Build or buy? The individual and unit-level performance of internally versus externally selected managers over time.
Philip S. DeOrtentiis, Chad H. Van Iddekinge, Robert E. Ployhart, and Tom D. Heetderks
Abstract:
At some point, hiring managers in all organizations face the decision of whether to fill open positions with internal candidates (e.g., through promotions) or to hire external candidates (e.g., from competitors or new entrants into the labor market). Despite this ubiquitous choice, surprisingly little research has compared the effectiveness of internal and external selection or has identified situations in which 1 approach may be better than the other. The authors use theory on human capital resources to predict differences between internal and external hires on manager- and unit-level outcomes. Analysis of data from a quick-service retail organization (N = 3,697) suggested that internally hired managers demonstrated higher levels of individual job performance and commanded lower starting salaries than externally hired managers. At the unit-level, operations led by internal hires demonstrated higher performance on organization-specific criteria (i.e., service performance), whereas no internal–external differences were found on more general criteria (i.e., financial performance). They also found some evidence that differences in unit service performance decreased over time (but did not diminish completely) as external hires improved at a slightly faster rate than internal hires. Overall, these findings underscore the complexity of the recurring “build or buy” decision. The results also suggest that internal hires generally outperform external hires, both individually and collectively, and they do so for less money.
Philip S. DeOrtentiis, Chad H. Van Iddekinge, Robert E. Ployhart, and Tom D. Heetderks
Abstract:
At some point, hiring managers in all organizations face the decision of whether to fill open positions with internal candidates (e.g., through promotions) or to hire external candidates (e.g., from competitors or new entrants into the labor market). Despite this ubiquitous choice, surprisingly little research has compared the effectiveness of internal and external selection or has identified situations in which 1 approach may be better than the other. The authors use theory on human capital resources to predict differences between internal and external hires on manager- and unit-level outcomes. Analysis of data from a quick-service retail organization (N = 3,697) suggested that internally hired managers demonstrated higher levels of individual job performance and commanded lower starting salaries than externally hired managers. At the unit-level, operations led by internal hires demonstrated higher performance on organization-specific criteria (i.e., service performance), whereas no internal–external differences were found on more general criteria (i.e., financial performance). They also found some evidence that differences in unit service performance decreased over time (but did not diminish completely) as external hires improved at a slightly faster rate than internal hires. Overall, these findings underscore the complexity of the recurring “build or buy” decision. The results also suggest that internal hires generally outperform external hires, both individually and collectively, and they do so for less money.
A dual-process theory perspective to better understand judgments in assessment centers: The role of initial impressions for dimension ratings and validity.
Pia V. Ingold, Mirjam Dönni, and Filip Lievens
Abstract:
Insight into assessors’ initial impressions has the potential to advance knowledge on how assessors form dimension-based judgments and on possible biases in these ratings. Therefore, this study draws on dual process theory to build and test a model that integrates assessors’ dimension ratings (i.e., systematic, slow, deliberate processing mode) with their initial impressions (i.e., intuitive, fast, automatic processing mode). Data collection started with an AC where assessors provided ratings of assessees, and an online survey of assessees’ supervisors who rated their job performance. In addition, two other rater pools provided initial impressions of these assessees by evaluating extracted 2-min video clips of their AC performance. Initial impressions from both of these samples were positively related to assessors’ dimension ratings, which supports assumptions from dual process theory and might explain why assessors’ dimensional ratings are often undifferentiated. Initial impressions did not appear to open up the doors for biases and stereotypes based upon appearance and perceptions of liking. Instead, assessors picked up information that assessees transmitted about their personality (i.e., Conscientiousness and Emotional Stability). Implications for further research on initial impressions and AC dimension ratings are discussed.
