Whose Job Is It Anyway? Co-Ethnic Hiring in New U.S. Ventures

Kerr, Sari Pekkala; Kerr, William R.

doi:10.3386/w28509

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 35 publications

(41 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We test these reports in a selection decision setting, and evaluate their efficiency from the perspective of decision accuracy, as well as from the perspective of participants' levels of comprehension and satisfaction with the reports. Selection accuracy holds particular significance for organizations (Kerr, 2021), as poor hiring decisions can have detrimental impact on various organizational areas (CareerBuilder, 2017). Additionally, empirical findings from educational testing domain showed that different types of reports lead to different levels of comprehension and satisfaction (e.g., Bucknavage, 2007).…”

Section: The Present Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

Designing Assessment Reports: How Proper Score Descriptions Can Improve Selection Decisions

Spinu,

Iliescu

2023

PRU

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper explores, through a quasi-experimental design, different ways of building employee assessment reports to determine which elements would lead to more efficient selection decisions. Two types of reports were built: (a) reports containing descriptions of the minimum and maximum scores (i.e., 1 vs. 10), and (b) reports containing the description of the exact score recorded by the participant (i.e., any score on a scale of 1 to 10). The efficiency of these report was evaluated in two scenarios: a difficult-decision scenario and an easy-decision scenario. A total of 269 hiring managers participated in a simulated selection decision setting. They were asked to choose the best candidate for a specific position, based on a job description and two personality profiles for two fictitious candidates. They were also asked about their perceived levels of comprehension and satisfaction with the report. The model was statistically significant, χ2(3) = 110, p < .001, R2N = .461. In both the difficult and the easy scenarios, reports containing descriptions of the minimum and maximum scores were more efficient than reports containing descriptions of the exact scores recorded by the participants, and they also led to higher levels of perceived comprehension and satisfaction with the report. The results were influenced by the participants’ familiarity with the used personality questionnaire (the NEO PI-R). This study has both theoretical and practical implications, extending the existing organizational literature by drawing from cognitive psychology, and highlighting the critical role that assessment reports have in the process of organizational selection decisions.

show abstract

Section: The Present Studymentioning

confidence: 99%