Search

Questions about whether candidate perceptions of recruitment and selection practices "matter" have been raised for decades. This study tackles such questions by developing a new theoretical framework to understand the business unit-level emergence and consequences of the collective candidate experience, defined as " Applicants' aggregate overall cognitive and affective perceptions based on multiple interactions with a business unit over the course of the entire recruitment and selection process." A theoretical framework is introduced that integrates signaling theory with research from marketing, recruitment, and applicant reactions to propose that the collective candidate experience construct emerges from interactions in unit-specific social, structural, and physical contexts. The construct is further expected to influence new hire outcomes and business unit outcomes. We then test the theorized consequences of the collective candidate experience in a multi-unit quick service restaurant organization. The collective candidate experience is positively associated with collective new hire engagement, which in turn is associated with collective new hire turnover intentions, collective turnover, and collective customer satisfaction. Additional supporting evidence and preliminary measures are provided in online appendices. Overall, this study complements and extends prior research and directs new research by offering a theoretical framework. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In two studies, we examined the effects of algorithm‐based (vs. recruiter‐based) evaluations of an asynchronous video interview and a personality inventory on applicant reactions. In line with our expectations, we found several negative applicant reactions to the use of algorithms. Specifically, in Study 1 (N = 172), informing participants that an algorithm, rather than a recruiter, had analysed their interview and personality inventory increased feelings of emotional creepiness, and reduced fairness perceptions, perceived predictive validity and feedback acceptance. In Study 2 (N = 276), we were able to replicate these effects for fairness perceptions and perceived predictive validity. Furthermore, in both studies, algorithm‐based evaluations negatively affected feedback acceptance, organizational attraction and job acceptance intentions through fairness perceptions. However, in contrast with our expectations, selection decision favourability did not influence the impact of evaluation source (recruiter vs. algorithm) on applicant reactions. In Study 2, we also found some tentative evidence that applicant reactions to algorithm‐based evaluations are not affected by the type of information source (i.e. verbal vs. nonverbal cues) on which the algorithm is based. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Intense competition for talent has led to increased organizational focus on improving how applicants perceive and respond to selection tools. Because of the recent increased use of technology in selection, we tested whether modifying aspects of videoconference interviews could improve applicant reactions. We tested two interventions--structured rapport building and question provision--with 205 applicants applying for a research assistant position. Applicants were randomly assigned to either an experimental condition (rapport or question provision) or the control condition and participated in a structured videoconference interview, followed by a survey. Structured rapport building had no significant effect on applicant reactions. However, question provision improved applicants' perceptions of overall fairness and chance to perform--but not their reported anxiety. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

How applicants’ perceptions of organizational attractiveness (OA) change over the recruitment process and whether OA, once lost, can ever be regained, has hardly been investigated. Therefore, drawing on organizational justice and signaling theories, we examined the effects of treatment (fair vs. unfair), re-evaluation (positive vs. negative), and outcome (offer vs. rejection) on OA. Results from a multiple-segment factorial vignette study (N = 193 employees) showed a reduction in OA (67%) after applicants were treated unfairly. Up to 24% of this loss was regained in subsequent stages through positive re-evaluation and by being offered a job. The results also showed a reduction in OA (52%) for applicants who were treated fairly but re-evaluated their experience negatively and received a rejection. Thus, one good experience may not be enough to attract applicants, and understanding the combined effect of experiences is even more important than understanding the effect of a single experience.

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 interviews. Moreover, this association remained significant when accounting for attitudes to structured interviews, perceived recruiter expertise, and attitudes to holistic versus mechanic methods in general. The results suggest that overestimation of recruiters’ intuitive expertise may help explain why many people prefer unstructured selection methods.