Pia V. Ingold, Mirjam Dönni, and Filip Lievens
Abstract:
Insight into assessors’ initial impressions has the potential to advance knowledge on how assessors form dimension-based judgments and on possible biases in these ratings. Therefore, this study draws on dual process theory to build and test a model that integrates assessors’ dimension ratings (i.e., systematic, slow, deliberate processing mode) with their initial impressions (i.e., intuitive, fast, automatic processing mode). Data collection started with an AC where assessors provided ratings of assessees, and an online survey of assessees’ supervisors who rated their job performance. In addition, two other rater pools provided initial impressions of these assessees by evaluating extracted 2-min video clips of their AC performance. Initial impressions from both of these samples were positively related to assessors’ dimension ratings, which supports assumptions from dual process theory and might explain why assessors’ dimensional ratings are often undifferentiated. Initial impressions did not appear to open up the doors for biases and stereotypes based upon appearance and perceptions of liking. Instead, assessors picked up information that assessees transmitted about their personality (i.e., Conscientiousness and Emotional Stability). Implications for further research on initial impressions and AC dimension ratings are discussed.
Influencing how one is seen by potential talent: Organizational impression management among recruiting firms.
Kang Yang and Trevor Yu
Abstract:
This paper investigates how employers influence the beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors of potential talent as part of a process of Organizational Impression Management (OIM) during the recruitment process. Several studies were conducted seeking to address the lack of empirical research on what recruiters do to manage organizational images. Study 1 developed and validated an empirical measure of OIM. Study 2 demonstrated that OIM tactics were distinct from other phenomena encountered by job seekers as part of the recruitment process. Study 3 established predictive validity by investigating the impact of OIM on organizational images and attraction in a field experiment setting. Implications for future research in OIM, as well as recruiting organizations in the practice of OIM, are discussed.
Kang Yang and Trevor Yu
Abstract:
This paper investigates how employers influence the beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors of potential talent as part of a process of Organizational Impression Management (OIM) during the recruitment process. Several studies were conducted seeking to address the lack of empirical research on what recruiters do to manage organizational images. Study 1 developed and validated an empirical measure of OIM. Study 2 demonstrated that OIM tactics were distinct from other phenomena encountered by job seekers as part of the recruitment process. Study 3 established predictive validity by investigating the impact of OIM on organizational images and attraction in a field experiment setting. Implications for future research in OIM, as well as recruiting organizations in the practice of OIM, are discussed.
Using Practice Employment Tests to Improve Recruitment and Personnel Selection Outcomes for Organizations and Job Seekers
Michael C. Campion, Emily D. Campion, and Michael A. Campion
Abstract:
This study introduces the use of practice employment tests during recruitment as a tool with the potential to improve outcomes for both an organization and its (potential) applicants during personnel selection. Synthesizing research on recruitment, selection, job search, adverse impact, signaling theory, and human capital theory, we propose that practice tests reduce information asymmetry regarding the nature of an organization’s assessment procedures, thereby acting as short-term human capital investment opportunities. Using a large sample of potential applicants and applicants who later decided to apply for jobs within a professional occupation in a large organization, we demonstrate that (a) those who took the practice tests scored higher on the actual tests; (b) score gains between practice tests and actual tests were greater for Blacks and Hispanics when compared to Whites; (c) the practice test exhibited a self-selection effect, encouraging those with higher scores to apply; and (d) score gains between practice tests and actual tests were similar to scores observed for those retesting on the actual tests. These findings suggest practice tests may be capable of simultaneously enhancing organizational outcomes (e.g., increased quality of applicants, reduced cost of testing unqualified applicants, and reduced adverse impact) and applicant outcomes (e.g., increased human capital, increased chances of eventual employment, and reduced disappointment and wasted effort from unsuccessful application).
