Employee Resourcing Flashcards
Employee resourcing definition
Staffing and mobilising workforce - right people doing the right jobs at the right time
What employee resourcing focuses on
Recruiting, selecting, inducting, retention, dismissal, and retirement
Good practice of recruitment and selection - Purpose
Hire best qualified and highest performing staff while being fair to job applicants
Good practice of recruitment and selection - 4 main stages
- Job analysis and design
- Recruitment
- Selection
- Induction
Job analysis and design - what does it use
Job description and person specifications
Selection of good practice
Using objective methods to accurately predict future performance
Induction - use
Ensure newbies perform to high levels as quick as possible
Competency meaning
Boyzatis (1982) - underlying characteristic of a person resulting in effective and superior performance in job
Competency framework - what is it
List of personal attributes expressed as what ppl can do and how they prefer to conduct work (similar to person specs)
Competency framework steps
- Identify best performers
- Find underlying characteristics that they share
- Formulate framework
- Compare candidate list to framework
- Hire those who have a higher number
Competency framework vs person specifications
Competencies are not specific to jobs/job groups, as it covers wide range of divisions or whole organisation
What can the competency framework be used for in HRM practices?
Performance mgmt, employee development, recruitment and selection
What tests can be conducted to find underlying characteristics?
Interview, personality tests, direct observation
Milsom (2009)
Competency frameworks are more distinct than person specs as it focuses on organisational values: not just simple attributes to get job done, also language that reflects core values
Pros of competency frameworks
- modern business context requires flexibility, not appropriate to define narrow jobs
- globalisation, tech, unpredictable market conditions means that job description/person specs need continuous updating (costly and disruptive)
- Effective performers are less about skills sets and more about attitudes/personal values (skills can be trained, attitudes are hard to influence)
Cons of competency framework
- Produce clones - reduced diversity (Kandola et al, 2000), same mindset and values, less creativity and innovation
- International organisations: doesn’t consider cultural differences
- Reflect characteristics that worked in the past, doesn’t reflect attributes needed to develop for the future
What is the best approach for recruitment and selection?
Blend competency framework and job analysis, drawing best features:
- incorporate competencies with role-specific points
- likely future requirements
Internal recruitment - define
Existing staff are given preference when new job opportunities arise in organisation
Types of internal recruitment
- Jobs first advertised internally, then externally if there are no candidates
- Internal applicants compete with external
- Jobs are only advertised internally, external candidates are not considered at all
Informal recruitment - define
Jobs are not formally advertised (e.g. WOM), unsolicited applications that may turn out being suitable
Criticisms of internal/informal recruitment
- unfair because excludes possible candidates, operates against minorities and benefits powerful
- potential external candidates may be better performers
Pros of internal recruitment
- low cost (no training/advertising)
- Low risk (expectations are known, less disillusioned)
- speed of adjustment (little induction/support)
- incentive and motivation (developmental opportunities)
- return on investment (waste of money invested in development of employees)
Sparrow and Hilton (1994)
European companies show evidence that support the benefits of internal recruitment
Cho et al (2006)
American hotels that promoted internally suffered higher levels of employee turnover among non-managerial jobs
Problems with internal recruitment
- ppl being promoted without training and support to carry new roles effectively
- unsuccessful applications lead to demotivation
- Senior mgmt need external recruits in order to avoid dull/non-innovative
Pros of informal recruitment
- less likely to be disillusioned as they know what to expect
- Less expensive
- less likely to leave early
- Turn out stronger/more qualified than external recruits
- fits with some cultural norms
Employer branding
Building organisation reputation as employer, seen positive and distinct from competitors
Employer of choice
Organisation recognised as most desirable in industry from candidate perspective (most target market would like to work for)
Employee value proposition (EVP)
Terms and conditions and potential experiences that org tries to offer its recruits in order to attract/retain
Employer branding - focus
- develop and communicate compelling EVP to achieve employer-of-choice status
