Answer to Question #156419 in Management for Meenaz

Question

A medium sized business was seeking to recruit a product development manager in its research and development (R&D) section. The new person would be responsible for overseeing the process by which the new products the business was developing were prepared for launch onto the market.

The recruitment process involved placing adverts in trade magazines and the national press and the adverts resulted in over 60 applications. There were 5 people involved in the short listing process: the direct line manager; the head of the HR division; the assistant head of that division; and two members of the new product development department - one from R&D and one from the launch team.

A short list of 7 candidates was drawn up. However, the assistant head of HR heard that a former trainee of the firm wanted to apply but could not get the application in by the deadline - she would be a strong candidate and the firm knew of her qualities. The head of HR agreed to let the application come in three days late and she was duly added to the shortlist.

On the day of the selection, each candidate had to do a presentation on the extent to which they matched the job description and person specification and what they felt they could bring to the job to further the company's objectives. This was followed by an interview. The candidate who had put in the late application did not turn up and the head of HR phoned her up. She said that she had not received a letter inviting her for interview and was not therefore aware that she was wanted. She agreed to come in and was allowed to miss doing the presentation although would be questioned on it in the same way that other candidates were.

At the end of the process, two clear candidates emerged, one of which was the late applicant. It was decided that she would be offered the position and after receiving the phone call from the assistant manager of the HR department, she duly accepted. The rest of the selection team took the responsibility of contacting the other candidates to tell them they were unsuccessful and to give them some feedback about their performance and why they were unsuccessful.

Later that evening, the head of HR received a phone call from the successful candidate telling her that she had gone back to her company where she had been working part time and told them of her success. They had responded by offering her a full time position and increasing her salary and she had decided to stay with them and thus did not want the position.

This meant that the candidate who was second had to be contacted and have the position explained to him. Fortunately for the firm, he understood and was happy to accept the position. Had he not, it could have involved the business in another round of selection which is an expensive process.

Things to Consider

The following questions are provided to guide you in your thinking and critical analysis.

Is the method of advertising for new positions appropriate?

Is the method of sifting through the applications and short listing efficient and effective?

How far would you say that the firm's process meets employment legislation

What lessons might be learned about the selection process from what happened in the scenario?

What implications might there be on motivation, training and development from the way the eventual appointment was made?

Is the method of providing feedback to unsuccessful candidates appropriate?

Answer 1

Is the method of advertising for new positions appropriate?

yes

Is the method of sifting through the applications and short listing efficient and effective?

yes

How far would you say that the firm's process meets employment legislation the firm's process of selection meets employment selection since its does not exhibit any form of biases. It is open and allows open participation of applicants. Even though it allows the winning applicant to skip some of the recruitment steps, it allows others to pass through the process.

What lessons might be learned about the selection process from what happened in the scenario? The lesson that could be derived from the scenario is that a business should not depend on a specific applicant and create conditions for him/her to pass the interview since the applicant may fail to pursue the job.

What implications might there be on motivation, training and development from the way the eventual appointment was made? the eventual appointment resulted into the second person winning the job position. His/her motivation emanates from the fact that the selection was competitive and his appointment was based on the qualities he/she showed during the process. The training and development of such an employee could be minimal since he/she has enthusiasm for job after winning a competitive selection process.

Is the method of providing feedback to unsuccessful candidates appropriate?

The method is appropriate as it enables the unsuccessful applicants to pursue other endeavor as they improve their skills in the field.