Giessener Elektronische Bibliothek

GEB - Giessener Elektronische Bibliothek

Reasons for being selective when choosing personnel selection procedures

Koenig, Cornelius J. ; Klehe, Ute-Christine ; Berchtold, Matthias ; Kleinmann, Martin


Originalveröffentlichung: (2010) International Journal of Selection and Assessment 18 (2010) 1, 17-27; doi:10.1111/j.1468-2389.2010.00485.x
Zum Volltext im pdf-Format: Dokument 1.pdf (161 KB)


Bitte beziehen Sie sich beim Zitieren dieses Dokumentes immer auf folgende
URN: urn:nbn:de:hebis:26-opus-85323
URL: http://geb.uni-giessen.de/geb/volltexte/2012/8532/

Bookmark bei Connotea Bookmark bei del.icio.us


Freie Schlagwörter (Englisch): personnel selection , selection procedures , institutional theory , predictive validity
Universität Justus-Liebig-Universität Gießen
Institut: Arbeits- und Organisationspsychologie
Fachgebiet: Psychologie
DDC-Sachgruppe: Psychologie
Dokumentart: Preprint (Vorabdruck)
Sprache: Englisch
Erstellungsjahr: 2010
Publikationsdatum: 04.01.2012
Kurzfassung auf Englisch: The scientist–practitioner gap in personnel selection is large. Thus, it is important to gain a better understanding of the reasons that make organizations use or not use certain selection procedures. Based on institutional theory, we predicted that six variables should determine the use of selection procedures: the procedures´ diffusion in the field, legal problems associated with the procedures, applicant reactions to the procedures, their usefulness for organizational self-promotion, their predictive validity, and the costs involved. To test these predictions, 506 HR professionals from the German-speaking part of Switzerland filled out an online survey on the selection procedures used in their organizations. Respondents also evaluated five procedures (semi-structured interviews, ability tests, personality tests, assessment centers, and graphology) on the six predictor variables. Multilevel logistic regression was used to analyze the data. The results revealed that the highest odd ratios belonged to the factors applicant reactions, costs, and diffusion. Lower (but significant) odds ratios belonged to the factors predictive validity, organizational self-promotion, and perceived legality.
Lizenz: Veröffentlichungsvertrag für Publikationen ohne Print on Demand