It seems that organizations could take relatively small steps to improve applicant reactions to selection procedures. It also appears that perceived justice is a large piece of this puzzle. How can organizations make their selections practices appear more fair? How do the predictors used for the selection procedure affect this perception? It seems the organizations just need to keep the applicant informed on the purpose of each procedure as well as how that information is used.
Negative selection experiences are associated with lower self-efficacy for applicants who have these experiences. Furthermore, applicants who were rejected for employment following a job-relevant selection measure (versus a less job-relevant measure) suffered a greater hit to their self-efficacy. What can organizations do to reduce the negative impact of rejection on applicants who are not hired?
Good comments and questions. How does taking a construct approach impact applicant reactions to the testing process. What are they advocating for here?
Procedural justice is very strongly a factor in applicant reactions. Providing step by step feedback may not be enough. Would providing a voice to potential applicants be ethical?
It seems that organizations could take relatively small steps to improve applicant reactions to selection procedures. It also appears that perceived justice is a large piece of this puzzle. How can organizations make their selections practices appear more fair? How do the predictors used for the selection procedure affect this perception? It seems the organizations just need to keep the applicant informed on the purpose of each procedure as well as how that information is used.
ReplyDeleteWhat are the advantages and disadvantages of measuring applicant reactions pre- and post-testing? Which might be most important to assess?
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteNegative selection experiences are associated with lower self-efficacy for applicants who have these experiences. Furthermore, applicants who were rejected for employment following a job-relevant selection measure (versus a less job-relevant measure) suffered a greater hit to their self-efficacy. What can organizations do to reduce the negative impact of rejection on applicants who are not hired?
ReplyDeleteWhat factors might influence the importance of making a selection procedure have face validity?
ReplyDeleteGood comments and questions. How does taking a construct approach impact applicant reactions to the testing process. What are they advocating for here?
ReplyDeleteProcedural justice is very strongly a factor in applicant reactions. Providing step by step feedback may not be enough. Would providing a voice to potential applicants be ethical?
ReplyDeleteWhat do you think are some of the biggest obstacles in developing a construct oriented approach to the study of applicant reactions?
ReplyDelete