Pros and Cons of The Different Selection Methods Paper

Need your ASSIGNMENT done? Use our paper writing service to score better and meet your deadlines.


Order a Similar Paper Order a Different Paper

For this discussion, I would like you to read through the scenario, make your decisions, and then discuss. You can discuss the pros and cons of the different selection methods that NEO employs first, or you can jump right in with your decision. Your decision MUST be backed with logic and support from the literature. It is ok to have an opinion, but you must also back up your decision with empirical support when possible. I will be looking for you to cite from readings from throughout the course… from material in the beginning of the semester through now… This is one place where it all comes together, so to speak.

Here is the topic**:

You are to review candidate credentials for a plant manager position at Non-Existent Organization (NEO) in Dallas. Based on the information provided, provide a detailed report that addresses the following:

  1. Rank order your top four choices for the plant manager position based on the information provided.
  2. Provide a discussion of how this rank order was reached. Provide a rationale for rating some candidates higher than others. As part of this process, provide a discussion of how the information was used. Consider each piece of selection information. Discuss which selection information should be given most weight, which given the least, and explain why. Cite relevant research where appropriate.
  3. How should the selection process be changed in the future? Which devices should be retained and which should be eliminated? Explain. What additional information would you like to have regarding selection devices, the process, or the candidates?

Again, please cite relevant articles where/when appropriate. It is too easy to let our opinions and “hunches” guide us. Please back up your decisions and rationale with research findings.

As you make your decision consider all of the information you have. Sort through what is relevant and what is not based on the information you have about selection devices and validity issues. Keep in mind the specific position for which you are hiring and how the information you have applies to that specific position rather than how it applies to selection in general. In other words, apply both science and logic to the problem at hand.

Background

NEO is a medium-sized manufacturer of office supplies headquartered in Houston, TX. The firm employs about 10,000 people and has plants in St. Paul, Columbus, Atlanta, San Diego, Pittsburgh, Dallas, and Little Rock.

Recently, the company has been trying to hire a new plant manager for the Dallas plant. Although the company has generally done well in terms of profitability and sales growth, the Dallas plant has generally lagged behind the other plants. Over the past three years production costs have been extremely high and there has been a great deal of labor trouble that has involved numerous grievances and work slowdowns. The last plant manager was terminated although the official reason for his leaving was so he could take a better job.

Because of the importance of the plant manager position, NEO has used several expensive selection devices to hire the new manager. They are detailed below. After a thorough recruiting effort and some initial screening, the list of job candidates has been reduced to eight candidates. NEO does not have an established philosophy for filling job openings. In the past, it has favored promotion from within the company. However, the vice president of production was hired externally. Although transfers have been rare, NEO has no policy on lateral transfers, and it evaluates each request on the basis of whether the company will benefit from the transfer.

Job Summary of the Plant Manager Position

The plant manager is ultimately responsible for the operating efficiency of the entire plant. In fulfilling his/her responsibilities, the PM regularly consults with subordinate supervisory personnel and frequently delegates duties to them. A plant manager must be knowledgeable of production methods and the capabilities of equipment. Some of the activities the plant manager is directly or indirectly involved in include:

  • procuring materials
  • maintaining the plant
  • controlling quality
  • using the work force effectively
  • establishing budgets
  • revising production schedules because of equipment failure or operating problems
  • consulting with engineering to modify machinery to improve production and safety
  • conducting hearings to resolve grievances
  • ensuring safety
  • establishing community relations

Candidates for Plant Manager at NEO – Dallas

  1. George Martin: Age 44, white male

Education: B.S. in Management, Wisconsin, Masters in Industrial Relations, Cornell

Work History: Last 6 years as plant manager of a relatively small (580 nonunion employees) plant located in Cleveland (one of NEO’s competitors). Martin has been in his current job for six years and with his present company for 14 years.

Other Information: No reference information was gathered for him because he was concerned about his present company’s reaction.

  1. Tony Caciopo: Age 59, white male

Education: high school graduate

Work History: Last 10 years as Assistant Manager at NEO Atlanta plant, 24 years with NEO

Other Information: Had severe heart attack four years ago but appears to have recovered; turned down plant manager job 10 years ago because of his wife’s health problems

  1. Kathy Joyce: Age 36, white female

Education: B.S. in Business, Indiana

Work History: Last 2 years as plant manager at NEO – Little Rock; with NEO for 5 years

Other Information: She desires a lateral transfer because it would enhance job opportunities for her husband; has suggested that she may leave the company if she cannot move to a larger city.

  1. Barry Fein: Age 49, white male

Education: Associates Degree in Industrial Technology, Morehead State

Work History: Currently unemployed; most recently plant manager at a unionized textile plant for five years; worked for company for 20 years

Other Information: Was terminated two months ago when the company he worked for discontinued the product line has plant produced. He has three letters of reference from his former employer that are excellent.