Industrial development in recent decades has led to using information and communication technologies (ICT) to support personnel selection processes. One of the most notable examples is game-related assessments (GRA), supposedly as accurate as conventional tests but which generate better applicant reactions and reduce the likelihood of adverse impact and faking. However, such claims still lack scientific support. Given practitioners’ increasing use of GRA, this article reviews the scientific literature on gamification applied to personnel selection to determine whether the current state of the art supports their use in professional practice and identify specific aspects on which future research should focus. Following the PRISMA model, a search was carried out in the Web of Science and Scopus databases, identifying 34 valid articles, of which 85.3% are empirical studies that analyze five areas: (1) validity; (2) applicant reactions; (3) design of GRA; (4) personal characteristics and GRA; and (5) adverse impact and faking. Together, these studies show that GRA can be used in personnel selection but that the supposed advantages of GRA over conventional tests are fewer than imagined. The results also suggest several aspects on which research should focus (e.g., construct validity, differences depending on the type of game, prediction of different job performance dimensions), which could help define the situations in which the use of GRA may be recommended. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Industrial development in recent decades has led to using information and communication technologies (ICT) to support personnel selection processes. One of the most notable examples is game-related assessments (GRA), supposedly as accurate as conventional tests but which generate better applicant reactions and reduce the likelihood of adverse impact and faking. However, such claims still lack scientific support. Given practitioners’ increasing use of GRA, this article reviews the scientific literature on gamification applied to personnel selection to determine whether the current state of the art supports their use in professional practice and identify specific aspects on which future research should focus. Following the PRISMA model, a search was carried out in the Web of Science and Scopus databases, identifying 34 valid articles, of which 85.3% are empirical studies that analyze five areas: (1) validity; (2) applicant reactions; (3) design of GRA; (4) personal characteristics and GRA; and (5) adverse impact and faking. Together, these studies show that GRA can be used in personnel selection but that the supposed advantages of GRA over conventional tests are fewer than imagined. The results also suggest several aspects on which research should focus (e.g., construct validity, differences depending on the type of game, prediction of different job performance dimensions), which could help define the situations in which the use of GRA may be recommended.

How applicants' perceptions of organizational attractiveness (OA) change over the recruitment process and whether OA, once lost, can ever be regained, has hardly been investigated. Therefore, drawing on organizational justice and signaling theories, we examined the effects of treatment (fair vs. unfair), re-evaluation (positive vs. negative), and outcome (offer vs. rejection) on OA. Results from a multiple-segment factorial vignette study (N = 193 employees) showed a reduction in OA (67%) after applicants were treated unfairly. Up to 24% of this loss was regained in subsequent stages through positive re-evaluation and by being offered a job. The results also showed a reduction in OA (52%) for applicants who were treated fairly but re-evaluated their experience negatively and received a rejection. Thus, one good experience may not be enough to attract applicants, and understanding the combined effect of experiences is even more important than understanding the effect of a single experience. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: When applying for a job, applicant reactions are defined as the amount to which the applicants of the job regard the process of selection as impartial or unbiased. The questions for the structured interview can be future-oriented (Situational Interview) or past-oriented (Patterned Behaviour Description Interview). Past research on using SI or PBDI in selection process and their effects on applicant reactions showed that applicant reactions are highest towards PBDI. Methods: The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of combining PBDI and SI (mixed SPBDI) as interview questions, and to differentiate its effect with PBDI. This study involved 46 lecturers from the International Islamic University Malaysia (IIUM). This study used (a) mixed SPBDI, and PBDI as interview questions, and (b) Applicant Reaction Questionnaires which was based on the Organizational Justice theory. The interview was conducted in a transcript form. After the participants answered the interview transcripts, they answered the applicant reactions questionnaires. The data was then analysed and presented. Results: The results showed a significant difference between mixed SPBDI and PBDI, with the PBDI’s mean (M = 13.61; SD = 1.57) is significantly higher than the mixed SPBDI’s mean (M = 10.89; SD 1.91), t (46) = 7.22; p < 0.01. Specifically, applicants reacted more positively to PBDI interview content compared to the mixed SPBDI. Conclusion: This research had few limitations such as the interview being conducted in the form of transcript and not verbally as in real workplace context. It is also limited to studying the reactions in terms of only perceived fairness and no other elements such as organizational effectiveness or the decision making of the applicants. Nevertheless, this study has contributed to the theoretical and research development in applicant reactions, and to the practical application for organizations in Malaysia.

