Beste egokitzapen godardar baterako metafikzio eta testuartekotasuna

Whilst a significant body of selection and assessment research is focused on interview processes and practices, research on filtering processes has been limited (see Aguinis & Smith, 2007; Anderson et al., 2004; Robertson & Smith, 2001). According to Oswald et al. (2004), past research has reported on some aspects of informal decisions within filtering but most research (see Bliesener, 1996; Robertson & Smith, 2001; Thierry, 2007) has failed to have significant impact on practical settings and thus has failed to address issues in practice. Current theory, in fact, could be strengthened by exploring and integrating research surrounding informal decisions (Aguinis & Smith, 2007; Harvey-Cook &

Taffler, 2000) in the daily practice of ‘doing’ selection and making decisions.

As reported in the first chapter this thesis aims to address the following overarching research question:

“How are informal decisions reached by screeners when filtering out undesirable job applications?”,

From the review of the literature important gaps in knowledge have been identified and three further research questions (secondary research questions) have been formulated:

“What are the selection processes that small organisations use for informal decisions?”

“How is information weighted for informal decisions?”

“What are the major influences on assessors’ informal decisions?”

Researching these questions will facilitate a better understanding of the issue investigated and will support the answer of the primary research question.

-59- 2.9 Conclusions

Whilst literature provides a foundation of understanding, practice can be radically different from theory (Brownlie et al., 2008; Iles et al., 1990).

Many organisations desire a generalisable or adaptable selection process that can be applied effectively to local jurisdictions and international fora alike (Aycan, 2005; Porterfield, 2001), but information and testing have differing legal constraints across jurisdictional limits which can influence decisions. Whilst uniformity would promote consistency, inconsistency and individualism appear to be the norm (Pronin et al., 2002). Variances in labour laws, cultural attributes, and values are part of global operations and must be considered when constructing selection processes. Therefore, understanding informal decisions can improve organisational filtering processes and ensure consistency in hiring.

Any improvement in informal decisions in selection can create a competitive advantage for an organisation. In a global environment where resources are scarce and desires can be infinite, organisations having a competitive advantage have an increased chance at survival. Decreasing waste from resources (i.e. enhancing productivity) can be a dramatic competitive advantage. For example, Ferris et al. (2002) note competitions within labour markets can obligate organisational resources towards recruitment and retention practices and not towards productivity or product research and development. Essentially, organisations gain more by locating productive workers (Barron et al., 1985). According to Drucker (1954, p. 255), “…the greatest opportunity for improved economic performance lies in the improvement of effectiveness of people in their work.” These points illustrate that competitive advantages are dependent on good filtering decisions. Thus, good filtering decisions cost less in the long run (Browne et al., 2005; Zachar, 2004). As Drucker (in Edersheim, 2007, p. 195) points out “The first sign of decline of a company is loss of appeal to qualified, able, and ambitious people.”

“In hiring a worker one always hire the whole man [sic].” states Drucker (1954, p.

262). Stanton (1977, p. 103) states that “…the best way to predict an applicant’s future job performance is to take a good look at what he or she has done in the past.” However, deviations enter hiring decisions by cultural and social assumptions, through language, and simple error. Successful hiring decisions are hinged upon strong informal decisions rooted in guidelines and personnel specifications (cf., Barron et al., 1985; Blakemore & Low, 1984;

Borjas & Goldberg, 1978), information processing (cf., Aguinis & Smith, 2007; Anderson &

Shackleton, 1990), and screener objectivity (cf. Oliphant & Alexander, 1982; Ryan et al., 1999). Whilst this does not encompass all deviations in informal decisions, it does highlight what is most prevalent within the literature (cf., Anderson et al., 2004; Robertson & Smith, 2001).

-60-

This chapter has provided a strong foundation to explain aspects of human decision making processes; however, the depth of understanding these processes in informal decisions has not been achieved by reviewing literature and additional sources of information alone. This review allows questions concerning the relationships and nature of informal decisions regarding filtering to be formulated and asked. Boettcher (2004) and Bobko et al., (2008) suggest that understanding the environmental factors in which decisions are made can provide an opportunity to understand and interpret decision making processes.

Reflecting upon the management environment, Half (1985) notes that successful organisations can remove (or at least reduce) assumptions from hiring practices. Individuals are best lead by their strengths and knowledge (Drucker, 2001).

“Management is about human beings. Its task is to make people capable of joint performance, to make their strengths effective and their weaknesses irrelevant.

This is what organization is all about, and it is the reason that management is the critical determining factor.”

Drucker (2001, p. 10)

The significant theme here is that the final quality of hiring decisions rests within early screening and informal filtering decisions which can significantly impact an organisation’s visions and continued existence (Choo, 1998; Geerlings & van Veen, 2006). To be employed, job-seekers must successfully, either on their own merits or by erroneous decisions, pass filtering processes. Applying academic insight requires constantly revisiting discoveries to improve current practises. However, this solution is impractical and unimaginable as there are no strong theoretical depictions or comprehensive studies on informal decisions. From a practitioner viewpoint, clear communication amongst managers and staff responsible for filtering processes can reduce errors in judgement (Mercer, 1993).

Errors can result from problems with information: screeners can improperly weight information (cf. Guion & Gottier, 1996; Hill et al., 1988; Keysar, 1989; McGrath, 2003) or make false assumptions by the improper weighting of information (Schmitt & Oswald, 2006).

Finally, shared experiences, such as training, could reduce improperly weighted information (Bendig, 1956; Cook, 1991; Roch & O’Sullivan, 2003) by promoting understanding amongst decision-makers (Keysar, 1997; Keysar & Bly, 1995; Schmidt & Hunter, 1974).

A literature review was conducted before the formation of the research question (Eisenhardt, 1989a; Miller & Salkind, 2002; Shah & Corley, 2006). Yin (1994, p. 13, in Alan, 2003, p. 8) suggests that case studies “benefits from the prior development of theoretical propositions to guide data collection and analysis…” Using the identified knowledge gaps

-61-

discussed with the methodological limitations of previous research concerning informal decisions, shortfalls in knowledge were identified to form the basis for research (Allan, 2003;

Gephart, 2004; Maital et al., 2008): How are informal decisions reached by screeners when filtering out undesirable job applications? By focusing on daily hiring practices, this research will shed light on informal decisions that may not be evident with using other more indirect tools and methodologies.

Chapter 3 presents the research methodology implemented to address this research question and build a deeper understanding of informal decisions within filtering processes

.

-62-

Chapter 3 Research