Are effective and efficient human resource interventions Necessary for organizational survival?

1. Utilization of Human Resource Programs Are effective and efficient human resource interventions Necessary for organizational survival? When are effective and efficient human resource interventions Necessary for organizational survival? Are effective and efficient human resources interventions Necessary for organizational excellence?

2. Quality of Human Resource Programs Low High Degree to which an organization’s “Technical core” consists of or is Dependent on human talent

3. Do good human resource programs cause good organizations or do good organizations cause good human resource programs?

4. High Quality of Human Resource Programs Low Low High Degree of Environmental Hostility

5. When should a particular Human resource strategy Be used?

6. Equifinality: “A system can reach the same final state from differing initial conditions and by a variety of paths.” Substitutability: The degree to which two or more inputs can be substituted for each other to produce a specific amount of an output.

7. Strategies for enhancing individual performance under different conditions Time and resources available for human resource development Organization Quality of supervision Employees Quality of the applicant pool Job Job complexity Turnover

8. SELECTION UTILITY • BROGDEN – CRONBACH – GLESER (BCG) UTILITY FORMULAS 1. TOTAL GAIN IN UTILITY OVER RANDOM SELE (ONE YEAR) U = Ns rxy Sdy 8/N – Ns C/N U = Total gain over random selection Ns = Number of applicants selected rxy = Validity of the predictor SDy = Standard deviation of dollar value of employees (40% of average annual salary) N = Selection ratio (proportion of applicants hired) ( area in upper tail corresponding to cutting score – the smaller the better) 8 = The ordinate of the normal curve corresponding to the cutting score C = Cost of testing one applicant N 8

9. SELECTION UTILITY 2. NET GAIN IN UTILITY WHEN TWO (NON-RANDOM) SELECTION PROCEDURES ARE COMPARED (ONE YEAR) U = Ns (r1 – r2) Sdy 8/Ns (C1-C2)/N r1 = Validity for procedure 1 (new) r2 = Validity for procedure 2 (old) C1 = Cost of testing for procedure 1 C2 = Cost of testing for procedure 2 3. NET GAIN IN UTILITY WHEN TWO (NON-RANDOM) SELECTION PROCEDURES ARE COMPARED (T YEARS) U = TNs ( r1 – r2) Sdy 8/N – Ns (C1 – C2)/ N T = Average tenure in years per selectee

10. SELECTION UTILITY Rxy = Ability & performance rxy = Ability & job satisfaction EXAMPLE 1EXAMPLE 2 Ns = 996 996 rxy = .17 -.57 Sdy = $5217 $289 N = .086 .086 8 = .1561 .1561 C = $5.00 $5.00 T = .48 .46 U = $679.596 = ($254,827)

11. Assumptions in Selection Utility Analysis • Explicit Assumptions 1. Liniar relation between cognitive ability and hob performance • Implicit assumptions 1. Productivity is the most important outcome 2. Cognitive ability is not negatively related to other, important outcomes 3. There are no “costs” to testing other than the costs of the test and administrators time 4. The relationship between cognitive ability and hob performance is stable over time 5. There is a meaningful variance in cognitive ability in the applicant pool 6. Organizational performance equals the sum or individual performance

12. Not by Robots AloneAssembly plant characteristics*