Retrieved October 13, 2006 from Mathis, R.L. & Jackson, J.H. (1979). Personnel. St. Paul: West Publishing. Sloan, Jeff. (2006). “Hiring Great Employees.” Start Up Nation. Retrieved October 13, 2006 from Witkin, Arthur A. (July 1980). “Commonly Overlooked Dimensions of Employee Selection.” Personnel Journal. Vol. 59. Read More