  1. Jon Jackson: Age 33, African-American male

Education: B. A., Howard; M.B.A., Northwestern

Work History: Acting NEO – Dallas plant manager for last two months; Assistant manager NEO – Dallas for two years; has been with NEO for four years

Other Information: None

  1. Jay Davis: Age 46, white male

Education: B.A., Harvard; M.B.A., Harvard

Work History: Assistant plant manager NEO – Atlanta for one year; Assistant plant manager NEO – St. Paul for six years; been with NEO 10 years

Other Information: None

  1. Frank Hall: Age 58, white male

Education: B.S. in Chemistry, Duke

Work History: Last 6 years as VP of Production at BLR Office Supplies; Twelve years as plant manager at unionized BLR plant

Other Information: Hall claims he has sought a demotion so that he will not have to travel as much, but no plant manager jobs are currently open at BLR. No reference information is available for Hall. He has received favorable comments in two trade publications for his performance at BLR (which is one of NEO’s major competitors).

  1. Ton Doyle: Age 36, Hispanic male

Education: B.A., Williams College; M.B.A., University of Chicago

Work History: Last two years as special assistant to VP of Production at NEO; Plant manager at Little Rock for three years; Assistant plant manager at Little Rock for two years.

Other Information: Doyle at 33 was the youngest person ever to be appointed to the plant manager’s job at NEO. Despite his potential, he was not effective as plant manager and was removed after three years to work at headquarters.

Selection Data

Personality profiles:

Each of the eight candidates was examined by a psychologist using personality indicators including the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator and the Thematic-Apperception Test. The following conclusions were established:

Candidate’s Ratings

Criteria

High

Medium

Low

Ability to handle stress

Martin

Caciopo

Davis

Joyce

Jackson

Fein

Doyle

Hall

Ability to resolve conflict

Joyce

Davis

Caciopo

Martin

Doyle

Hall

Fein

Jackson

Interpersonal skills

Martin

Joyce

Hall

Jackson

Caciopo

Davis

Fein

Doyle

Most likely to succeed as plant manager

Martin

Caciopo

Davis

Joyce

Doyle

Hall

Jackson

Fein

In addition, a professional graphologist analyzed the handwriting samples of all eight candidates and rated them in terms of their likelihood of success as the Dallas Plant Manager. The seven point success scale ran from -3 (very unlikely to succeed) to +3 (very likely to succeed).

Applicant

Rating

Applicant

Rating

George Martin

+3

Tony Caciopo

+1

Kathy Joyce

-1

Barry Fein

+1

Ron Jackson

+2

Jay Davis

+2

Frank Hall

-2

Tom Doyle

+3

Interview Ratings:

Each candidate went through a series of four interviews. Each of the two company vice presidents went through a day-long training session in administering a structured interview. Each of the two subsequently interviewed each candidate. The structured interviews averaged three hours in length. The two plant managers conducted unstructured interviews of one hour in length with each candidate with the exception that the Columbus manager was on the day Hall was on site. Each interviewer ranked the candidates on a seven point scale (1 = poor candidate to 7 = outstanding candidate) as follows:

VP of Production

VP Human Resources

Columbus Plant Manager

Atlanta Plant Manager

Martin

6.5

6

5.5

4

Caciopo

5

5.5

4.5

6

Joyce

6

6.5

5

5.5

Fein

4

4

3

4

Jackson

5

5.5

4.5

5

Davis

4.5

5

3.5

6.5

Hall

6.5

7

N/A

4

Doyle

5.5

6

4.5

6

Ability and Performance Ratings:

Each applicant was given the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale to assess each applicant’s level of intelligence (IQ). NEO has used this test often in the past for selecting management trainees and has discovered that individuals scoring below 115 tend not to do well in managerial positions. The standard deviation for this test is 3.5.

All current NEO employees in the applicant pool have promotability and performance data from their immediate supervisors. A promotability rating is part of the annual review, and scores range from 1 = should not be promoted to 7 = ready for immediate promotion. Performance ratings ran 1 = unacceptable performance to 7 = exceptional performance.

As part of the selection process all applicants went through a series of work sample tests that included in-basket exercises, leaderless group discussions, and production planning exercises. The work sample test was designed by an industrial/organizational psychologist and the assessors included two trained raters from human resources and two outside consultants. A score of 20 was the highest possible score.

Intelligence test scores

Promotability ratings

Performance ratings

Work sample scores

Martin

119

N/A

N/A

19.5

Caciopo

116

6

5

15.5

Joyce

131

5

6

18.5

Fein

122

N/A

N/A

18.5

Jackson

114

5.5

6

18

Davis

136

7

7

16.5

Hall

112

N/A

N/A

19

Doyle

125

5.5

6

17.5

"Is this question part of your assignment? We can help"

ORDER NOW
Writerbay.net

Do you need help with this or a different assignment? We offer CONFIDENTIAL, ORIGINAL (Turnitin/LopesWrite/SafeAssign checks), and PRIVATE services using latest (within 5 years) peer-reviewed articles. Kindly click on ORDER NOW to receive an A++ paper from our masters- and PhD writers.

Get a 15% discount on your order using the following coupon code SAVE15


Order a Similar Paper Order a Different Paper