I did some interview recently for our graduate intake.
The standard of candidate we had called for interview was so high that
I thought that we might as well select them at random.
The personnel people involved appeared to be selecting on
trivial criteria, for e.g. one candidate was marked down
because he did not leave his home town to go to university.
One candidate was marked up for being "very smart" - he had a nice suit on!
They were obsessed with selecting "leadership" material but
we also need "specialists" who stood no chance in the psuedo-psychometric
techniques used as they would show poor team working skills.
Solution: Employ less HR people, select people at random give adequate
qualification
Result: More rounded group of employees - mixture of leaders, doers and
specialists = better teams for less money. Reduced staff turnover as failed
leaders (can't all be the boss) try their luck elsewhere.
--
---
73 de
PeteR
Somewhere in Derbyshire, England.
P.S. Visit Brian Long's Clock site at
http://www.hickoryclock.co.uk
or my Derbyshire tourist info site at
http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~prlf/derbyshi.htm
and pictures of my new great nephew at
www.mc-lindley.co.uk
T.S. Lim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
92cccm$u70$[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:92cccm$u70$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> jim clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > On Tue, 26 Dec 2000, John Uebersax wrote:
> > > IMHO, psychological tests in this case should not substitute for a
> > > thorough interview and human judgment.
> > >
> > > Just my .02 worth.
> >
> > There is a considerable literature on clinical judgment (i.e.,
> > interview and human judgement) vs. actuarial predictions (i.e.,
> > predictions from demonstrably valid regression equations ...
> > human judgment _might_ be used in producing individual predictor
> > scores, but not in aggregating them). In general, human judgment
> > does not fare all that well relative to actuarial (i.e.,
> > statistical) methods. Interesting that someone posting to a
> > statistical newsgroup would advocate the non-statistical approach
> > to selection problems.
> >
> > Best wishes
> > Jim
> >
> >
> ========================================================================
> ====
> > James M. Clark (204) 786-9757
> > Department of Psychology (204) 774-4134 Fax
> > University of Winnipeg 4L05D
> > Winnipeg, Manitoba R3B 2E9 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > CANADA
> http://www.uwinnipeg.ca/~clark
> >
> ========================================================================
> ====
>
>
> What kind of statistical methods are used in screening job applicants?
> Do people who apply for a faculty position at your department have to
> take such a psychological test too? What about the drawing tests or
> graphology? Are they valid tests based on statistical method?
>
> --
> T.S. Lim
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> www.Recursive-Partitioning.com
> _____________________________________________________________________
> Get paid to write reviews! http://recursive-partitioning.epinions.com
>
>
> Sent via Deja.com
> http://www.deja.com/
=================================================================
Instructions for joining and leaving this list and remarks about
the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES are available at
http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/
=================================================================
