Candidate’s personality and decision making during recruitment and selection process
Amalasunta Georgeta Iacob, Phd.
University “ Al. I Cuza”
Iaşi, România
Andreia Andrei, Phd.
University “ Al. I Cuza”
Iaşi, România
Daniela Iosub, Phd.
University “ Al. I Cuza”
Iaşi, România
Abstract
Studied from theory and experience in staff recruitment and selection, we have some great patterns of personality or, rather, we are inclined to give more credit to a candidate with certain personality traits. Along with this finding was observed and a good ability of candidates to play a very good candidate interviewed so well manages its strengths and weaknesses, that we speak a high level of self-monitoring. So that we can interview a candidate is accepted if it has the following personality traits: openness, extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiously. If high positions dominate the first three dimensions listed, but can not necessarily talk about conscientious, but a great capacity to take risks, make decisions and high self-monitoring. While in executive positions required a high level of conscientiousness and of emotional stability order to avoid conflicts between candidate and employer.
Keywords:personality evaluation, Big Five model, self-monitoring, interview.
- Introduction
Meaning assigned to term limits personality ranged from one to another theoritician. Allport found that psychologists had visions of three elements: a) each individual has a unique personality, b) each person consists of several different characteristics, c) those characteristics remain stable over time (are constants) (apud Hayes & Orrel, 1997).
In an attempt to describe how personality is formed, Murray proposes four sets of essential factors:
1.Constitutional determinatives - they are: age, gender, body type, physical force, any disabilities that have different importance depending on the social environment.
2.Group membership determinatives - these include family groups, professional, political, religious, etc. because that membership entails a social environment with a particular system needs.
3.Related role determinatives - is a subclass of determinants of group membership, culture prescribes ways in which the roles required for group life should be played, the formation of personality is closely linked both predefined roles (gender) and those that choose (occupation).
4.Situational determinatives- is composed of the individual's everyday experience, which is usually unpredictibleand capricious: interpersonal contacts short / long term, family constellation, relationships with certain people, etc..
Personal constructs theory focuses on psychological processes that facilitate understanding of life. Personologic Kelly's system, key theoretical construct is whether the term of construction. "Man of the world through transparent patterns or templates you create yourself, then trying to match the realities of the world consists [...]. Without these patterns, our world would appear as an undifferentiated homogeneity that we could not assign any sense (apud Hjelle & Ziegler, op., p.217). Such a personal construct is a class of thoughts which the human individual constructs and interprets his own life (ie, refined to raunchy, good against evil, etc.).
2. Personality assessment in organizational environment
The first environmental assessment in organizational psychological nature have emerged from the need to ensure compatibility between people and machinery due to the introduction into employment and further automation. These initial assessment aimed at both qualified staff and on the unskilled, but also specialists in order to assess their ability to adapt to new working conditions.
The main objective of psychological evaluation is human knowledge, the features and characteristics of its individual for a diagnosis, possibly to solve a psychological problem.
Investigations of specific psychological divide after Zörgö (1976, apud Pitariu 1983): a) examination aimed at capturing and describing certain processes / physical activities, without taking into account their different aspects and b) review study aimed primarily features Psychiatric differential, which identify and organizational psihodiagnosis.
In a more comprehensive psychological examination involves understanding human problems and the overall behavior of the individual as psychological aspects. Thus, the findings of a psychological evaluation is a synthesis of information obtained from a variety of methods and techniques. Horia Pitariu very plastic emphasize his "psychology of selection and training": "The image of our personality structure is organized as a mosaic according to its own laws which constitutiveselements are interrelated, are compensated each other" (p. 83) .
Psychological examination must therefore design a framework that goes beyond mereobservation "mechanistic" because human personality is a dynamic and continuous transformation, in terms of layout skills and interests. Psychological assessment should not remain in the methodical observation of behavior in clearly defined circumstances, but can serve at one time a progressive analysis of our behavior that we learn to know, we strive to current capabilities.
