Ranking Candidates: An Experiential Exercise in Personnel Selection

Question 1. Which selection criteria did you find most important and why?

Although the number of criteria and their ranking will differ between groups, students commonly indicate educational level and type of degree, experience in HRM, and prior teaching experience. Students might also mention personal characteristics, such as self-motivation and organizational skills. In the discussion, students share why they chose their selection criteria. For this exercise, my students listed educational level and previous experience teaching HRM as their top choices. However, responses varied on the relative importance of the remaining criteria. Instructors should prompt students to discuss how they came to a consensus on the importance of their selection criteria. Some students will prefer candidates who seem to have more knowledge of technology since the job posting mentions using a learning management system and web conferencing. Others will argue that teaching experience is more important since an experienced instructor can learn to use the technology. Instructors should encourage students to articulate their choices in relation to the job posting.

Question 2. Provide your ranking of each applicant. Why do you feel your top choice is the better one, relative to the other three candidates?

Responses will vary. However, most groups of students in my courses preferred the applicants who had the highest level of experience in teaching (e.g., Applicants 1 and 4) and practical HRM experience (e.g., Applicants 2 and 4). Generally, students ranked Applicant 3 last because they felt he lacked specific experience in HRM, since his resume emphasizes marketing and international business.

The discussions around the preferred choices revealed that once students decided on their relevant criteria, some tended to focus on their chosen criteria and discard other information that might be useful. Although this was not the norm, instructors should encourage students to reflect diligently on their choices and to consider carefully all the information included in the resumes.

In all instances where I ran this exercise, the discussion portion was quite animated and revealed that certain biases emerged during the activity. This outcome opens the door for instructors to introduce various rater biases. For example, contrast effect is relevant since students tend to compare the resumes of the applicants against each other rather than against an objective standard. Other types of biases could also affect the ratings. For example, Zysberg and Nevo (2004) found that the fit of candidates for a managerial position tended to emphasize cognitive skills, suggesting that the appearance of intelligence, as signaled by the information on the resume, could create a halo effect. Limited information in the resumes could also have a disproportionate effect on the ranking of the candidates since students will make assumptions based on incomplete information. Furthermore, stereotypes can affect the rankings if students discriminate against a candidate belonging to a particular group. For example, some students thought that certain applicants were too old. Some students who preferred younger applicants engaged in reliance on central traits by presuming that a younger instructor would be more competent with technology and more dynamic.

Questions 3. What are the consequences of rating applicants in a context where qualified personnel might be limited?

This question emphasizes the problem of limited choices in personnel selection and gives rise to a number of questions. Would students consider their lowest ranked applicant, if the others were not available? What would be the repercussions of limited applicants in this context? Should the university cancel the course rather than consider hiring a less desirable applicant? What would happen if students needed the course to graduate?

In past discussions, students tended to prefer the option of not offering the course rather than hiring a less qualified applicant. They generally argued that given the number of institutions offering introductory HRM courses online, students who needed the course to graduate could take the course at a different institution. They argued that hiring a less desirable candidate would cause students to dislike the subject and could risk damaging the university’s reputation. These are examples of important overarching considerations that guide selection decisions.