Australian Management Selection Practices: Closing the Gap between Research Findings and Practice

Abstract

Three arguments were made for expecting changes in selection practice over the past decade: 1) time necessary to transfer research findings into practice, 2) evidence that HRM has become more strategic, and 3) the increased professionalism of the HRM community. In contrast to earlier findings, there was strong support for the use of structured interviewing. Interviews were most commonly undertaken by HR and line staff. Typically applicants underwent more than one interview and at each, were interviewed by two to three interviewers. Cognitive tests were more frequently used than personality assessments. There was some support for personality assessments based on the Five Factor Model but there was similar support for measures without published psychometric properties. In general, the government sector made greater use of structured interviewing, conducted a single interview with two to three interviewers present and made use of better quality assessment tools compared to other sectors. Recommendations are made for future studies.Management selection practice has the potential to make a strategic contribution to organisational performance. Studies of Australian management selection practice using data collected in the 1980s (Patrickson and Haydon 1988) and early 1990s (Di Milia and Smith 1997) concluded there was a reliance on the classic trio of interviewing, reference checking and application forms. With the exception of the standard application form, the other methods have generally been found to be associated with poor predictive ability depending

What is in Applicants' Minds When They Fill Out a Personality Test? Insights from a qualitative study

“…A lthough many organizations across the globe use personality tests as a personnel selection tool (e.g., Di Milia, 2004;König, Klehe, Berchtold, & Kleinmann, 2010;Zibarras & Woods, 2010), many practitioners worry about whether they can trust applicants' responses (e.g., Robie, Tuzinski, & Bly, 2006): How much self-presentation (or 'faking') is there in the data from personality tests? Given that people can increase their scores if asked to do so (e.g., Viswesvaran & Ones, 1999), it is understandable that practitioners are concerned about faking.…”

Investigating Retesting Effects in a Personnel Selection Context

“…T he use of ability testing in employee selection and development programs appears to be fairly popular in many countries around the globe (e.g., Di Milia, 2004;Ryan, McFarland, Baron, & Page, 1999). However, as the use of ability tests increases, issues associated with applicants' levels of contact and experience with such instruments are likely to emerge (e.g., Sackett, Burris, & Ryan, 1989).…”

The Amazing Diversity of Thought: A Qualitative Study on How Human Resource Practitioners Perceive Selection Procedures

“…The scientist-practitioner gap is especially well documented in the area of personnel selection. Human resource (HR) practitioners across the world often use procedures with relatively low predictive validity, whereas more valid procedures are not used as regularly as scientists advise (e.g., Di Milia 2004;Furnham 2008;K önig et al 2010;Lievens and De Paepe 2004;Ryan et al 1999;Scholarios and Lockyer 1999;Schuler et al 2007;Taylor et al 2002;Zibarras and Woods 2010). For example, although metaanalytic evidence supports the use of structured interviews (McDaniel et al 1994), only 5% of the companies surveyed in Belgium by Lievens and De Paepe (2004) used interviews in which all main and follow-up questions were determined a priori and in which each individual response of candidates was evaluated according to pre-established answers.…”