Page 231 - Fundamentals of Management Myths Debunked (2017)_Flat

230 Part 3 • Organizing
is based on a proven relationship between the selection device used and some relevant
measure. For example, we mentioned earlier a firefighter applicant who was wheelchair
bound. Because of the physical requirements of a firefighter’s job, someone confined to a
wheelchair would be unable to pass the physical endurance tests. In that case, denying em-
ployment could be considered valid, but requiring the same physical endurance tests for the
dispatching job would not be job related. Federal law prohibits managers from using any
selection device that cannot be shown to be directly related to successful job performance.
That constraint goes for entrance tests, too; managers must be able to demonstrate that,
once on the job, individuals with high scores on such a test outperform individuals with
low scores. Consequently, the burden is on the organization to verify that any selection de-
vice it uses to differentiate applicants is related to job performance.

Tests . . . not just for school!

hoW effectiVe are teStS and interVieWS aS SeLection deViceS? Managers
can use a number of selection devices to reduce accept and reject errors. The best-known
devices include written and performance-simulation tests and interviews. Let’s briefly
review each device, giving particular attention to its validity in predicting job performance.
Typical written tests include tests of intelligence, aptitude, ability, and interest. Such tests
have long been used as selection devices, although their popularity has run in cycles. Written
tests were widely used after World War II, but beginning in the late 1960s, fell out of favor.
They were frequently characterized as discriminatory, and many organizations could not
validate that their written tests were job related. Today, written tests have made a comeback,
10
although most of them are now Internet based. Experts estimate that online personality tests
are used by employers to assess personality, skills, cognitive abilities, and other traits of some
11
60 to 70 percent of prospective employees. Managers are increasingly aware that poor hir-
ing decisions are costly and that properly designed tests can reduce the likelihood of making
such decisions. In addition, the cost of developing and validating a set of written tests for a
specific job has declined significantly.
Research shows that tests of intellectual ability, spatial and mechanical ability, per-
ceptual accuracy, and motor ability are moderately valid predictors for many semiskilled
12
and unskilled operative jobs in an industrial organization. However, an enduring criti-
cism of written tests is that intelligence and other tested characteristics can be somewhat
13
removed from the actual performance of the job itself. For example, a high score on an
intelligence test is not necessarily a good indicator that the applicant will perform well
as a computer programmer. This criticism has led to an increased use of performance-
simulation tests.
What better way to find out whether an applicant for a technical writing position at Apple
can write technical manuals than to ask him or her to do it? That’s why there’s an increasing
interest in performance-simulation tests. Undoubtedly, the enthusiasm for these tests lies in
the fact that they’re based on job analysis data and, therefore, should more easily meet the re-
quirement of job relatedness than do written tests. Performance-simulation tests are made up
of actual job behaviors rather than substitutes. The best-known performance-simulation tests
are work sampling (a miniature replica of the job) and assessment centers (simulating real
problems one may face on the job). The former is suited to persons applying for routine jobs,
the latter to managerial personnel.
The advantage of performance simulation over traditional testing methods should be
obvious. Because its content is essentially identical to job content, performance simulation
should be a better predictor of short-term job performance and should minimize potential
employment discrimination allegations. Additionally, because of the nature of their content
and the methods used to determine content, well-constructed performance-simulation tests
are valid predictors.
The interview, along with the application form, is an almost universal selection device.
performance-simulation Few of us have ever gotten a job without undergoing one or more interviews. The irony of
tests this is that the value of an interview as a selection device has been the subject of consider-
Selection devices based on actual job behaviors 14
able debate.