The purpose of this study is to investigate applicants’ reactions towards different personnel selection methods used in Pakistan. A sample of 149 undergraduates, graduates, and working adults rated their perceptions of the favorability and fairness of these personnel selection methods, namely: resumes, job knowledge tests, biographical information, interviews, personal references, work-sample tests, personality tests, written ability tests, personal contacts, and situational judgment tests. Our first research objective is to provide details about applicant reactions, detailed system of the same and methods on a range based on working adults, graduates, and undergraduates. The second major objective is to identify the interaction effects of favorability and system fairness based upon applicant reactions. Descriptive data analysis was performed using IBM SPSS and the data was collected from Lahore, Islamabad, and Jhelum. The results demonstrated that 112 applicants reported the most favorable rating reaction towards the interview personnel selection method, with the effectiveness of identifying qualified people for the job, while 101 applicants reported a favorable rating reaction towards job knowledge tests, noting the fairness of this procedure. In addition, implications for the current assessment of selection practices from the applicants’ viewpoints, the strengths and limitations of the study, and directions for future research are all discussed. The practices of different predictor methods are considered in the conclusion.

The current research explores applicants' reactions to the employment interview and how these are associated with core self-evaluations and proactivity along with perceptions of the interviewer and interview's justice perceptions of post-interview outcomes (behavioral intentions, job attractiveness, and organizational attractiveness). We also explored the role of perceived organizational support (POS) in these relationships. We employ a cross-sectional approach, with the participation of 238 actual job applicants, using a survey methodology. We demonstrated the important role of core self-evaluations in fairness perceptions of the interview, along with the significant role of some interview characteristics, more importantly informativeness and personableness. Finally, applicants' perceptions of the employer were also strongly associated with interview's justice perceptions and post-interview outcomes. This is one of the first and very few studies exploring this topic in a non-English culture (in Greece), with actual job applicants, not students. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Prior research suggests that interviewers play an important role in representing their organization and in making the interview a pleasant experience for applicants. This study examined whether impression management used by interviewers (organization-enhancement and applicant-enhancement) is perceived by applicants, and how it influences applicants' attitudes, intentions, and emotions. Adopting a signaling perspective, this article argues that applicants' positive attitudes and intentions toward the organization increase if interviewers not only enhance the organization, but if the signals they sent (i.e., organization-enhancement) are actually received by the applicant. Similarly, applicants' positive emotions should increase if interviewers not only enhance the applicant, but if the signals they send (i.e., applicant-enhancement) are actually received by the applicant. A field study that involved video coding interviewers' impression management behavior during 153 selection interviews and pre- and post-interview applicant surveys showed that the signals sent by interviewers during the interview were received by applicants. In addition, applicants rated the organization's prestige and their own positive affect after the interview more positively when they perceived higher levels of organization-enhancement during the interview. Furthermore, applicants reported more positive affect and interview self-efficacy after the interview when they perceived higher levels of interviewer applicant-enhancement. We also found an indirect effect of interviewers' organization-enhancement on organizational prestige through applicants' perceptions of organization-enhancement as well as indirect effects of interviewers' applicant-enhancement on applicants' positive affect and interview self-efficacy through applicants' perceptions of applicant-enhancement. Our findings contribute to an integrated understanding of the effects of interviewer impression management and point out both risks and chances in selling and smooth-talking toward applicants.

