MGMT90015 · Foundations Of Human Resource Management
Recruitment and Selection
Recruitment and selection is de-emphasised on the 50% final — it is the zone the individual case assignment covers — but it still supplies arguments for strategy, diversity and ethics answers, so the canon is worth knowing tightly. Recruitment is attracting a pool of suitable applicants; selection is choosing among them with valid methods. The chapter walks the R&S cycle, then introduces the realistic job preview (RJP) — giving candidates the honest picture, the bad with the good, to improve later fit and retention. The technical heart is reliability vs validity: reliability is consistency (the same candidate scores the same way twice), validity is accuracy (the method actually predicts job performance) — and you need both. The chapter ranks selection methods by predictive validity (structured interviews, work samples and ability tests beat unstructured interviews and references), covers interview and rater bias, and distinguishes person–job fit from person–organisation fit — while flagging that 'fit' can quietly launder bias and shrink diversity.
What this chapter covers
- 01Recruitment vs selection — attract, then choose
- 02The R&S cycle from job analysis to offer
- 03The realistic job preview (RJP) and its retention logic
- 04Reliability (consistency) vs validity (accuracy) — you need both
- 05Predictive validity ranking of selection methods
- 06Interview and rater bias (halo, similarity, stereotyping)
- 07Person–job fit vs person–organisation fit
- 08How 'fit' can launder bias and undermine diversity
Why a 'gut-feel' interview is the wrong selection method — argue it
- +1Define the two criteria: reliability is consistency — the method gives the same result on repetition; validity is accuracy — it actually predicts later job performance. A good method needs both.
- +1Diagnose the unstructured interview: a 'gut-feel' chat is low on both — it varies with mood and rapport (low reliability) and predicts performance weakly (low validity).
- +1Add the bias point: unstructured interviews are wide open to halo, similarity-to-me and stereotyping bias, which also threatens diversity — a cross-link to the DEI topic.
- +1Recommend higher-validity methods: a structured interview (same questions, anchored scoring), a work sample or an ability test — all rank higher on predictive validity.
- +1Conclude: standardise the process to raise reliability and validity together and reduce bias; keep the manager's judgement, but inside a structured frame.
Key terms
- Recruitment vs selection
- Recruitment is the process of attracting a pool of suitable applicants to apply; selection is the process of choosing among them using valid methods. They are sequential stages of the same talent-acquisition cycle, not synonyms.
- Realistic job preview (RJP)
- Giving candidates an honest picture of the role — the negatives as well as the positives — before they accept. It can lower offer-acceptance rates but improves person–job fit and reduces early turnover, so it is a trade-off, not a free win.
- Reliability vs validity
- Reliability is the consistency of a selection method (the same candidate scores the same way on repetition); validity is its accuracy (it actually predicts job performance). A method can be reliable but invalid; you need both, and predictive validity is the gold standard.
- Predictive validity ranking
- The evidence-based ordering of how well selection methods predict later performance: structured interviews, work samples and cognitive-ability tests rank high; unstructured interviews, references and graphology rank low. It is the basis for recommending one method over another.
- Person–job vs person–organisation fit
- Person–job fit is the match between a candidate's skills and the role's demands; person–organisation fit is the match between their values and the firm's culture. Over-weighting 'org fit' can launder bias and reduce diversity by selecting for sameness.
Recruitment and Selection FAQ
Is recruitment and selection examinable if it's de-emphasised?
Yes, but lightly. It is the individual case assignment's zone, so it is less likely to be a standalone exam question, but its concepts (reliability, validity, bias, fit) strengthen strategy, diversity and ethics answers, so know the canon and how to deploy it briefly.
What is the difference between reliability and validity?
Reliability is consistency — does the method give the same result twice? Validity is accuracy — does it actually predict job performance? A method can be perfectly reliable yet useless (consistently measuring the wrong thing), so you need both, and you should define both whenever you use them.
Why is a structured interview better than an unstructured one?
A structured interview asks every candidate the same job-related questions and scores them against anchored criteria, which raises both reliability and validity and reduces interviewer bias. An unstructured 'chat' varies with rapport and mood, predicts performance weakly, and is wide open to halo and similarity bias.
How can 'fit' undermine diversity?
When selectors over-weight person–organisation fit, 'fit' becomes a proxy for similarity to the existing team, so it quietly screens out difference and reduces diversity. Naming this risk is a strong cross-link to the DEI topic and earns analysis marks.
Exam move
Keep this chapter compact: memorise the reliability-vs-validity distinction (define both, every time), the predictive-validity ranking of methods, and the bias and fit critiques. Don't expect a standalone exam question, but bank the concepts as supporting evidence for strategy, diversity and ethics answers — for example, using 'fit can launder bias' to deepen a DEI argument.
