{"id":1338,"date":"2010-01-19T01:00:33","date_gmt":"2010-01-19T09:00:33","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/systematichr.com\/?p=1338"},"modified":"2010-01-18T14:38:46","modified_gmt":"2010-01-18T22:38:46","slug":"employee-selection-and-workforce-diversity-are-current-tools-up-to-the-task","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/systematichr.com\/?p=1338","title":{"rendered":"Employee Selection and Workforce Diversity: Are Current Tools Up To The Task?"},"content":{"rendered":"

Guest Author:\u00a0 Stephen B. Jeong, Ph.D.<\/em><\/p>\n

Hispanics, African Americans, Asians and Native Americans now constitute more than one-third of the U.S. population. By 2042, they are projected to make up nearly one-half of all Americans.\u00a0 Given these rapidly changing demographics\u2014and consequently, the rapidly changing U.S. marketplace\u2014many organizations are recognizing that workplace diversity is a business necessity. Creating and promoting a diverse workforce is particularly essential for industries where a significant number of employees deal face-to-face with prospective customers, because the latter are more likely to buy from people like themselves. So retail, financial, legal, insurance, hospitality and consumer goods businesses may want and need staff diversity. Yet existing selection tools may not be up to the task. Here\u2019s why:<\/p>\n

1. Job tests based on outdated material<\/strong><\/p>\n

In the context of legal defensibility and employee selection tools, the concept of \u201cvalidation\u201d simply refers to accumulated \u201cevidence\u201d showing that a given selection is, indeed, a good (or valid) predictor of job performance.\u00a0 Selection specialists (or those who design selection tests) typically gather validation evidence by correlating job applicants\u2019 scores on a given selection test (e.g., on intelligence, job knowledge, values, personality) with their future job performance (predictive validation) or using incumbents (concurrent validation).\u00a0 If the resulting correlation is relatively high, the test is considered to be a valid predictor of job performance.\u00a0 Employment tests and other employee selection tools are judged on their \u201cvalidation\u201d strength, or the degree to which they can accurately predict future job performance. If there is a high correlation between an applicant\u2019s score on a given selection test (e.g., testing intelligence, job knowledge, values or personality) and his\/her future performance, the test is considered to be a good predictor.<\/p>\n

One critical issue with the above approach is that the majority of the tests used in the U.S. today were validated primarily on a Caucasian pool. This means that while a given test may work well in predicting job performance for Caucasian job applicants, it may be biased, at a minimum, and in the worst case, invalid, when used with non-Caucasian applicants.\u00a0 There are proven differences between Caucasians and non-Caucasians in terms of values, management and leadership styles, and general work-related preferences, and selection tests that fail to recognize them may be unhelpful for predicting job performance, retention, and engagement of non-Caucasians.
\n
\n2. Differences between Western and non-Western cultures<\/strong><\/p>\n

Intercultural academics have been able to label what many of us have already known; that there are cultural variations that can differentially impact one\u2019s thoughts, emotions, and behaviors in the workplace.\u00a0 In addition to the more commonly known \u201cindividualistic\u201d and \u201ccollectivistic\u201d cultural differences, employees in Western countries (e.g., U.S., Europe, Australia, New Zealand) generally prefer a more equal power distribution in the workplace, while employees from Asian countries (e.g., South Korea, Japan, China, Taiwan) tend to be more accustomed to autocratic or paternalistic power relationships \u2013 or top-down authority.\u00a0 They also differ in assertiveness, preferred levels of uncertainty and short-term vs. long-term orientations, all of which may impact one\u2019s job performance, satisfaction, and promotion opportunities. For example, while assertiveness is generally a desired trait in Western societies, it is much less so and even frowned upon in countries such as Japan, Korea, and Taiwan. If a selection test assumes assertiveness as a desirable trait, a Taiwan-born applicant, who may have been a top salesman in his country, may be knocked out of the selection process here.<\/p>\n

3. Difference Among Non-Caucasians And Acculturation<\/strong><\/p>\n

In addition to the Western vs. non-Western distinction, selection tools should further take into account differences among non-Western cultures \u2013 e.g., Hispanics, African-Americans, Asian-Americans and Native Americans, differences between foreign- and US-born, and differences among nationalities within a racial or ethnic group \u2013 which include customs, values, work ethics, body language, and communication styles. Ethiopians are very different from South Africans; Costa Ricans from Bolivians; Japanese from Koreans. The point here is that these sub-groups vary greatly with respect to normative values that guide their behavior in the workplace.<\/p>\n

People also vary with respect to their degree of acculturation and assimilation to the mainstream. Naturally, attitudes and values of those individuals who have resided in the U.S. for longer periods of time are likely to be more similar to the general American population. However, more recent immigrants are less likely to be so. Hence, if an organization\u2019s business and diversity strategy dictates the inclusion of more recent immigrants, it is critical to understand that current selection tools used in the U.S. would be least applicable to recent immigrants from non-Western countries.<\/p>\n

It is important to make one thing clear:\u00a0 I\u2019m not suggesting that all selection tests must identify and include all unique cultural attributes in order to be useful \u2013 that would be impractical. Rather, one should simply consider the fact that the majority of the selection tests in use today are likely to hold less value when used on non-Western and non-Caucasian applicants.<\/p>\n

So, what\u2019s the answer?\u00a0 There is no one simple solution. It depends on an organization\u2019s industry, strategy, mission and priorities as well as its customer demographics.\u00a0 If the goal is to sell to new immigrants, one should select applicants whose views closely mirror that of one\u2019s prospective customers. If the future American market place\u2014in which the current minorities add up to almost a majority\u2014is at all a consideration, our current employment selection tools need to be revised to reflect both the common as well as those unique cultural attributes that can play out in the work setting.\u00a0 For current and future generations of immigrant workers\u2014whose primary identification is with a non-Western culture\u2014a new measurement approach should lead to a more meaningful (and valid) performance prediction\u2014one that addresses those attributes valued by their culture.<\/p>\n

Stephen B. Jeong, is currently the Managing Director of Waypoint People Solutions – www.waypointps.com<\/a>, a human capital consulting firm that focuses on high precision employee diagnostic surveys using cutting-edge measurement technology and methodologies. He holds Ph.D. in Industrial-Organizational psychology from the Ohio State University and has been advising private, public, and government organizations since 2000.\u00a0 He can be reached at stephen.jeong@waypointps.com.<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Guest Author:\u00a0 Stephen B. Jeong, Ph.D. Hispanics, African Americans, Asians and Native Americans now constitute more than one-third of the U.S. population. By 2042, they are projected to make up nearly one-half of all Americans.\u00a0 Given these rapidly changing demographics\u2014and…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":15,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_coblocks_attr":"","_coblocks_dimensions":"","_coblocks_responsive_height":"","_coblocks_accordion_ie_support":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[10,8,15,16],"tags":[128,127,72],"class_list":["post-1338","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-engagement","category-strategies","category-talent-acquisition","category-workforce-planning","tag-diversity","tag-employee-selection","tag-recruiting"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/systematichr.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1338","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/systematichr.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/systematichr.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/systematichr.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/15"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/systematichr.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=1338"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/systematichr.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1338\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1339,"href":"https:\/\/systematichr.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1338\/revisions\/1339"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/systematichr.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=1338"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/systematichr.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=1338"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/systematichr.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=1338"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}