Michael C. Campion, Emily D. Campion, and Michael A. Campion
Abstract:
This study introduces the use of practice employment tests during recruitment as a tool with the potential to improve outcomes for both an organization and its (potential) applicants during personnel selection. Synthesizing research on recruitment, selection, job search, adverse impact, signaling theory, and human capital theory, we propose that practice tests reduce information asymmetry regarding the nature of an organization’s assessment procedures, thereby acting as short-term human capital investment opportunities. Using a large sample of potential applicants and applicants who later decided to apply for jobs within a professional occupation in a large organization, we demonstrate that (a) those who took the practice tests scored higher on the actual tests; (b) score gains between practice tests and actual tests were greater for Blacks and Hispanics when compared to Whites; (c) the practice test exhibited a self-selection effect, encouraging those with higher scores to apply; and (d) score gains between practice tests and actual tests were similar to scores observed for those retesting on the actual tests. These findings suggest practice tests may be capable of simultaneously enhancing organizational outcomes (e.g., increased quality of applicants, reduced cost of testing unqualified applicants, and reduced adverse impact) and applicant outcomes (e.g., increased human capital, increased chances of eventual employment, and reduced disappointment and wasted effort from unsuccessful application).
Using machine learning to translate applicant work history into predictors of performance and turnover.
Sima Sajjadiani, Aaron J. Sojourner, John D. Kammeyer-Mueller, and Elton Mykerezi
Abstract:
Work history information reflected in resumes and job application forms is commonly used to screen job applicants; however, there is little consensus as to how to systematically translate information about one’s work-related past into predictors of future work outcomes. In this article, we apply machine learning techniques to job application form data (including previous job descriptions and stated reasons for changing jobs) to develop interpretable measures of work experience relevance, tenure history, and history of involuntary turnover, history of avoiding bad jobs, and history of approaching better jobs. We empirically examine our model on a longitudinal sample of 16,071 applicants for public school teaching positions, and predict subsequent work outcomes including student evaluations, expert observations of performance, value-added to student test scores, voluntary turnover, and involuntary turnover. We found that work experience relevance and a history of approaching better jobs were linked to positive work outcomes, whereas a history of avoiding bad jobs was associated with negative outcomes. We also quantify the extent to which our model can improve the quality of selection process above the conventional methods of assessing work history, while lowering the risk of adverse impact.
Sima Sajjadiani, Aaron J. Sojourner, John D. Kammeyer-Mueller, and Elton Mykerezi
Abstract:
Work history information reflected in resumes and job application forms is commonly used to screen job applicants; however, there is little consensus as to how to systematically translate information about one’s work-related past into predictors of future work outcomes. In this article, we apply machine learning techniques to job application form data (including previous job descriptions and stated reasons for changing jobs) to develop interpretable measures of work experience relevance, tenure history, and history of involuntary turnover, history of avoiding bad jobs, and history of approaching better jobs. We empirically examine our model on a longitudinal sample of 16,071 applicants for public school teaching positions, and predict subsequent work outcomes including student evaluations, expert observations of performance, value-added to student test scores, voluntary turnover, and involuntary turnover. We found that work experience relevance and a history of approaching better jobs were linked to positive work outcomes, whereas a history of avoiding bad jobs was associated with negative outcomes. We also quantify the extent to which our model can improve the quality of selection process above the conventional methods of assessing work history, while lowering the risk of adverse impact.
Employee referral hiring in organizations: An integrative conceptual review, model, and agenda for future research.
Steven D. Schlachter and Jenna R. Pieper
Abstract:
Employee referral hiring, an organization’s use of current employees’ social networks (referrers) to fill job openings with new hires (referred workers), is a popular organization practice. This topic has been studied for decades by scholars, and research remains vibrant across several disciplines. While reviews of recruitment methods and their influence on job seekers and organizations exist, they give minimal attention to employee referrals. This gap is critical because an assessment of the employee referral literature exposes numerous theories, deviations in methodological approaches, and other important nuances. The research developed, and emerging across different disciplines, is also disconnected, often overlooking promising findings from each other. Furthermore, the impact of technology and the changing nature of work requires a renewed attention to the methodological and theoretical underpinnings of the referring phenomenon. Our review integrates the multidisciplinary literature to address important knowledge gaps and confront the underlying complexities of the referral hiring phenomenon. We review 101 relevant referral hiring studies from 86 published and unpublished articles across a variety of disciplines, and, in the process, we develop a model of employee referral hiring in organizations. This model portrays the pathways and contextual variables that describe the referring process (e.g., referrer motivations, the hiring process, and referrer and referred worker outcomes). Last, we advance an agenda for future research on this promising topic.
