Introduction
The selection and assessment of personnel is a crucial aspect of organizational success because it ensures that the right individuals are employed and retained in the workplace (Arnold, Cooper, Silvester, & Robertson, 2005). This process includes the intentional creation and use of a number of selection strategies to evaluate possible candidates in accordance with established criteria. Reliability, test-retest reliability, split-half technique, validity, legality, scalability, efficiency, and fairness are some of the assessment criteria (Ryan & Ployhart, 2014).
Reliability is the consistency of the selection process over time, while test-retest reliability is the stability of the strategy when employed more than once. The split-half technique, on the other hand, divides the process into two equal pieces and examines each half’s internal consistency (Arnold et al., 2005). A selection method’s legality ensures that it complies with all relevant rules and regulations, and its validity measures how successfully it does what it is intended to. The ability of a selection method to accommodate a variety of candidate numbers is referred to as scalability, while the time and resources required to apply the technique are known as efficiency. Fairness, which ensures that the process is unbiased and fair, eradicating prejudice, and promoting diversity in the workplace, is the last crucial consideration in selection (Ryan & Ployhart, 2014).
Selection Process
To effectively choose the best candidate from a pool of 81 applicants for the Marketing Specialist position, several selection methods are required. The main recommended strategy is the structured behavioral interview, with resume screening and reference checking serving as supplemental secondary options.
A good method of selection is the Structured Behavioural Interview (SBI), which focuses on assessing applicants’ prior behavior to forecast their performance in the job position (Arnold et al., 2005). By using a constant set of questions and a standardized scoring approach, SBIs reduce biases and improve the evaluation criteria, such as validity, fairness, and legality (Ryan & Ployhart, 2014). SBIs have more validity than unstructured interviews, according to Roth and Huffcutt (2013), ensuring that the method accurately evaluates candidates’ suitability for the position. In terms of fairness, the systematic method gives all applicants equal opportunity, reduces subjective judgments in accordance with legal norms, and prevents bias (Arnold et al., 2005). SBIs are also more cost and time-effective than other alternatives, including assessment centers, and are scalable and successful since they can be adjusted to meet different applicant numbers (Ryan & Ployhart, 2014).
The sensitivity of SBIs to social desirability bias, where applicants may offer replies they consider to be favorable rather than honestly reflecting their past experiences, is one of the major downsides of SBIs (Arnold et al., 2005). Additionally, the interview process was unable to fully assess a number of skills, including inventiveness and familiarity with digital marketing, both of which are crucial for the post of marketing expert.
To get over these limitations, the SBI may be used in conjunction with other selection methods like resume screening and reference checking to provide a more full assessment of applicants’ qualifications and career history. By limiting the applicant pool to those who meet the minimum requirements for the post, resume screening provides a preliminary evaluation of candidates’ histories, credentials, and education (Ryan & Ployhart, 2014). Reference checks provide further details about a candidate’s reliability, dependability, and interpersonal abilities while also helping to corroborate the statements stated in their resumes. This improves the legitimacy and trustworthiness of the selection process (Arnold et al., 2005).
To offer a thorough and effective selection process for the Marketing Specialist post, it is crucial to use a variety of selection procedures, such as Structured Behavioural Interviews and Resume Screening with Reference Checking. Using a variety of strategies enables the process to deal with the shortcomings of each method more effectively and provide a full assessment of candidates, eventually resulting in the successful employment of the most qualified applicant for the job (Ryan & Ployhart, 2014; Arnold et al., 2005).
Evaluation Criteria that the Proposed Selection Method Meets
Validity
The recommended selection method of Structured Behavioural Interviews (SBI) has strong validity since it emphasizes past behavior as a predictor of future job performance (Arnold et al., 2005). By assessing candidates’ responses to work-related events and their ability to complete necessary tasks, this method assures content validity (Ryan & Ployhart, 2014). Since SBIs are better at identifying people who have the highest chances of succeeding in a certain role than unstructured interviews, research suggests that they have higher predictive validity (Roth & Huffcutt, 2013). Additionally, since a larger range of relevant skills and credentials are recorded when SBIs are used in conjunction with resume screening and reference checking, the selection process’ overall construct validity is increased (Arnold et al., 2005).
