ArticlePublisher preview available

Fairness Reactions to Personnel Selection Techniques in France and United States

Authors:
To read the full-text of this research, you can request a copy directly from the authors.

Abstract

The authors examined the bases for fairness reactions to different selection practices and considered cross-cultural differences in these reactions by comparing respondents from 2 cultures. College students ( N = 259) from France and the United States rated the favorability of 10 selection procedures and then indicated the bases for these reactions on 7 procedural dimensions. Selection decisions based on interviews, work-sample tests, and resumes were perceived favorably in both cultures. Graphology was perceived more favorably in France than in the United States, but even French reactions toward graphology were somewhat negative. The perceived face validity of the selection procedure was the strongest correlate of favorability reactions among both samples. Beyond comparing the results from each culture, the discussion addresses implications for multinational companies establishing selection systems in foreign countries. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
Journal
of
Applied
Psychology
1996,
Vol.
81,
No. 2.
f34-141
Ccpyrighl
I
996
by
the
Am
n
Psychological
Association, Inc.
002l-90IO/96/$3.00
Fairness Reactions
to
Personnel Selection Techniques
in
France
and the
United States
Dirk
D.
Stciner
and
Stephen
W.
Gilliland
Louisiana
State
University
and
Agricultural
and
Mechanical
College
The
authors
examined
the
bases
for
fairness
reactions
to
different
selection practices
and
considered cross-cultural
differences
in
these reactions
by
comparing
respondents
from
2
cultures. College students
(Ar
=
259)
from France
and the
United States rated
the fa-
vorability
of
10
selection procedures
and
then indicated
the
bases
for
these reactions
on
7
procedural
dimensions.
Selection decisions
based
on
interviews, work-sample tests,
and
resumes
were
perceived
favorably
in
both
cultures.
Graphology
was
perceived more
favorably
in
France than
in the
United
States,
but
even
French
reactions
toward graphol-
ogy
were somewhat
negative.
The
perceived
face
validity
of the
selection
procedure
was
the
strongest
correlate
of
favorability
reactions among both samples. Beyond comparing
the
results
from
each
culture,
the
discussion addresses
implications
for
multinational
companies establishing selection systems
in
foreign
countries.
Applicant
reactions
to
specific
selection procedures
have
had
a
research tradition
in the
United States
for at
least
two
decades (Dodd, 1977;
Ryan
&
Sackett, 1987;
Schmitt
&
Coyle,
1976).
More
recently,
research
has
compared
the
favorability
or the
acceptability
of
different
selection proce-
dures (e.g.,
Smither,
Reilly,
Millsap,
Pearlman,
&
Stoffey,
1993),
and
researchers have begun
to
identify
the
bases
for
these
reactions.
For
example,
Rynes
and
Connerley
(1993)
found
that
beliefs
regarding scoring
and the
organization's
need
to
know
were
the
strongest predictors
of
reactions
to a
variety
of
selection procedures.
The
limited research
to
date
on the
bases
of
selection reactions
has
identified
deter-
minants
through
inductive
or
empirical means.
One of the
principal
purposes
of our
study
was to
examine these bases
from
a
more systematic, theoretical perspective.
Gilliland
(1993)
approached this issue
by
using organi-
zational justice theories
and
developed
a
justice-based
Dirk
D.
Steiner
and
Stephen
W.
Gilliland, Department
of
Psychology,
Louisiana State University
and
Agricultural
and
Mechanical
College. Stephen
W.
Gilliland
is now at the
Depart-
ment
of
Management
and
Policy,
University
of
Arizona.
This
study
was
conducted
in
part
while Dirk
D.
Steiner
was
participating
in an
exchange program
at
Universite
de
Pro-
vence,
Aix-en-Provence,
France.
We
thank
Neal
Schmitt
for his
valuable comments
on an
ear-
lier
draft
of
this study.
We
thank Kadidja Benkada, Bouba
Os-
mani,
and
Corinne Siringo
for
collecting
the
data
in
France
and
Scott
Klafke
for
collecting
the
data
in the
United
States.
Correspondence concerning this article should
be
addressed
to
Dirk
D.
Steiner,
Department
of
Psychology, Louisiana
State
Uni-
versity
and
Agricultural
and
Mechanical College, Baton Rouge,
Louisiana
70803-5501.
Electronic mail
may be
sent
via
Internet
to
psstei@lsuvm.sncc.lsu.edu.
model
of
applicants' reactions
to
selection systems. Spe-
cifically,
he
proposed
several procedural justice dimen-
sions that
may
form
the
basis
for
fairness
reactions.
