EVALUATING FIT IN EMPLOYEE SELECTION: BELIEFS ABOUT HOW, WHEN, AND WHY

摘要

Research strongly supports the use of standardized assessment methods, like structured interviews, to evaluate applicants. Many practitioners, however, continue to prefer unstructured and intuition-based approaches to employee selection. Nonstandardized assessment methods compromise the reliability and predictive validity of employee-selection systems and expose the hiring process to the idiosyncratic beliefs and biases of decision makers. To better understand practitioners' beliefs about decision making for employee selection, this study examines (a) the effects of standardization on the perceived usefulness of assessment methods for evaluating applicants fit with the job (person-job [PJ] fit) and the organization (person-organization [PO] fit); (b) the effects of work proximity on beliefs about the importance of evaluating PJ and PO fit for employee selection; and (c) beliefs about the work-related outcomes that are influenced by PJ and PO fit. Study results provide insight concerning how, when, and why those who make hiring decisions believe these forms of compatibility should be evaluated during employee selection. Suggestions for how this information may be used to help consulting psychologists design employee-selection systems that are more attractive to use, yet retain the predictive validity and legal defensibility of traditional standardized approaches, are offered.