Benedict P.

Siron
MBA
STANDARD FOR SELECTION METHODS
Selection
Selection is the process of choosing individuals with qualifications needed to fill jobs in an
organization. Without these qualified employees, an organization is far less likely to succeed.
Perhaps the best perspective on selection and placement comes from two HR beliefs that
underscore the importance of effective staffing:
■ “Hire hard, manage easy.” The amount of time and effort spent selecting the right
people for jobs may make managing them as employees much less difficult because
many problems are eliminated.
■ “Good training will not make up for bad selection.” When the right people with the
appropriate capabilities are not selected, employers will have difficulty later adequately
training the lesser qualified individuals who were selected.
Selection is about measuring the degree to which each applicant possesses the competencies
required to do a job.
Placement
The ultimate purpose of selection is placement, or fitting a person to the right job. Placement of
human resources should be seen primarily as a matching process that can affect many different
employment outcomes. How well an employee is matched to a job can affect the amount and
quality of the employee’s work, as well as the training and operating costs required to prepare
the individual for work life. Finally, employee morale can also be an issue because good fi t
encourages individuals to be positive about what they accomplish on the job.
The Selection Process
Selection activities follow a standard pattern, beginning with an initial screening interview and
concluding with the final employment decision. The selection process typically consists of eight
steps: (1) initial screening interview, (2) completion of the application form, (3) pre-employment
tests, (4) comprehensive interview, (5) conditional job offer, (6) background investigation, (7)
medical or physical examination, and (8) permanent job offer. Each step represents a decision
point requiring affirmative feedback in order for the process to continue. Each step in the process
seeks to expand the organization’s knowledge about the applicant’s background, abilities, and
motivation, and it increases the information that decision makers use to make their predictions
and final choice. However, some steps may be omitted if they do not yield useful data, or if the
cost of the step is unwarranted. Applicants should also be advised of any specific screening, such
as credit checks, reference checking, and drug tests. The flow of these activities is depicted in the
below picture.
A strategic approach to selection requires ways to measure the effectiveness of selection tools.
From science, we have basic standards for this:

∙ The method provides reliable information.

∙ The method provides valid information.
∙ The information can be generalized to apply to the candidates.
∙ The method offers high utility (practical value).
∙ The selection criteria are legal.

1. RELIABILITY

The reliability of a type of measurement indicates how free that measurement is from random
error. A reliable measurement therefore generates consistent results. Assuming that a person’s
intelligence is fairly stable over time, a reliable test of intelligence should generate consistent
results if the same person takes the test several times. Organizations that construct intelligence
tests should be able to provide (and explain) information about the reliability of their tests.
Usually this information involves statistics such as correlation coefficients. These statistics
measure the degree to which two sets of numbers are related. A higher correlation coefficient
signifies a stronger relationship. At one extreme, a correlation coefficient of 1.0 means a perfect
positive relationship—as one set of numbers goes up, so does the other. If you took the same
vision test three days in a row, those scores would probably have nearly a perfect correlation. At
the other extreme, a correlation of −1.0 means a perfect negative correlation— when one set of
numbers goes up, the other goes down. In the middle, a correlation of 0 means there is no
correlation at all. For example, the correlation (or relationship) between weather and intelligence
would be at or near 0. A reliable test would be one for which scores by the same person (or
people with similar attributes) have a correlation close to 1.0.

Reliability answers one important question—whether you are measuring something accurately—
but ignores another question that is as important: Are you measuring something that matters?
Think about how this applies at companies that try to identify worker who will fit in well with
the company’s culture. Often these companies depend on teamwork, social networking, and
creativity, and they expect those behaviors to prevail when workers get along well and share
similar values. However, efforts to seek cultural fit often translate into favoring the most likable
candidates—for example, those who make eye contact, display an interest in others, and tell
engaging stories. This approach not only raises questions of reliability—for example, whether
making eye contact in a job interview is a reliable measure of a person’s behavior on the job over
time—it also raises questions about the extent to which being likable really translates into
effective teamwork and creative problem solving. Perhaps the prickly member of the team will
be the one who opens up a new and valuable line of thinking. As in this example, employers
need to consider both the reliability of their selection methods and their validity.