Drawing on Gilliland’s selection fairness framework, we examined antecedents and behavioral effects of applicant procedural fairness perceptions before, during, and after a personnel selection procedure using a six-wave longitudinal research design. Results showed that both perceived post-test fairness and pre-feedback fairness perceptions are related to job offer acceptance and job performance after 18 months, but not to job performance after 36 months. Pre-test and post-test procedural fairness perceptions were mainly related to formal characteristics and interpersonal treatment, whereas pre-feedback fairness perceptions were related to formal characteristics and explanations. The impact of fairness attributes of formal characteristics and interpersonal treatment diminished over time, whereas attributes of explanation were only associated with pre-feedback fairness. Results are discussed in terms of theoretical implications for fairness research and for hiring organizations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The current research explores applicants’ reactions to the employment interview and how these are associated with core self-evaluations and proactivity along with perceptions of the interviewer and interview’s justice perceptions of post-interview outcomes (behavioral intentions, job attractiveness, and organizational attractiveness). We also explored the role of perceived organizational support (POS) in these relationships. We employ a cross-sectional approach, with the participation of 238 actual job applicants, using a survey methodology. We demonstrated the important role of core self-evaluations in fairness perceptions of the interview, along with the significant role of some interview characteristics, more importantly informativeness and personableness. Finally, applicants’ perceptions of the employer were also strongly associated with interview’s justice perceptions and post-interview outcomes. This is one of the first and very few studies exploring this topic in a non-English culture (in Greece), with actual job applicants, not students.