Steven D. Schlachter and Jenna R. Pieper
Abstract:
Employee referral hiring, an organization’s use of current employees’ social networks (referrers) to fill job openings with new hires (referred workers), is a popular organization practice. This topic has been studied for decades by scholars, and research remains vibrant across several disciplines. While reviews of recruitment methods and their influence on job seekers and organizations exist, they give minimal attention to employee referrals. This gap is critical because an assessment of the employee referral literature exposes numerous theories, deviations in methodological approaches, and other important nuances. The research developed, and emerging across different disciplines, is also disconnected, often overlooking promising findings from each other. Furthermore, the impact of technology and the changing nature of work requires a renewed attention to the methodological and theoretical underpinnings of the referring phenomenon. Our review integrates the multidisciplinary literature to address important knowledge gaps and confront the underlying complexities of the referral hiring phenomenon. We review 101 relevant referral hiring studies from 86 published and unpublished articles across a variety of disciplines, and, in the process, we develop a model of employee referral hiring in organizations. This model portrays the pathways and contextual variables that describe the referring process (e.g., referrer motivations, the hiring process, and referrer and referred worker outcomes). Last, we advance an agenda for future research on this promising topic.
Faking to fit in: Applicants’ response strategies to match organizational culture.
Nicolas Roulin and Franciska Krings
Abstract:
We examine applicant faking as an adaptive response to the specific environment that applicants are confronted with. More specifically, we propose that applicants fake by adapting their responses to the culture of the hiring organization so that they display the personality profile that best matches the organization’s culture. In other words, they fake in a targeted manner, to increase their person–organization (P-O) fit. We tested this proposition in 6 studies, including experiments and surveys, and focused on competitiveness and innovativeness as 2 central elements of organizational culture. Results confirm that applicants infer an ideal personality profile from elements of organizational culture and then adapt their responses on personality inventories accordingly. Faking to increase P-O fit was present, albeit slightly weaker, when accounting for the fact that applicants choose organizations that fit their values. Overall, this research highlights the adaptive component of faking and underlines that it should not be considered a behavior that only dishonest individuals show.
Nicolas Roulin and Franciska Krings
Abstract:
We examine applicant faking as an adaptive response to the specific environment that applicants are confronted with. More specifically, we propose that applicants fake by adapting their responses to the culture of the hiring organization so that they display the personality profile that best matches the organization’s culture. In other words, they fake in a targeted manner, to increase their person–organization (P-O) fit. We tested this proposition in 6 studies, including experiments and surveys, and focused on competitiveness and innovativeness as 2 central elements of organizational culture. Results confirm that applicants infer an ideal personality profile from elements of organizational culture and then adapt their responses on personality inventories accordingly. Faking to increase P-O fit was present, albeit slightly weaker, when accounting for the fact that applicants choose organizations that fit their values. Overall, this research highlights the adaptive component of faking and underlines that it should not be considered a behavior that only dishonest individuals show.
Political affiliation and employment screening decisions: The role of similarity and identification processes.
Philip L. Roth, Jason B. Thatcher, Philip Bobko, Kevin D. Matthews, Jill E. Ellingson, and Caren B. Goldberg
Abstract:
Recent research in political science, along with theory in applied psychology, has suggested that political affiliation may be associated with substantial levels of affect and, thus, might influence employment decision-makers. We designed 2 experiments using social media screening tasks to examine the effects of political affiliation similarity on ratings of hireability. Our findings in both studies suggest that the identification (capturing positive affect) and disidentification (capturing negative affect) of a decision-maker with a job applicant’s political affiliation were important variables that influenced perceived similarity. Consistent with the similarity-attraction paradigm, perceived similarity was related to liking and, in turn, liking was related to expected levels of applicant task and organizational citizenship behavior performance. Further, in both studies, political affiliation related variables influenced hireability decisions over and above job-relevant individuating information. Future research should continue to examine political affiliation similarity, particularly in light of its frequent availability to decision-makers (e.g., via social media websites).