EXAMPLES OF RELIABILITY STANDARD:

 Physical Characteristics (Height, Strength or Endurance)

 Cognitive Abilities (Mathematical Ability or Verbal Reasoning Capacity)
 Personality (Initiative or Integrity)

2. VALIDITY

For a selection measure, validity describes the extent to which performance on the measure (such
as a test score) is related to what the measure is designed to assess (such as job performance).
Although we can reliably measure such characteristics as weight and height, these measurements
do not provide much information about how a person will perform most kinds of jobs. Thus, for
most jobs height and weight provide little validity as selection criteria. One way to determine
whether a measure is valid is to compare many people’s scores on that measure with their job
performance. For example, suppose people who score above 60 words per minute on a
keyboarding test consistently get high marks for their performance in data-entry jobs. This
observation suggests the keyboarding test is valid for predicting success in that job.

As with reliability, information about the validity of selection methods often uses correlation
coefficients. A strong positive (or negative) correlation between a measure and job performance
means the measure should be a valid basis for selecting (or rejecting) a candidate. This
information is important not only because it helps organizations identify
the best employees, but also because organizations can demonstrate fair employment practices
by showing that their selection process is valid.

Three ways of measuring validity: criterion-related, content, and construct validity.

Criterion-Related Validity

Criterion-related validity is a is a method of establishing the validity of a personnel selection

method by showing a substantial correlation between test scores and job-performance scores.

Two types are:

1. Predictive validation —This research uses the test scores of all applicants and looks for
a relationship between the scores and the future performance of
those who were hired. The researcher administers the tests,
waits a set period of time, and then measures the performance of
the applicants who were hired.

2. Concurrent validation—This type of research administers a test to people who

currently hold a job, then compares their scores to existing
measures of job performance. If the people who score highest
on the test also do better on the job, the test is assumed to be
valid.

Predictive validation is more time consuming and difficult, but it is the best measure of validity.
Job applicants tend to be more motivated to do well on the tests, and their performance on the
tests is not influenced by their firsthand experience with the job. Also, the group studied is more
likely to include people who perform poorly on the test—a necessary ingredient to accurately
validate a test.

Content Validity

Content validity is a test-validation strategy performed by demonstrating that the items,

questions, or problems posed by a test are a representative sample of the kinds of situations or
problems that occur on the job. It is the consistency between the test items or problems and the
kinds of situations or problems that occur on the job.
All candidates for that job receive the same test or questions so applicants can be properly
compared. A simple example of a content-valid test is a typing test for a word processing
position. Such a test can approximate the work; the applicant can be given a typical sample of
typing, on which his or her performance can be evaluated. Assuming that the tasks on the test, or
the questions about tasks, constitute an accurate sample of the tasks on the job (ordinarily a
dubious assumption at best), the test is content valid. Content validity is best for small samples.
The usual basis for deciding that a test has content validity is through expert judgment. Experts
can rate the test items according to whether they mirror essential functions of the job. Because
establishing validity is based on the experts’ subjective judgments, content validity is most
suitable for measuring behavior that is concrete and observable.

Construct Validity

Construct validity is the degree to which a test measures a particular trait related to successful
performance on the job. These traits are usually abstract in nature, such as the measure of
intelligence, and are called constructs. Construct validity is complex and difficult. In fact, it is
the most difficult type of validity to prove because you are dealing with abstract measures.

3. GENERALIZABILITY

Generalizability is the degree to which the validity of a selection method established in one
context extends to other contexts. The process must be appropriate for the position the candidate
is applying for. If the process is not appropriate candidate may be hired with characteristic that
don’t match the position requirements.

