"I Didn't Stand a Chance!"
New Research on Improving Fairness Perceptions of Selection Processes
In today's competitive environment organisations are placing more importance on not only the effectiveness of their selection and promotion processes but also on how fair applicants perceive the processes to be. Positive candidate reactions to selection and promotion processes have been shown to benefit the organisation in many ways, for example improving company image, attracting external talent and keeping unsuccessful internal applicants motivated.
The related literature suggests that perceived fairness is based on satisfaction or violation of the following procedural aspects:
a) characteristics of the selection system (e.g. job relatedness, opportunity to perform, consistency of administration)
b) explanation (e.g. feedback, honesty, information provided)
c) interpersonal treatment (e.g. interpersonal effectiveness of administrator)
Until now research had focused mainly on 'job relatedness' as the primary influence on fairness perceptions. That is, candidates report more fairness when exercises/tests are clearly related to the job they are applying for. As a result, organisations wanting to improve fairness perceptions have tended to focus primarily on ensuring the selection process consists of tests/exercises that are relevant to the role.
Latest Research in the US has found that in addition to job relatedness, it is just as important that candidates felt that they had an 'opportunity to perform' during the selection process. This was found to be an important predictor of perceived fairness.
The study involved assessing applicants for positions within a US government agency. The individuals took part in a one-day assessment consisting of a number of tests/exercises developed from job analysis. In the study, candidate perceptions were measured before they were told whether or not they had been offered the job and also approximately 3 months after receiving the selection/rejection feedback. Of particular interest is that 'opportunity to perform' became the most (more so than job relatedness) important factor after candidates received negative feedback. For example, once candidates received the rejection feedback they expressed more concerns over whether there had been adequate opportunity to display their knowledge and skills during the process.
In looking to explain this finding, literature suggests that stating there was not enough opportunity to perform provides the most "self-serving" explanation for failure. For example candidates can better excuse their poor performance on a cognitive ability test by stating that they did not have enough time or that "it did not give me the opportunity to show what I know" than by stating that the test was not relevant to the job.
Implications for Organisations
Whether the comments made by candidates are "self-serving" or not, considering the organisational benefits of perceived fairness, organisations should be seeking to ensure that their selection processes are perceived positively. This research indicates that opportunity to perform is an important component of overall procedural fairness perceptions and organisations should take account of this when designing and implementing their selection processes.
The authors propose that organisations seeking to improve fairness perceptions could:
-
provide information to applicants pointing out that the assessments are designed to a) provide them with enough time and b) provide sufficient resources to perform c) be free of distractions and d) overlap with their backgrounds and experiences.
-
make sure they gather candidate reactions before and after feedback
-
seek to better understand the applicant pool (e.g. prior employment, level of education, technical savvy) in order to be better positioned to make choices about the format of the assessments and hence increase perceived opportunity to perform
-
include at least some assessments perceived as providing greater opportunity to perform, for example including non-written testing formats (such as role-plays) and excluding biodata
How can Human Assets help?
Your approach to selection and promotion will have a lasting impact on candidates - whether they are successful or not. We can help you not only identify the right people but also to assess the impact of your selection and promotion processes - ensuring that the impression of your organisation is a positive one.
Human Assets is a business psychology consultancy with 20 years' experience in choosing, developing and retaining talent. We strive to ensure that our client solutions benefit from the latest knowledge.
If you would like to find out more about this area please contact our consultants at enquiries@humanassets.co.uk or on +44 (0)20 7434 2122.
Reference
Schleicher DJ, Venkatarmani V, Morgeston FP, Campion MA (2006). So you didn't get the job... Now what do you think? Examining Opportunity-to-Perform Fairness Perceptions. Personnel Psychology, 59(3), 559-590.
Newsletter: January 2007