One
of
the
major suggested
influences
on
these dimensions
is
selection
(or
testing) procedures. Four procedural justice
dimensions that apply
explicitly
to
selection procedures
are
perceived
job
relatedness,
opportunity
to
demonstrate
one's
abilities, interpersonal treatment,
and
propriety
of
questions. Gilliland
(1994)
found
job
relatedness
to be an
important determinant
of
perceptions
of
selection process
fairness.
Research
has
also distinguished between per-
ceived
face
validity
and
perceived predictive validity
(Smither
et
al.,
1993),
both
of
which
reflect
job
related-
ness.
Opportunity
to
demonstrate one's abilities
is
based
on
considerable
organizational
justice research demon-
strating
the
value
of
having
a
voice
or a
chance
to
offer
input
into organizational decisions
(Lind
&
Tyler,
1988).
Interpersonal treatment during
a
decision process
affects
reactions
to
that
process
(Bies
&
Moag,
1986;
Greenberg,
1994),
and
some selection procedures
may be
perceived
to
be
cold
and
insensitive while others
are
seen
as
warm
and
more personal. Propriety
of
questions
refers
to
inappropri-
ate or
illegal
questioning previously shown
to
relate
to ap-
plicants' perceptions
of
unfairness
(Bies
&
Moag.
1986).
Invasion
of
privacy
is an
additional procedural dimension
relevant
to
selection
techniques,
based
on
research dem-
onstrating
its
relationship
to
fairness
perceptions
of
selec-
tion
procedures
(Kravitz,
Stinson,
&
Chavez,
1994).
In
addition
to
these procedural dimensions,
a
selection
procedure
may be
viewed
as
more
acceptable
when
it is
widely
used; people
may
make
an
implicit
judgment that
a
widely
used technique
must
be
valid.
Thus,
in
this study
we
examined
perceptions
of
fairness
of a set of
selection
134
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
... Taking into account the theories of organizational justice, the recruitment process should be viewed primarily from the perspective of procedural justice, which can be defined as the participant's belief that the methods used in the process in which he participates are fair, satisfactory, and impartial in themselves [44]. Job applicants perceive the fairness of the recruitment process from different, individual perspectives, guided by their own set of criteria, which, however, are based on certain dimensions common to employees: the relationship of the selection process with work; the opportunity to demonstrate skills; the way the candidate is treated; relevance of the questions asked [36]. ...
... Applied recruitment procedures will be perceived by job applicants as more acceptable when they feel that they are widely used. They will assume that the fact that a given recruitment procedure is widely used shows that it is good, appropriate, and does not result from prejudices [36]. Recruitment participants may perceive it as violating the sense of procedural fairness taking into account numerous criteria. ...
... Hence, it becomes necessary not only to obtain comprehensive data about the candidate but also to ensure that these data are collected legally and relate to substantive key issues for a given position. The last issue is particularly important for job applicants who assess to what extent the recruitment process checks their knowledge and skills useful in the job for which they apply [36]. Already research conducted in the 1970s indicated that employees assess the fairness of decision-making processes in an organization through the prism of the quantity and quality of data collected and processed as part of the decision-making process [25]. ...
Article
Full-text available
Each organization is faced with the problem of recruiting staff to meet the needs of the tasks carried out in the organization. This process is becoming more and more complicated every year, among others, due to the greater mobility of employees, and thus the increase in the number of applications for open positions in recruitment processes. One of the key stages of the recruitment process is to obtain relevant information concerning job applicants. The purpose of this article is to present the results of the survey on a group of 76 organizations that conduct online recruitment in Krakow (Poland) in terms of obtaining data on employees by these organizations within the framework of the applicable legal framework in this area. In the case of more than half of the organizations analyzed (52.63%), they collected redundant data on job applicants, thus exceeding the scope of data collection permitted by the provisions of Polish labor law.
... Dans ce cadre, deux critères importants permettent aux candidats de juger de la qualité des procédures de recrutement : son efficacité et son caractère juste et éthique (Gilliland, 1993). La théorie de la justice organisationnelle (JO) est ainsi souvent mobilisée comme cadre conceptuel pour expliquer la formation du jugement des candidats à propos de leur futur employeur en fonction des procédures de recrutement auxquelles ils ont été soumis (Steiner & Gilliland, 1996). On peut donc avancer que les perceptions de justice formées par les candidats au cours de la procédure de recrutement s'inscrivent dans la catégorie des bénéfices psychologiques véhiculés par la marque employeur. ...
