Human resources/the students chosen candidate screening/selection method is reference checking and the validity of that method

Human Resources/The students chosen candidate screening/selection method is reference checking and the validity of that method

Oral interviews in Human Resource Selection Oral interview selection method is a most preferred method. In a study that used open responses, it was noted that oral interviews bring a deeper understanding of needed concepts (Nehm & Sconfeld, Dec 2008). Even the minute details of the learner can be learnt during the interview process. This research study utilized science educators and tried to correlate the importance attached to natural selection. The natural selection method is most preferred because it gives direct feedback (Nehm & Schonfeld, Dec 2008). While it was noted that there was needed reviewing how the CINS and ORI types of natural responses were used in selection, there was little that was said about oral interviews as needing change. This is because the validity of oral interviews is high. The selection panel is sure to get the right person, rather than using other methods which ultimately may give a different person or character contrary to how he or she was described.
In interview sessions, one of the most evaluated things is the consistency. If the candidate cannot correlate what he or she described in his or her application letter during the oral interviews, then, the person is not qualified. According to Conway, Jako and Goodman (Oct 1995), the reliability of oral interviews is very high. This person is asked questions that directly relate to what he or she has described in the application letter and accompanying documents. This research was a meta-analysis using 49 coefficient alphas and 111 reliability coefficients emanating from selection interviews. From all the methods used for selection, it was noted that high reliability was on oral interviews. It is most preferred because at the end of the selection process, the panel is sure that it has got the right mind and behavior for the intended work.
During interviews, the selection panel seeks to have a person with right psychology and a person who would put good performance. In a study to measure validity of employment interviews, and by use of 245 coefficients from 86, 311 individuals, McDaniel, Whetzel, Schmidt & Maurer (Aug 1994) noted that one of the methods that can evaluate future performances in individuals is oral interview. Oral interviews make a person face with the panel and through his or her responses to questions directed at him or her; the selection panel can measure his or her future performances. The organization requires a person with right psychology and dedication to perform. This person cannot be measured during training, rather, can be got during real interviews. The panel would be prepared to put the person to tough psychological tests by use of questions that directly relate to performance of the organization. If this person shows correlation of what he or she says and the needs of the organization, then, the organization can be sure that the person can perform in the organization.
Oral tests are most suited to pre-determine the far a person can go in the organization in terms of performances. It has high validity in measuring the kind of input the candidate can give in the organization. In a study involving 15 elements of selection criterion or structure, it was noted that the method with high validity is oral test. Oral test has little negative attributes as compared to all others (Campion & Palmer, Sept 1997). Other interview methods were noted to contain some elements of torture or low reliability. Oral tests were noted to contain the right structure, both in questions and capability to put a candidate at ease. When the candidate is measured when he or she is at ease, he or she is capable of putting out all his or her capability, and since the panel would be evaluating this, his or her performance would be noted.
Recommendation to improve validity
While oral interviews are highly favored for their high validity, some deviate from the core purpose of the interview. So as to increase validity, all questions and oral tests should be issue- based. That is, the questions should be about performance and not questions that can scare the interviewee. It is possible for the interviewee to panic if he or she is asked questions out of his or her scope, either in education or performance. Oral interviews should not be used as intimidation tools. In a number of times when the organization already has a preferred candidate, other candidates are intimidated in the course of the selection process by use of questions out of their scope and giving statement that generally shows that the candidate has not qualified.
Oral interviews should always be used as a way of creating good rapport between the selection panel and the candidate. For example, the candidate should be told at the end of the interview that if he or she fails, there are possibilities of him or her being contacted later without applying if another opportunity opens up. The candidate should not be victimized for non-issues during the interview. For example, if he or she has not attained the recommended dress code, it should not be shown during oral interviews. It should only be a matter of consideration during evaluation of the candidates.
References
Conway, J. M., Robert, A. & Goodman, D. F. (Oct 1995). “ A meta-analysis of interrater and internal consistency reliability of selection interviews.” APA PsycNet Journal, 80(5), 565-579.
Campion, M. A. & Palmer, D. K. (Sept 1997). “ A review of structure in the selection interview.” Journal of Personnel Psychology, 50(3), 655-702.
Nehm, R. H & Schonfeld, R. S. (Dec 2008). “ Measuring knowledge of natural selection: A comparison of the CINS, an open-response instrument, and an oral interview.” Journal of research in science training, 45(10), 1131-1160.
McDaniel, M. A., Whetzel, D. L, Schmidt, F. L. & Maurer, S. D. (Aug 1994). “ The validity of employment interviews: A comprehensive review and meta-analysis.” Journal of applied psychology, 79(4), 599-616.