Die Nutzung psychologischer Verfahren der externen Personalauswahl in deutschen Unternehmen

Abstract

Zusammenfassung. Die vorliegende Untersuchung bietet eine aktuelle Aufstellung der Einsatzhäufigkeiten verschiedener Personalauswahlverfahren. Mit Angaben von 125 deutschen Unternehmen unterschiedlicher Größe und Branche stellt diese Erhebung eine Fortsetzung der Studien aus den beiden vergangenen Jahrzehnten dar ( Schulz, Schuler & Stehle, 1985 ; Schuler, Frier & Kauffmann, 1993 ). Das Einstellungsinterview und die Analyse von Bewerbungsunterlagen bestätigen sich als verbreitetste Auswahlverfahren, der Einsatz graphologischer Gutachten ist in den letzten Jahren auf ein Minimum zurückgegangen. Verstärkte Verwendung finden vor allem strukturierte Interviews und Assessment Center. Die Nutzung von Online-Verfahren ist mit Ausnahme der Online-Bewerbungsunterlagen noch nicht sehr verbreitet. Es werden detaillierte Betrachtungen der Verwendung von Personalauswahlverfahren für die einzelnen Bewerbergruppen angestellt. Alle Verfahren wurden darüber hinaus von den Personalverantwortlichen hinsichtlich ihrer Validität, Praktikabilität und Akzeptanz bei den Bewerbern eingeschätzt.

Preselection Methods Prior to the Internal Assessment Center for Personnel Selection in German Companies

“…Our results are in line with previous findings showing that German companies rarely use psychometric tests in comparison with other countries (Ryan et al, 1999), which may be based on ideologically rooted reservations (Krause & Gebert, 2003). The infrequent use of trait-oriented methods can also be traced back to low acceptance among both companies (König, Klehe, Berchtold, & Kleinmann, 2010;Schuler, Hell, Trapmann, Schaar, & Boramir, 2007) and applicants (Anderson, Salgado, & Hülsheger, 2010). Albeit speculatively, reasons for the low acceptance of intelligence tests could be the frequently abstract task designs and the minor face validity (Chan, Schmitt, DeShon, Clause, & Delbridge, 1997).…”

“…Second, we focused on the internal selection of candidates for the AC. Given the differences between internal and external recruiting processes (Bartram, 2004;Becker et al, 2011;Schuler et al, 2007), it would be interesting to extend our research to preselection methods that are used for the external nomination of AC candidates. Third, because we surveyed only German companies, research is necessary to generalize our results to other countries.…”

“…Nevertheless, we tried to recruit a sample representing AC using companies in Germany at the best. Knowing that bigger organizations (more than 2,000 employees) prefer the use of ACs (e.g., Schuler et al, 2007;Höft & Obermann, 2010) and that their line of business is mostly the industrial sector, we tried to recruit companies with regard to these characteristics. Fourth, future studies should aim to integrate research on preselection methods and research on ACs.…”

The Role of Neuroscience Information in Choosing a Personality Test: Not as seductive as expected

“…However, to test our causal hypotheses, we needed an experimental design, and convincing test publishers to manipulate their promotion material was deemed impossible. Furthermore, personality tests are not used that often (e.g., Diekmann & König, in press;Schuler et al, 2007), making the decision for or against a test a rare event. Therefore, the disadvantage of the use of a hypothetical scenario must be considered together with the advantage of being able to draw causal conclusions.…”

“…One prominent example is the pronounced preference for the unstructured interview (Lievens & De Paepe, 2004;Stephan & Westhoff, 2002), even though research has shown that standardization leads to higher validity (Kepes, Banks, McDaniel, & Whetzel, 2012;McDaniel, Whetzel, Schmidt, & Maurer, 1994). The role of general mental ability in personnel selection, as another example, has been emphasized for decades now (Schmidt & Hunter, 1998), but tests of cognitive ability are used only occasionally (e.g., companies surveyed by Ryan, McFarland, Baron, & Page, 1999, indicated the extend of use of cognitive ability tests with 21-50%, and only 30% of German companies use cognitive ability tests with at least some applicants; Schuler, Hell, Trapmann, Schaar, & Boramir, 2007). On the other hand, even methods like graphology, which have been found to be inappropriate in selection procedures (Driver, Buckley, & Frink, 1996), still find some supporters (Berchtold, 2005;Di Milia, Smith, & Brown, 1994;Ryan et al, 1999;Shackleton & Newell, 1994), although this is not as widespread as is sometimes believed (Bangerter, König, Blatti, & Salvisberg, 2009).…”