... Lors du processus de recrutement, les candidats sont amenés à porter une évaluation subjective sur la manière dont ils ont été sélectionnés ou non par l'organisation. Les chercheurs se sont particulièrement intéressés aux perceptions des candidats à chaque étape du processus de recrutement (Gilliland, 1993;Steiner & Gilliland, 1996), à travers trois dimensions de la justice procédurale : la pertinence de la procédure par rapport à l'emploi ; l'opportunité pour le candidat de montrer ses points forts ; le traitement interpersonnel et la bienséance des questions posées. ...
... L'intérêt des chercheurs pour l'étude des perceptions des candidats confrontés à différentes techniques de sélection dans différents pays est réel : en témoignent les nombreuses études publiées, permettant d'évaluer la favorabilité de dix méthodes de sélection dans des contextes variés. En France comme aux Etats Unis, les entretiens, les CV, les échantillons de travail (simulations de mise en situation professionnelle) sont les méthodes de sélection évaluées le plus positivement (Steiner & Gilliland, 1996). Plus globalement, les études menées dans de nombreux pays (Turquie, Roumanie, Grèce, Pays-Bas, Etats-Unis, France, Espagne, Portugal, Italie, Allemagne, Belgique) concluent que les méthodes préférées par les candidats sont les échantillons de travail, les entretiens non structurés, suivis des CV, des tests d'aptitude intellectuelle, des références et des inventaires de personnalité (Hausknecht et al., 2004;Hülsheger & Anderson, 2009;Nikolaou & Judge, 2007). ...
... However, the main source of scientific findings in this area is still the 30 years tradition of research on the perception of fairness of selection tools (Steiner, Gilliland, 1996 Woźniak, 2020). It brought several well-established findings regarding candidates' perception of particular tools, which brought practical recommendations for recruiters. ...
Article
Full-text available
Purpose: Earlier studies on the use of ICT-based recruitment & selection tools focused primarily on two perspectives: the organizational (predictive validity of the tool) and the candidate’s (fairness of selection process using the tool), leaving aside the third one – recruiter’s assessment of different aspects of tool usage. The aim of this study is to investigate this third perspective through studying Polish recruiters’ opinions about different aspects of four ICT-based recruitment & selection tools. Design/methodology/approach: On the basis of data collected using an e-questionnaire from 120 Polish recruiters, four hypotheses concerning the assessment of three aspects (functionality, candidate experience, and predictive validity) of various types of ICT-based tools used in employee selection processes were statistically verified. Findings: Recruiters, regardless of the length of professional experience, notice differences in how each of the tools contribute to the three dimensions of the recruiter's role. These dimensions are: the recruiter as a person providing the organization with accurate predictions as to the likely success of the candidate in the job offered; the recruiter as a representative of the organization responsible for the efficiency of recruitment and selection processes; and the recruiter as a person who takes care of the company's image. Recruiters rated competence games and VR as the highest on candidate experience, while they value bots primarily for their functionality. Research limitations/implications: The sample was unrepresentative, as it was created using the snowball methodology. The scales constructed for this study are of a pilot nature and further research is needed to assess and improve their psychometric values. Practical implications: The study suggests that none of the three aspects investigated (i.e. functionality, predictive validity, and candidate experience) should be neglected when new tools are introduced to HR departments. Originality/value: The study is a rare attempt at conducting a multidimensional investigation of acceptance of ICT-based recruitment/selection tools from the recruiter’s perspective. Keywords: recruitment, selection, recruiters, ICT-based selection tool, candidate experience. Category of the paper: Research paper.
... The study was introduced as a project about selection procedures, and key terms (recruiter, applicant, selection methods) were defined in the paper-pencil survey that consisted of five measures plus filler items (see online Appendix). Following a procedure developed by Steiner and Gilliland (1996;also see Anderson & Witvliet, 2008;Hoang et al., 2012), participants were asked to think about a job that they were likely to apply for in the future, and to write down what type of job it was. Of the jobs that the participants imagined, 72.5% were high-skilled, 22.3% were low-skilled, and the remaining 5.2% were not clearly described. ...
Article
Full-text available
The unstructured employment interview is one of the most popular selection tools among employers and applicants alike. Although past research has shed light on some explanations for practitioners’ preferences for unstructured methods, less is known about the reasons for their popularity among applicants. One reason might be that applicants overestimate recruiters’ intuitive abilities to make judgments about applicant characteristics based on resumes and interviews. The results of this study (N = 345) suggest that recruiters are perceived as much better than laypeople at making judgments about applicants based on resume screening and interviews, and that faith in recruiters’ intuition predicts process favorability for unstructured employment intervi