3. Organization of psychological assessment in organizations
Indicated that psychological evaluation to take place in a special, after a series of well defined rules, since it must be more complex to discover as much of the subject's personality. W. Stern (apud Pitariu, 1983) proposes an organizational scheme of psychological assessment: a) basic components - assessment of feelings, perceptions, memory, language, imagination, b) intellectual components - intelligence and operational review of its aspects, c) personal components - the structure of general reactions, dynamic personality. Another scheme offered by Allport (apud.Pitariu, 1983), who believes that psychological assessment should include: a) determining psychophysical systems - temperament and skills, b) special components - the nature of acquired behavior, c) dynamic organization of personality, d ) relational system and adapt to the environment.
In practice it is difficult to observe such a scheme and the situation often requires the identification of other types of attitudes, relationships, etc.. Across organizational psychology literature have often met diagnostic word as a result of a psychological evaluation, word is not used in practice and whether it would use many would have a reaction such as a medical diagnosis. Moreover, some organizations strongly oppose the use of psychological assessment, while others take so much as personality inventories and outcome applied to ensure performance at work, employee loyalty, even profit - which is very difficult to predict for an employer.
4. Test usefulness and organizational effectiveness
A very common question is justified and the organizational environment is the extent to improve staff selection techniques help to increase efficiency and profitability in an whole organization.
Schmidt, Hunter, McKenzie and Muldrow (1979) have estimated how much a company using a valid program for the selection of employees such a measure. First the researchers used the station analysis software, then supervisors asking them to estimate the "financial value" of programmers weak, medium and good. The responses collected were processed together with other collateral information such as: a) a test used in hiring computer programmers have a validity of 0.76, b) costs $ 10 for each candidate taking the test, c) were employed by the company more than 4,000 programmers, d) each year we employ over 600 developers, e) once committed, the programmer takes this job environment for 10 years. Using this information, the study authors compared the expected utility of the test with other tests that were used in the past and whose validity was between 0.00 and 0.50. They also examined the effect of different selection ratios, whose value was between 0.05 and 0.80. Financial cost that campaign to use a test with higher validity was surprising. If the test used in the past have a validity of 0.50, and the selection ratio was 0.80, the efficiency (ie the result of employment of people better prepared) was 5.6 million dollars per year.
Although Carson, Becker and Henderson (1998) made some progress in convincing managers to understand the usefulness of the tests valid analysis, they found that the degree of acceptance by managers of the process is still very low. Whyte and Latham (1997) considers the reluctance of managers to understand and accept the logical conclusions based statistics regarding the usefulness of a valid evaluation program as "futility of utility analysis. Cronshaw (1997) suggests that the best use of this procedure is the amount of information given to a psychologist to assist program managers in making personnel decisions.
5. Personality in human resources selection
5.1. Big Five Model and another methods
5.1.1. Big Five model in cross-cultural studies
Immediately after the emergence of this new model of personality analysis and numerous studies have appeared in various places linguistic response in Europe, Asia and America.
Oliver P. John and Sanjay Srivastava (1999) provides a summary of the key research conducted to support the transcultural nature of the model. Thus the first research of origin other than English were those of German and Dutch. Dutch research has been conducted by Hofstee, De Rad and colleagues (De Raad, Hofstee him of. 1988). Their findings were consistent with results obtained by British researchers, identifying only five global factors showed that any set of adjectives used or group of subjects. As stated John and Srivastava (1999), were realized similar research in Chinese, Czech, Hebrew, Hungarian, Italian, Russian and Turkish to demonstrate the existence of the five global factors of personality.
Recent studies further examine the reliability and internal consistency of the Big Five model. Chockalingam Viswesvaran and Deniz S. Ones (2000) study included all personality inventories which are currently used and assessing the Big Five model and analyzed the factors on the fidelity and internal consistency. The results show that the average stability coefficients are between 0.69 and 0.76, the highest average coefficient of stability are found only in extroversion and lowest in agreeability. In terms of internal consistency environments ranging from 0.73 to 0.78. Extroversion, emotional stability and conscientiousness have achieved a 0.78 average and lowest average internal consistency was obtained openness to experience scale: 0.73.
