•How can we avoid same-source bias to have better measures of P-O fit? •What is the process for a new selection tool, like P-O fit, becoming a legal measure for hiring? Is there potential acceptance from EEOC and CRA of this tool for selection despite its current weak relationship to job performance? I feel that the measure of P-O fit is important, but I can understand applicants wanting to just get a job based on their ability to do the job instead of both. I think more complex jobs may value from P-O fit particularly because of possibly the difficulty in doing the job and possibly in hiring for the job as well. Any thoughts on this?
Do you think there could be adverse impact when using person-organization fit for selection purposes? I wonder if this would correlate with other individual factors, such as personality, race, or gender?
How might applicants perceive the use of P-O fit as a selection tool? Would they feel like the company had their best interests at heart (thinking that the company was looking out for them and wanted to hire them only if they would fit in well in the organization), or might the applicant feel like that is something they should be perceiving and they may not have a good feel for it until after being on the job?
Do you think applicant's reactions to selection tests might impact their perceptions of P-E fit? Is this one possible explanation for why applicants tend to have negative reactions to structured interviews?
I disagree with the authors’ recommendation that employers should not be concerned with fit when it comes to selection. Fit was important to turnover, which is a very costly thing. I think including a predictor that can ensure employees will stay is very important… What do you think?
I wondered about this also Nick. Still, I appreciate the point they made in the end, that the subjective measure of fit especially is susceptible to contamination by the recruiter or interviewer's bias and might lead to subgroup differences (and that this has not been studied.) So, I agree with the conclusion, we need to be cautious. I was going to use this as a predictor in the group project, but now will not. It seems safer to use P-O fit for placement (post-hire), but not for selection.
•How can we avoid same-source bias to have better measures of P-O fit?
ReplyDelete•What is the process for a new selection tool, like P-O fit, becoming a legal measure for hiring? Is there potential acceptance from EEOC and CRA of this tool for selection despite its current weak relationship to job performance? I feel that the measure of P-O fit is important, but I can understand applicants wanting to just get a job based on their ability to do the job instead of both. I think more complex jobs may value from P-O fit particularly because of possibly the difficulty in doing the job and possibly in hiring for the job as well. Any thoughts on this?
Do you think there could be adverse impact when using person-organization fit for selection purposes? I wonder if this would correlate with other individual factors, such as personality, race, or gender?
ReplyDeleteHow might applicants perceive the use of P-O fit as a selection tool? Would they feel like the company had their best interests at heart (thinking that the company was looking out for them and wanted to hire them only if they would fit in well in the organization), or might the applicant feel like that is something they should be perceiving and they may not have a good feel for it until after being on the job?
ReplyDeleteWhat factors might affect the degree to which people see P-O as a valid selection tool?
ReplyDeleteDo you think applicant's reactions to selection tests might impact their perceptions of P-E fit? Is this one possible explanation for why applicants tend to have negative reactions to structured interviews?
ReplyDeleteI disagree with the authors’ recommendation that employers should not be concerned with fit when it comes to selection. Fit was important to turnover, which is a very costly thing. I think including a predictor that can ensure employees will stay is very important… What do you think?
ReplyDeleteI wondered about this also Nick. Still, I appreciate the point they made in the end, that the subjective measure of fit especially is susceptible to contamination by the recruiter or interviewer's bias and might lead to subgroup differences (and that this has not been studied.)
ReplyDeleteSo, I agree with the conclusion, we need to be cautious. I was going to use this as a predictor in the group project, but now will not. It seems safer to use P-O fit for placement (post-hire), but not for selection.