Caveat of Employer branding
- EVP must be lived in experience of employees, misleading leads to loss of trust
Employer branding - steps
- Find out what employees perceive as best things from employment experience, how is it distinct from competition
- Formulation of compelling EVP
- Develop short, snappy slogan summing up main points of EVP to use in advertisement
Tools to achieve first stage of employer branding
- employ specialist consultants to advise and carry research, focus groups, wider employee surveys
Concerns of employer branding
Multi-national employers - using single EVP to employ ppl in different cultural contexts
- EVP will have to be tailored to meet local preferences
Problems with Headhunting
- Companies that source recruits, seen as incompatible with ‘good practice’
- Industry is unregulated, guilty of misleading recruiters and recruits
- expensive, tendency for agency to exaggerate qualities of candidates, very narrow field of candidates
- attracts negative media comments
- agents contact candidates already on their books, as they’re reluctant to make major research
- don’t commit with genuine equal opportunities for selecting new recruits from widest possible field of talent
Why headhunting
- need to fill highly specialised role, placing advertisement in press/website is unlikely to be successful
- Company is expanding operations into new regions and lacks expertise to recruit locally. headhunters have required contacts and understanding of labour market
- Company doesn’t want existing staff to know recruitment activity
- headhunters provide contact to professional groups, highest calibre recruits, Jobs that are well-paid and T&C are negotiable before appointment
- subcontract headhunters to communicate confidentially with candidates working for competitors and present excellent shortlist
- develop strong links with headhunters and work with them over a long period
- exclusivity, employer ensures consultant works for them and refrain from exaggerating abilities or attracting successful candidates away to further jobs elsewhere after commission has been paid
Selection interviews
Most common method for selection process: Formal face-to-face encounter
Traditional/unstructured interviews
- one/two interviewers
- no specific questions
- decisions of selection made by interviewer, who fills existing skill gaps and who they personally like the most?
Criticisms of traditional interviews
- Unfair bias risk, interviewers favour ppl like themselves, first impressions/prejudicial judgements (disfavours minority groups)
- Poor predictor of job performance or those who stay in organisation for a good length of time
- People with good interview skills are appointed irrespective of skills, abilities or attributes that contributes to the job
- candidates are given opportunities to shine as they get asked helpful questions or manage to steer conversations to suit their strengths
Method to predicting good performance
Relative predictive validity: score on scale 0-1
- 1 = future job performance predicted perfectly
- 0 = no capacity to predict future work performance
Schmitt and Fandre (2008)
- Traditional/unstructured interviews scored poorly (0.1-0.2)
- predictive validity of structured interviews - 0.4 to 0.6
Cook (2004)
Traditional interviews gives candidates opportunity to manage impressions through force of personality, personal charm or presenting themselves professionally
Rigorous and structured interviews
Candidates have same questions, enabling comparisons. questions asked derive from person specification or competency framework ensuring that candidates meet specific requirements for a job
- requires involvement of panel of interviewers who score candidates against some selection criteria. after all interviews, panel discusses and reaches consensus
Situational questioning
candidates are asked about how they’d act in hypothetical situations directly relevant to job. Establish preferred approach in scenarios they’d face
Behavioural questions
Focused on past experiences, past occasions were effective/relevant skills or attributes were used. what did they do? Why did they choose that approach? What might they do differently?
Pros of structured interviews
Approaches fairer, less unjustified bias, much better to predict future performance accurately (fits requirements of ‘good practice’)
Pros of traditional interviews
Problem lies this with format and more with poor interviewers. unfair bias and prejudice is allowed by interviewer
- unwise to judge effectiveness purely against prediction of future performance. conversational nature provides information about the job and organisation to see whether they’d take the job offer
- inexpensive and flexible, structured involve preparation and participation of a group of managers. cheaper when compared to other selection methods (personality testing, assessment centres)
- most candidates prefer traditional, feel comfortable and see it as fair