If we consider that the Big Five model is closely related to language may argue that language is at the same time, and a very weak point of the cross-cultural model. (Juni, 1996 apud Rolland, 2002). To correct this problem arose two types of current methodological research that can be created: a) emic discussing - who wants to discover the culture-specific constructs adding specific language material, b) ethical approach -which aims to verify identification constructs in a given culture can be found in others. In general research from both perspectives agree on the three dimensions of the five most problematic is open to experience and neuroticism.
As we have seen, if allowed lexical retrieval of the five dimensions (Big Five) in a variety of cultural and generated a series of studies on the Five Factor Model (factorial approach). The major difference in cross-cultural validation of both models is the size opening to experience. The most common explanation for the failure of this scale mining in certain cultural and linguistic context through psycho-lexical processes is given the insufficient number of adjectives on this dimension in certain cultures although recent cross-cultural studies which show recently but found that this dimension different and varied cultural contexts. (Rolland, 2002).
Studies conducted by Digman & DeRaad summary (1990, 1994) indicates a unanimous agreement of scientists in the first four factors: Extraversion, Agreeability, Conscientiousness and Emotional Stability (Neuroticism). Regarding the fifth factor names are controversial, but the scope is conceptually identical. In conclusion, we can say that there is a fairly broad consensus among researchers in the field and manufacturers of personality tests in terms of a vision of personality as a structure consisting of five of personality superfactors or large. Big Five model is essentially a general framework for understanding and description of the personality, the personality which gives effect sizes are those groups of important psychological meanings in everyday life and used as such to distinguish individuals within each language (Minulescu, 1996, 2004).
5.1.2. The Five Superfactors and their facets
The NEO-PI-R, each of the five superfactors has many facets which six were confirmed by factor analysis. Given the high specificity of these types of tools for the language culture, it is possible that intrafactorial structure (facets) of the 5 superfactors vary in different linguistic and cultural areas, according to what people consider speaking specifically useful in evaluating behavior or personality. Structure rules will also be different from one population to another.
I.N-Neuroticism
Neuroticismul is considered by many theorists to be the area most studied personality. Is defined as a continuum between emotional stability and instability, mismatch and it is important to note that it is considered a dimension of mental normality. High scores define the general trend of living adversely affecting to be irrational ideas, decreased ability to control and cope with stress. Define low emotional stability scores. Scores are interpreted in very high risk of mental development but without pathological significance is compulsory.
The neuroticism facets as follows:
N1 - Anxiety: the general tendency, very high scores may also send the content type vs. phobic, calm, relaxation;
N 2 - Hostility: the tendency to experience state of anger, rage vs.. a prevailing state of psychological comfort;
N3 - Depression: predisposition to live affect a provision vs. depressive. their absence;
N4 - Self-(exaggerated) social anxiety and shyness vs. confidence or skills of social status;
N5 - Impulsivity: incapacity of self-control vs. capacity to resist temptations and frustrations;
N6 - Vulnerability: vulnerability to stress vs. self-assessment of competence and resist stress.
II.E-Extraversion
This super-factor indicates predominantly extrovert orientation (high scores) vs.. introvert stance (understood as lack of extraversion), thus making reference to the interpersonal domain. The two are features visible in the current behavior and studied extensively in the literature. Introvert behavior, are less observable, is low in points differential.
The extraversion facets are:
E1 - Heating / excitement: emotional behavior and friendly vs. attitude distant, formal, reserved;
E2 - Gregarious spirit: a preference for the company vs. others. tend to avoid company;
E3 - Assertion: the dominant behavior, social ascendancy vs. tendency to remain in the background;
E4 - Activism: Energy, high tempo vs. leisure preference for a slower tempo;
E5 - Search excitation: preference for stimulation vs. preference for a certain monotony;
E6 - Quality positive emotional states: the tendency to experience positive emotional states vs. lack of exuberance and verve.