Along with validity in general, we need to know whether a selection method is valid in the
context in which the organization wants to use it. A generalizable method applies not only to the
conditions in which the method was originally developed—job, organization, people, time
period, and so on. It also applies to other organizations, jobs, applicants, and so on. In other
words, is a selection method that was valid in one context also valid in other contexts?

For example, researchers have studied whether tests of intelligence and thinking skills (called
cognitive ability) can be generalized. The research has supported the idea that these tests are
generalizable across many jobs. However, as jobs become more complex, the validity of many of
these tests increases. In other words, they are most valid for complex jobs.

4. HIGH UTILIY (PRACTICAL VALUE)

Not only should selection methods such as tests and interview responses accurately predict how
well individuals will perform, but they should also produce information that actually benefits the
organization. Being valid, reliable, and generalizable adds value to a method. Another
consideration is the cost of using the selection method. Selection procedures such as testing and
interviewing cost money. They should cost significantly less than the benefits of hiring the new
employees. Methods that provide economic value greater than the cost of using them are said to
have utility.

Utility is the degree to which the information provided by selection methods enhances the
effectiveness of selecting personnel in organizations. The process needs to have a benefit for the
organization in order for it to be used. The choice of a selection method may differ according to
the job being filled. If the job involves providing a product or service of high value to the
organization, it is worthwhile to spend more to find a top performer. Therefore, utility is the
degree to which the information provided by selection methods enhances the effectiveness of
selecting personnel in organizations. At a company where salespeople are responsible for closing
million-dollar deals, the company will be willing to invest more in selection decisions. At a fast-
food restaurant, such an investment will not be worthwhile; the employer will prefer faster,
simpler ways to select workers who ring up orders, prepare food, and keep the facility clean.
Still, as the “Did You Know?” box illustrates, careless selection decisions are costly in any kind
of organization.

5. LEGALITY

 All selection methods must conform to existing laws and legal precedents.
 The Labor Code prohibits discrimination against women on account of their gender, and
against children on account of their age.
 The Magna Carta of Women (Republic Act No. 9710, as amended) prohibits
discrimination against women and expressly imposes liability for damages on the person
directly responsible for such discrimination.
 The Anti-Age Discrimination in Employment Act (Republic Act No. 10911) prohibits
discrimination on account of age, and imposes penalties for violation of the Act.
 The Magna Carta for Persons with Disability (Republic Act No. 7277, as amended)
provides that a qualified employee with disability shall be subject to the same terms and
conditions of employment as a qualified able-bodied person.
 The Solo Parents’ Welfare Act (Republic Act No. 8972) prohibits an employer from
discriminating against any solo parent employee with respect to the terms and conditions
of employment on account of the employee being a solo parent.
 The Indigenous Peoples’ Rights Act (Republic Act No. 8371) prohibits discrimination
against Indigenous Cultural Communities or Indigenous Peoples with respect to
recruitment and conditions of employment on account of their descent.
 The Philippine HIV and AIDS Policy Act (Republic Act No. 11166) also prohibits the
rejection of job application, termination of employment, or other discriminatory policies
in hiring, provision of employment and other related benefits, promotion or assignment of
an individual solely or partially on the basis of actual, perceived or suspected HIV status.
This law also states that policies and practices that discriminate on the basis of perceived
or actual HIV status, sex, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity and expression, age,
economic status, disability and ethnicity are deemed inimical to national interest.

References:
Fundamentals of Human Resource Management by Noe, Hollenbeck, Gerhart and Wright
Fundamentals of Human Resource Management by Decenzo and Robbins
https://prezi.com/lk_nqg1v0fl2/human-resource-management/
https://www.slideshare.net/Riciomaru/chapter-6-selection-and-placement
https://blr.dole.gov.ph/2014/12/11/labor-code-of-the-philippines/
https://gettingthedealthrough.com/area/18/jurisdiction/111/labour-employment-philippines/