Introduction: Tanglewood has followed a staff selection pattern developed by, Marilyn Anchley two years back. Feedback from store managers about the methodology has been poor. They have complained that the quality of the candidates has been below par and that the selection methodology is inadequate. The company has devised a new and more scientific methodology and has implemented it on a trial basis in ten of its stores.
They have also provided a correlation analysis between predictors and actual performance with regard to the old as well as the trial selection methodology. This report is mainly aimed at assessing the new methodology before implementing it across all their stores.. a detailed study will be done and recommendations and changes will be put forth. The report will keep in mind that too much deviation from current practices will not be accepted by store managers.
Assessing the correlation charts: Two correlation charts have been provided. The first chart is the correlation between the traditional predictors (education, work experience, and managerial interviews) and the Corresponding work outcome (actual performance). Work outcomes are measured using four criteria namely citizenship, absence, performance, and promotion potential. The second chart is provided by the stores that have implemented the new selection methodology (retail knowledge, bio-data, applicant exam, conscientiousness, and extraversion) on a trial basis.
It is assumed that the management is familiar with the methodology and the technical words used. This chart is similar to the above except that the new proposed predictors (given in brackets above) also have been added for correlating with work outcomes. It should be noted that the work outcome period is limited to the period of testing and not one year as in the case of traditional methods.
It can be seen that the words correlation and the p-value are given in the chart. “A correlation is a single number that describes the degree of relationship between two variables.” (Research methods knowledge base: Correlation, 2006). For example, in the first chart, the first item in the column is education level. The rows corresponding to this item show the correlation of education level with each of the following namely citizenship, absence, performance, and promotion potential.
These are the variables for which correlation is calculated. The way to understand the chart is given below with one or two examples. It can be seen that higher levels of education will increase citizenship, performance, and promotion potential. There is a positive correlation between education and the measures of work outcome. It can also be seen that higher education decreases absence and hence there is a negative correlation between education and absence.
Correlation figures fall between +1 and -1. Figures close to +1 indicate a high positive correlation and figures close to -1 indicate the opposite. Figures close to zero indicate a low level of correlation (+ or – as the case may be). The p-value is also explained in layman’s terms. It is an indication of whether the correlation figures are acceptable or not. Sometimes it may happen that a result arises purely out of chance like a tossed coin giving heads 18 times out of 20. The p-value indicates whether it happens by chance or whether the results are valid. Any value greater than 0.05 will indicate that the correlation is not valid and values closer to zero, that it is very valid.
- Chart one: None of the p-value figures are higher than 0.05 in the chart and hence all correlations are valid. But it can be seen that all correlations both positive and negative are low indicating that predictors are not effective in assessing work outcomes. Moreover, for work experience, two p-values are equal to 0.04 (close to 0.05) indicating that those correlations could be rejected as a chance one. Both higher education and work experience have resulted in lower absence rates. There is no strong level of correlation between predictive and outcomes in the whole chart.
- Chart B: P-value exceeds 0.05 in four places and these correlations can be considered to be invalid and not taken into account. The level of correlation in the whole chart is also very low. The highest positive relation exists between the bio-data and promotion potential (correlation is 0.34) indicating that bio-data is a big factor in determining promotion. The correlation between applicant exams and performance also has the same figures. This is followed by retail knowledge/promotion, It can also be seen that the highest comparative levels fall in the promotion potential column.
There does not seem to be any indication that the predictive in both cases is very effective in predicting work outcomes except for promotion potential.
Content validity
It is proposed to test the content validity of the proposed selection method in Tanglewood. “The extent to which the items of a test or procedure are in fact a representative sample of that which is to be measured; e.g., items relating to ability in arithmetic and defining words are appropriate content for an intelligence test.” (Content validity, 2005). In other words, it has to be seen whether the predictive methods can really test the work outcomes.
Retail Knowledge: This tests the applicant’s knowledge of the retail industry in general and about the position of the company in the retail industry. This has a positive correlation with all methods of work outcome except for absence. This means that more retail knowledge will decrease absence. But correlation levels are low in all relationships except for promotion potential. This knowledge is not really relevant for the post of store assistant except that he is a better candidate for promotion. There is also a slight increase in performance levels. The correlation with citizenship is not even valid according to the p-value. This test is more suited for the managerial category in the company (dept manager, asst. store manager, and store manager).
Bio-data: This too follows the same trend as above. The highest correlation in the whole chart is the correlation with promotion potential. This is mainly because no qualification (other than basic) is required for this post and hence is only valid in the case of promotions. This also slightly improves worker performance. A comparatively high correlation exists with citizenship.
Applicant exam: The highest correlations are with a performance followed by promotion possibility. This is a valid test to assess performance and promotion potential. There is no significant correlation with other factors.
Conscientiousness: This too follows in the same pattern of retail knowledge with a relatively high correlation to promotion potential. It is surprising that work performance shows such a low figure since high conscientiousness should result in better performance. It seems flawed since the synonyms of the term are “just, upright, honest, faithful, devoted, dedicated” etc. (Conscientiousness, 2008).
Extraversion: This is also a trait that is essential for the post of a store assistant. While this shows a relatively higher correlation (0.22) with regard to performance, it is surprising that it has a low correlation with promotion potential. Both conscientiousness and extraversion should have shown a high level of correlation with all the four factors or work outcomes.
Conclusion
It can be said that apart from promotion potential and to a certain extent, work performance, there is very little content validity for other factors. Moreover, the correlation of conscientiousness and extraversion with regard to both performance and promotion possibility appears to be misleading. The correlation should have been much higher than shown. For the post of store assistant, the predictors of retail knowledge and applicant exam can be done away with.
Both these are more relevant for higher posts. Maybe a choice can be given to the more ambitious candidates. The company has also mentioned that many women and students take up the post on a part-time basis for additional income. Such people would not be interested in taking an exam or acquiring retail knowledge. It might even scare off potential applicants with strong levels of conscientiousness and extraversion. These two tests are very valid and hence form the basis of the post of store manager along with a bio-data that shows a lot of work experience.
References
Research methods knowledge base: Correlation. (2006). Web Centre for Social Research Methods. Web.
Content validity. (2005). Cancer Education. Web.
Conscientiousness. (2008). Dictionary.com. Web.