III.O-Open to experience (openness to experience)
This is a factor less known, there are some authors from a relatively disagreement on its content features. Openness to experience is characterized by active imagination, the aesthetic sensibility, for proper attention to inner life and feelings, preference for variety, intellectual curiosity, independence of thought. All these aspects should be noted, not necessarily associated with education or general intelligence. Pole indicates a conservative behavior, preference for familiar emotional life "in soft and without exaggerated feelings. Lack of openness does not mean intolerance, authoritarian aggression (found in agreabilitate) or lack of principles.
Facets of openness are:
O1 - For fantasy: fantasy life, dreams oriented enrichment vs. inner life. prosaic structures that prefer to remain focused on what I do here and now,
O2 - On the Aesthetic: openness to and interest in art and beauty vs.. lack of interest; O3 - Towards modes of feeling: appreciation and sensitivity vs. inner life. affect less differentiated, less nuanced;
O4 - the action plan: the desire to try things and new activities vs.. need to anchor in what is already known but without changing anything;
O5 - the ideational level: intellectual curiosity, interest in new ideas vs.. curiosity poor, limited interests;
O6 - The plan values: tendency to re-examine personal values, social vs.. tend to accept authority and tradition.
IV.A-Agreeability
Agreeability appears as a powerful interpersonal dimension of personality, like extraversion. Agreeability central issues are altruism, cooperation plan interpersonal prosocial behavior and to help others, sometimes they signaling a dependent person. Pole describe a dominant and antagonistic behavior, self-centered, competitive, sometimes narcissistic, hedonistic and anti-social.
Agreabilităţii facets are:
A1 - Trust: the confidence to conduct vs. cynicism and skepticism directed at others;
A2 - Honesty in expressing opinions and conduct: an honest, open and ingenious show vs. Handling parents tend to flattery, lying;
A3 - Altruism: active concern for the welfare of others, generosity vs. focus on yourself;
A4 - Goodwill: the tendency to give, forget, forgive vs. conflict situations. aggressive, competitive trends;
A5 - Modesty: modesty, humility vs. arrogance, an attitude of superiority;
A6 - gently: sympathy and concern for others vs. hardness, lack of emotions on interpersonal level.
V.C-Conscientiousness
Conscientiousness refers to self in terms of ability to self-organization, planning, fulfillment of liabilities, the willingness and capacity to complete. Conscientiousness is a valuable predictor for achievements in any profession. Pole is characterized by a lower accuracy in applying moral principles, a way to track flightiness goals, to accomplish tasks, a certain tendency towards hedonism and sexual dominant interests.
The conscientiousness facets are:
C1 - Competence: the feeling of being competent, capable vs.. reduced confidence in their abilities;
C2 - Order: organization, clarity, orderly mind vs. self-esteem a little low on the organization and working methods;
C3 - sense of duty: responsibility aware, strict ethical principles vs. conduct under circumstances in which it was difficult to trust;
C4 - Want to achieve: high aspiration level and his perseverance in achieving vs. apathy, laziness, lack of ambition;
C5 - Self-discipline: the ability to complete despite vs.. tendency to defer, to deter;
C6 - deliberation: the tendency to think carefully before acting vs.. tendency to hurry.
In personnel selection is well-known value of personality variables as predictors for differential efficiency on certain items. There is an ethical warning to be expressed in that context and covering requirement not to discriminate individuals using as a criterion of personality structure, similar to the requirement not to discriminate individuals using criteria as age or sex. This is one of the main reasons for the psychologist evaluator will make recommendations on selection rather than selection decisions. In fact, personnel selection is an approach that is identified who can ensure maximum efficiency in a post or a specific activity to determine the efficiency and contribute multiple variables, many of which related to personality, such as knowledge experience, skills, motivation. We recall that the same professional results can be obtained by different routes for people with different personality structures.