Please complete the following questions. Be sure to cite all your sources, even if you only use the textbook.
Do individuals making staffing decisions have an ethical responsibility to know measurement issues? Why or why not?
Describe the structured interview. What are the characteristics of structured interviews that improve on the shortcomings of unstructured interviews? Tell me about a structured interview you were a part of and what you thought about it.
Do you think employers have a right to check into applicants’ backgrounds? Even if there is no suspicion of misbehavior? Even if the job poses no security or sensitive risks? Even if the background check includes driving offenses and credit histories?
Compare and contrast the ability and mixed approaches to emotional intelligence—how are they similar, and how are they different?
What issues surround discretionary assessment methods? What would you do to mitigate these issues as a staffing professional?
What are the differences between peer ratings, peer nominations, and peer rankings?
Describe the three different types of interview simulations.
What steps should be taken by an organization that is committed to shattering the glass ceiling?
A) Vincent and Peter are both sales associates, and are up for promotion to sales manager. In the last five years, on a 1=poor to 5=excellent scale, Vincent’s average performance rating was 4.7 and Peter’s was 4.2. In an assessment center that was meant to simulate the job of sales manager, on a 1=very poor to 10=outstanding scale, Vincent’s average score was 8.2 and Peter’s was 9.2. Assuming everything else is equal, who should be promoted? Why?
B) As a member of a promotion board, you have been confronted with a difficult decision. The board is fairly split on who to promote into the vacant manager position, and results from several valid predictors have not differentiated very well among the few candidates for the position: there is not a candidate that is clearly outperforming the others. Although you tried to avoid it, several board members have political reasons for preferring one finalist over the rest (this person is not the best choice, according to the predictor data). Furthermore, the results of this promotion decision (a vacancy that the company has not seen in years) are likely to reverberate throughout the organization—all the finalists are key internal players who exercise immense influence and command the loyalty of their subordinates. If one of the finalists were to leave or become disgruntled, it would be devastating for the organization. Many of the board members believe that the finalists should not have the privilege of knowing what went into the decision; they believe the board’s say is final, regardless of how it affects the finalists. As a key board member overseeing the promotion process, how would you go about making a decision?