Philip L. Roth, Jason B. Thatcher, Philip Bobko, Kevin D. Matthews, Jill E. Ellingson, and Caren B. Goldberg
Abstract:
Recent research in political science, along with theory in applied psychology, has suggested that political affiliation may be associated with substantial levels of affect and, thus, might influence employment decision-makers. We designed 2 experiments using social media screening tasks to examine the effects of political affiliation similarity on ratings of hireability. Our findings in both studies suggest that the identification (capturing positive affect) and disidentification (capturing negative affect) of a decision-maker with a job applicant’s political affiliation were important variables that influenced perceived similarity. Consistent with the similarity-attraction paradigm, perceived similarity was related to liking and, in turn, liking was related to expected levels of applicant task and organizational citizenship behavior performance. Further, in both studies, political affiliation related variables influenced hireability decisions over and above job-relevant individuating information. Future research should continue to examine political affiliation similarity, particularly in light of its frequent availability to decision-makers (e.g., via social media websites).
Liar! Liar! (When Stakes Are Higher): Understanding How the Overclaiming Technique Can Be Used to Measure Faking in Personnel Selection
Patrick D. Dunlop, Joshua S. Bourdage, Reinout E. de Vries, Ilona M. McNeill, Karina Jorritsma, Megan Orchard, Tomas Austen, Teesha Baines, and Weng-Khong Choe
Abstract:
Overclaiming questionnaires (OCQs), which capture overclaiming behavior, or exaggerating one’s knowledge about a given topic, have been proposed as potentially indicative of faking behaviors that plague self-report assessments in job application settings. The empirical evidence on the efficacy of OCQs in this respect is inconsistent, however. We draw from expectancy theory to reconcile these inconsistencies and identify the conditions under which overclaiming behavior will be most indicative of faking. We propose that the assessment context must be tied to an outcome with high valence, and that the content of the OCQ must match the perceived knowledge requirements of the target job, such that overclaiming knowledge of that content will be instrumental to receiving a job offer. We test these propositions through three studies. First, in a sample of 519 applicants to firefighter positions, we demonstrate that overclaiming on a job-relevant OCQ is positively associated with other indicators of faking and self-presentation. Next, we demonstrate through a repeated-measures experiment (N = 252) that participants in a simulated personnel selection setting overclaim more knowledge on a job-relevant OCQ than on a job-irrelevant OCQ, compared with when they are instructed to respond honestly. Finally, in a novel repeated-measures personnel selection paradigm (N = 259), we observed more overclaiming during a selection assessment compared with a research assessment, and we observed that this job-application overclaiming behavior predicted deviant behavior following selection. Altogether, the results show that overclaiming behavior is most indicative of faking in job application assessments when an OCQ contains job-relevant (rather than job-irrelevant) content.