Fairness
By using a similar set of questions and standardised scoring techniques for all applicants, structured behavioral interviews decrease subjective biases and promote equal opportunities (Ryan & Ployhart, 2014). This systematic approach guarantees that candidates are assessed based on their core competencies and experiences rather than the interviewer’s biases or preconceptions (Arnold et al., 2005). Combining several screening processes also enhances fairness for a more complete assessment of applicants’ credentials. It reduces the possibility of missing a good candidate because of the limitations of one method (Ryan & Ployhart, 2014).
Legality
By reducing bias and ensuring that applicants are assessed using job-related criteria, structured behavioral interviews ensure that the hiring process complies with legal requirements (Arnold et al., 2005). By focusing on historical behavior and events relevant to the work, SBIs avoid inquiries that may infringe applicants’ rights, such as protected qualities (Ryan & Ployhart, 2014). The organized design of SBIs also upholds uniformity and openness, demonstrates adherence to regulations controlling equal employment chances, and reduces the probability of legal challenges (Arnold et al., 2005).
Scalability
Because they can be adjusted to accommodate a variety of candidate numbers, from small to large applicant pools, structured behavioral interviews are a scalable method of selection (Ryan & Ployhart, 2014). This flexibility is essential given the 81 applicants that are vying for the position of Marketing Specialist. By using a predetermined set of questions and a standardized scoring methodology, the SBI approach may efficiently assess several candidates while maintaining consistency and correctness (Arnold et al., 2005). The selection procedure is more scalable and enables a more complete assessment of numerous applicants when reference checking and resume screening are combined (Ryan & Ployhart, 2014).
Efficiency
The Structured Behavioural Interview method is a time- and resource-effective selection tool when compared to other approaches, such as assessment centers or intensive skill testing (Arnold et al., 2005). SBIs enable interviewers to quickly and reliably evaluate a candidate’s suitability for a job, reducing the time and effort required to make informed recruiting decisions (Ryan & Ployhart, 2014). SBIs combined with resume screening and reference checking provide for a more thorough assessment of applicants’ qualifications and experience, hastening the recruiting process and ultimately fostering organizational performance (Arnold et al., 2005).
Conclusion
In conclusion, resume screening with reference checking may be utilized in addition to structured behavioral interviews (SBI) as a main technique for the position of marketing specialist. As important evaluation criteria for effective staff selection, the SBI approach has several advantages, including high validity, fairness, legality, scalability, and efficiency (Arnold et al., 2005; Ryan & Ployhart, 2014). SBIs emphasize earlier behavior and circumstances pertinent to the position to ensure that candidates are assessed based on their core abilities and experiences. This enhances employment decisions and ultimately contributes to the company’s success.
Additionally, fixing SBI flaws and enhancing the overall effectiveness of the selection process may be accomplished by merging a number of selection procedures, including as reference checking and resume screening (Ryan & Ployhart, 2014). This extensive approach, which offers a more accurate examination of applicants’ histories and experiences, increases the likelihood of discovering the most suitable applicant for the post.
To ensure that the best candidates are selected and retained on staff, a well-designed selection process based on empirical and theoretical evidence is essential (Arnold et al., 2005). By combining selected ways that meet the major evaluation criteria, organizations may increase recruitment outcomes, promote a diverse and inclusive work environment, and eventually enhance their overall performance and competitiveness in the market (Ryan & Ployhart, 2014).
References
Arnold, J., Cooper, C. L., Silvester, J., & Robertson, I. T. (2005). Work psychology: Understanding human behaviour in the workplace. Pearson Education.
Roth, P. L., & Huffcutt, A. I. (2013). A meta-analysis of interviews and cognitive ability. Journal of Personnel Psychology.
Ryan, A. M., & Ployhart, R. E. (2014). A century of selection. Annual Review of Psychology, 65, 693-717.
write