Human Resource (HR) professionals are increasingly using Social Networking Websites (SNWs) for personnel recruitment and selection processes. However, evidence is required regarding their psychometric properties and their impact on applicant reactions. In this paper we present and discuss the results of exploring applicant reactions to either the use of a professional SNW (such as LinkedIn) or a non-professional SNW (such as Facebook). A scale for assessing applicant reactions was applied to 124 professionals. The results showed more positive attitudes to the use of professional SNWs compared with non-professional SNWs. Both gender and age moderated these results, with females and young applicants having a less positive attitude than males and older participants towards the use of non-professional SNWs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present study aimed to integrate findings from technology acceptance research with research on applicant reactions to new technology for the emerging selection procedure of asynchronous video interviewing. One hundred six volunteers experienced asynchronous video interviewing and filled out several questionnaires including one on the applicants' personalities. In line with previous technology acceptance research, the data revealed that perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use predicted attitudes toward asynchronous video interviewing. Furthermore, openness revealed to moderate the relation between perceived usefulness and attitudes toward this particular selection technology. No significant effects emerged for computer self-efficacy, job interview self-efficacy, extraversion, neuroticism, and conscientiousness. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose – Based on theories of media richness and procedural justice, the authors aim to examine the influence of videoconferencing (VC) technology on applicant reactions and interviewer judgments in the employment interview, the most commonly used employee selection device. Design/methodology/approach – MBA students participated in simulated VC and face-to-face (FTF) interviews. Applicant perceptions of procedural justice and interviewer characteristics were collected. Interviewers provided ratings of affect toward the applicant, perceived applicant competence, overall interview performance, as well as an overall hiring recommendation. Findings – Applicants perceived VC interviews as offering less of a chance to perform and as yielding less selection information. They also viewed VC interviews as less job-related than FTF interviews and had significantly less favorable evaluations of their interviewer (on personableness, trustworthiness, competence, and physical appearance) in VC interviews. Finally, applicants in VC interviews received lower ratings of affect (likeability) and lower interview scores, and were less likely to be recommended for the position. Research limitations/implications – The authors' findings suggest that VC technology can adversely affect both applicant reactions and interviewer judgments. They propose several precautionary steps to help minimize the risks associated with conducting VC interviews. Originality/value – The authors extend prior research concerning the use of VC interviews by directly assessing applicant perceptions of both procedural justice and of interviewer characteristics associated with the probability that job offers will be accepted. They also add to the literature in showing that VC interviews tend to result in less favorable evaluations of applicants than FTF interviews. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In a field experiment with 517 job applicants, the processes underlying the formation of procedural justice judgments were investigated. It was hypothesized that procedural justice judgments may be based not only on content information (e.g., 'What are fair aspects of the selection procedure?'), but also on the felt ease or difficulty with which this content information can be retrieved from memory (ease-of-retrieval; e.g., 'How easily can I recall fair aspects of the selection procedure?'). Evaluations of the company's online application procedure show that job candidates based procedural justice judgments on content information or on ease-of-retrieval, depending on their uncertainty regarding the online application procedure as well as their prior experiences with online applications. Specifically, experienced applicants who felt certain based their judgments on ease-of-retrieval, whereas all other applicants based their judgments on content information. Implications for research on the formation of justice judgments as well as practical applications are discussed. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of this study was to investigate the sequential effects of recruitment information on applicant reactions following three recruitment stages (campus fair, recruitment interview, and site visit) and the timing of communications independently, across stages, and in combination. A simulation of the recruitment process with 292 undergraduate business students randomly assigned to positive or negative experiences at each of the recruitment stages. Specific information during the campus fair, a personable and informative recruiter, prompt communication following the interview, and the opportunity to interact with organizational members during the site-visit were positively related to applicant reactions. Furthermore, although the recruitment information was more likely to have an effect at the stage in which it was received than at subsequent stages, the information at several stages did have significant positive and negative effects at subsequent stages. In addition, applicants who experienced more stages with positive information had more positive applicant reactions in support of the effects of “bundles” of recruitment activities. Even more important than understanding the impact of any one particular recruitment experience is the overall effect of all recruitment stages experienced by a job applicant. Thus, one good recruitment experience is probably not enough to impress and attract job applicants. This is one of the first studies to explore applicant reactions at different stages of the recruitment process using repeated measures SEM and to examine the combined effects of recruitment information at different stages on applicant reactions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The authors examined the influence of personal information privacy concerns and computer experience on applicants' reactions to online screening procedures. Study 1 used a student sample simulating application for a fictitious management intern job with a state personnel agency (N = 117) and employed a longitudinal, laboratory-based design. Study 2 employed a field sample of actual applicants (N = 396) applying for jobs online. As predicted, procedural justice mediated the relationship between personal information privacy concerns and test-taking motivation, organizational attraction, and organizational intentions in the laboratory and field. Experience with computers moderated the relationship between procedural justice with test-taking motivation and organizational intentions in the field but not in the laboratory sample. Implications are discussed in terms of the importance of considering applicants' personal information privacy concerns and testing experience when designing online recruitment and selection systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ABSTRACT: The current research investigated applicant reactions derived from common application blanks. Previous work has found applications to be riddled with legally inadvisable items, but limited research has attempted to understand how such items might affect applicants. By using organizational justice theory as a framework, two studies examined applicant reactions from two application blanks: a legally advisable application and a legally problematic application. It was found that applicants completing the legally problematic application had lower perceptions of justice and expressed higher litigation intentions compared to those completing the legally advisable application, especially for those that were rejected without an explanation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study examined the effect of applicants' reactions to selection measures on complaint intentions and perceptions of organizational attractiveness. Despite recent challenges to selection tests for invasion of privacy, limited research has examined the link between specific reactions and potential legal challenges. As predicted, perceived invasiveness was significantly related to perceived likelihood of complaints for three selection measures. Further, perceived job relatedness was negatively related to likelihood of complaints for a test battery and a math test, but not for an integrity test. On the other hand, neither job relatedness nor invasiveness was significantly related to organizational attractiveness for any of the tests. Limitations and implications for future research are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Research in selection examines how organizational justice principles may influence applicants' reactions to selection procedures. This article extends this research by examining how two aspects of procedures--interpersonal treatment and social comparison information--affect reactions to a personality testing. The results of two studies demonstrate that interpersonal treatment (expression of concern for applicants' feelings) and social comparison information (description of testing as either typical or experimental) interact to affect test-takers' reactions. When concern was expressed and personality testing was described as typical, individuals responded less positively. However, when no concern was expressed, evaluations were more positive when testing was described as typical. The implications for organizational justice research and selection research are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]