Patrick D. Dunlop, Joshua S. Bourdage, Reinout E. de Vries, Ilona M. McNeill, Karina Jorritsma, Megan Orchard, Tomas Austen, Teesha Baines, and Weng-Khong Choe
Abstract:
Overclaiming questionnaires (OCQs), which capture overclaiming behavior, or exaggerating one’s knowledge about a given topic, have been proposed as potentially indicative of faking behaviors that plague self-report assessments in job application settings. The empirical evidence on the efficacy of OCQs in this respect is inconsistent, however. We draw from expectancy theory to reconcile these inconsistencies and identify the conditions under which overclaiming behavior will be most indicative of faking. We propose that the assessment context must be tied to an outcome with high valence, and that the content of the OCQ must match the perceived knowledge requirements of the target job, such that overclaiming knowledge of that content will be instrumental to receiving a job offer. We test these propositions through three studies. First, in a sample of 519 applicants to firefighter positions, we demonstrate that overclaiming on a job-relevant OCQ is positively associated with other indicators of faking and self-presentation. Next, we demonstrate through a repeated-measures experiment (N = 252) that participants in a simulated personnel selection setting overclaim more knowledge on a job-relevant OCQ than on a job-irrelevant OCQ, compared with when they are instructed to respond honestly. Finally, in a novel repeated-measures personnel selection paradigm (N = 259), we observed more overclaiming during a selection assessment compared with a research assessment, and we observed that this job-application overclaiming behavior predicted deviant behavior following selection. Altogether, the results show that overclaiming behavior is most indicative of faking in job application assessments when an OCQ contains job-relevant (rather than job-irrelevant) content.
What’s on job seekers’ social media sites? A content analysis and effects of structure on recruiter judgments and predictive validity.
Liwen Zhang, Chad H. Van Iddekinge, John D. Arnold, Philip L. Roth, Filip Lievens, Stephen E. Lanivich, and Samantha L. Jordan
Abstract:
Many organizational representatives review social media (SM) information (e.g., Facebook, Twitter) when recruiting and assessing job applicants. Despite this, very little empirical data exist concerning the SM information available to organizations or whether assessments of such information are a valid predictor of work outcomes. This multistudy investigation examines several critical issues in this emerging area. In Study 1, we conducted a content analysis of job seekers’ Facebook sites (n = 266) and found that these sites often provide demographic variables that U.S. employment laws typically prohibit organizations from using when making personnel decisions (e.g., age, ethnicity, and religion), as well as other personal information that is not work-related (e.g., sexual orientation, marital status). In Study 2 (n = 140), we examined whether job seekers’ SM information is related to recruiter evaluations. Results revealed that various types of SM information correlated with recruiter judgments of hireability, including demographic variables (e.g., gender, marital status), variables organizations routinely assess (e.g., education, training, and skills), and variables that may be a concern to organizations (e.g., profanity, sexual behavior). In Study 3 (n = 81), we examined whether structuring SM assessments (e.g., via rater training) affects criterion-related validity. Results showed that structuring SM assessments did not appear to improve the prediction of future job performance or withdrawal intentions. Overall, the present findings suggest that organizations should be cautious about assessing SM information during the staffing process.
Liwen Zhang, Chad H. Van Iddekinge, John D. Arnold, Philip L. Roth, Filip Lievens, Stephen E. Lanivich, and Samantha L. Jordan
Abstract:
Many organizational representatives review social media (SM) information (e.g., Facebook, Twitter) when recruiting and assessing job applicants. Despite this, very little empirical data exist concerning the SM information available to organizations or whether assessments of such information are a valid predictor of work outcomes. This multistudy investigation examines several critical issues in this emerging area. In Study 1, we conducted a content analysis of job seekers’ Facebook sites (n = 266) and found that these sites often provide demographic variables that U.S. employment laws typically prohibit organizations from using when making personnel decisions (e.g., age, ethnicity, and religion), as well as other personal information that is not work-related (e.g., sexual orientation, marital status). In Study 2 (n = 140), we examined whether job seekers’ SM information is related to recruiter evaluations. Results revealed that various types of SM information correlated with recruiter judgments of hireability, including demographic variables (e.g., gender, marital status), variables organizations routinely assess (e.g., education, training, and skills), and variables that may be a concern to organizations (e.g., profanity, sexual behavior). In Study 3 (n = 81), we examined whether structuring SM assessments (e.g., via rater training) affects criterion-related validity. Results showed that structuring SM assessments did not appear to improve the prediction of future job performance or withdrawal intentions. Overall, the present findings suggest that organizations should be cautious about assessing SM information during the staffing process.