The following is a summary of the research and practice implications from: Becker, W. J., Connolly, T., & Slaughter, J. E. (2010). The effect of job offer timing on offer acceptance, performance, and turnover. Personnel Psychology, 63, 223-241.

Speed and timeliness are important during the hiring process. Without devoting some effort to establishing an efficient applicant acceptance process, most hiring managers will continue to be challenged in their efforts to enhance their organization’s ability to compete for talent.

Interpretations of Job Offer Timing

Job offer timing, or the time between an applicant’s final interview and a job offer being made, elicits several different reactions from job applicants, dependent on whether it is faster or slower. Offer timing also impacts the applicant’s offer acceptance decision.

Extending earlier job offers:

• Signifies the hiring manager’s enthusiasm and positive assessment of the candidate.
• Eliminates the applicant’s uncertainty in their evaluation of the job/organization.
• Makes the offer more attractive to the applicant.

In contrast, later offers are more likely to violate applicant expectations and produce less favorable reactions to the offer and the organization. Receiving a later offer causes applicants to assume that the organization is not interested in them, is inefficient, and is unfair. Job applicants will be less likely to accept a job offer if they perceive the selection process or their treatment during it to be unfair.

Additionally, post interview delays in communicating with candidates can lead to negative perceptions of the organization. These views sometimes manifest into action. For instance, delays between submitting an application and being contacted for an initial interview may cause economically disadvantaged candidates to self-select out of the process.

Decision Time

Both student and experienced applicants were more likely to accept job offers that were received sooner rather than later following the final selection interview. Moreover, faster offers to student candidates led to either relatively quick acceptances or long decision times that resulted in offer rejections.

On average, experienced candidates received quicker offers, made faster decisions, and were more likely to accept offers than were student candidates. However, applicant experience did not influence the relationship between offer timing and offer acceptance.

In regards to hiring outcomes, making quicker final selection and offer decisions will not likely influence performance or turnover.

Practical Implications

Improvements in job offer efficiency could help hiring managers to significantly reduce overall hiring costs and free up resources to bolster new employee on-boarding, development, and retention programs.

In case you are still wondering, “why is this important?” Increased acceptance rates, reduced search costs, and lower vacancy times can provide substantial cost savings for the organization. Such changes would require little cost to implement, and would lead to long term savings in regards to not only costs, but also the use of time.

Additionally, for greater efficiency in the job offer/acceptance process, organizations should consider imposing applicant decision deadlines.

Interpretation by:

Kandace Waddy

DeGarmo Group

The following is a summary of the research and practice implications from: Ilies, R., Dimotakis, N., & De Pater, I.E. (2010). Psychological and physiological reactions to high workloads: Implications for well-being. Personnel Psychology, 63(2), 407-432.

Daily workload can be defined as employees’ perceptions of the work demands placed on them in a given day. Employee perceptions of high daily workloads occur when they feel that they have been given more work in a given day than they can effectively complete. Perceptions of a high daily workload can negatively impact employee well-being in two major ways:

• Perceived increases in daily workload throughout the work day are related to increases in employee blood pressure during the work day, and when the employee punches out at the end of the day.
• Perceived increases in daily workload throughout the work day are also related to increases in the employee’s emotional distress throughout the work day, and when the employee punches out at the end of the work day.

Because employee perceptions of a high daily workload can have negative consequences for the employee’s well-being, it is important for supervisors to be aware of ways to minimize these negative reactions.

Ways to Alleviate Negative Reactions to High Workloads

It is possible to lessen the negative impact of a high daily workload on employee well-being. Two important considerations for reducing this negative impact are as follows:

• Job Control. Job control is a stable job characteristic that refers to how much freedom an employee has in completing his or her daily work tasks. The more control an employee has over how to complete a high daily workload, the less likely that employee will be to experience emotional distress or increased blood pressure.
• Organizational Support. Organizational support refers to the degree to which employees feel that the organization values their contributions, cares about their well-being, and supports them in carrying out their job successfully and managing a high daily workload when necessary. Employees who feel that they have adequate support from the organization as a whole are less likely to have negative reactions to a high daily workload.

Practical Implications

Because high daily workloads can lead to decreased well-being in employees, supervisors should capitalize on ways to protect the well-being of their employees. Certain job characteristics, such as job control and organizational support, help diminish negative reactions to high daily workloads. Ultimately, by implementing these job characteristics, supervisors can also potentially decrease long-term strain, emotional burnout, and cardiovascular risk in their employees. In return, organizations will also benefit from promoting greater well-being in their employees and minimizing the strain that a high daily workload can place on their employees.

Interpretation by:

Mackenzi Harmon

DeGarmo Group

The following is a summary of the research and practice implications from: Becker, W.J., & Cropanzano, R. (2011). Dynamic aspects of voluntary turnover: An integrated approach to curvilinearity in the performance-turnover relationship. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(2), 233-246.

If you are like most managers, you probably view voluntary employee turnover as a costly and undesirable occurrence.  In many instances, this is the case.  However, some types of voluntary turnover can actually be good for your company.  When the employees that leave an organization are poor performers, this may be better for the company than if the employees had stayed.  This is known as functional turnover, and is desirable.

Influences on Employee Turnover

There are numerous factors that influence voluntary employee turnover including performance level and performance ratings.

• Performance Level. As touched on above, performance level is one factor that can influence employee turnover.  The lowest performing employees are the most likely employees to turnover.  They are the highest risk, which as mentioned, is not necessarily a bad thing for an organization and a manager should not be as concerned about this type.  The second most common type of employee turnover is among the highest performers in an organization.  The best performing employees are also the most hurtful for the organization to lose. Managers should work to retain these employees.
• Performance Ratings. These are dynamic in that they are constantly changing for better or worse as an employee’s performance changes.  When these ratings go down for employees, they are more likely to turnover and leave an organization.  Poor performers are even more likely than high performers to turnover after a downward change in performance.  In addition, negative performance ratings will have a greater impact on turnover than positive performance ratings.  In other words, positive performance ratings from a manager will not stop turnover in low performers.  High performers are less likely to be affected by short-term changes in performance whether the ratings have decreased or increased from previous ratings.

What Can be done to Help?

Merit-based, or performance-based, pay may lessen the effects of voluntary turnover in relation to performance level and performance ratings.  High performers are less likely to turnover when they are paid based on performance.  As a manager, you should make sure that an employee is rightfully rewarded for their efforts.  This effect is not found among low performers; the method used to pay a low performer does not influence the turnover rate.

Practical Implications

Managers should provide a fair but rigorous performance rating system that holds employees to high standards.  This will help to get rid of any low performers naturally.  High performers should be adequately rewarded for their work as well because this will reduce turnover in high performers.  Without the right compensation for these employees, an organization will risk losing its move valuable assests.

Interpretation by:

Ashley Niemczyk

DeGarmo Group

The following is a summary of the research and practice implications from: Roulin, N., Bangerter, A., & Yerly, E. (2011). The uniqueness effect in selection interviews. Journal of Personnel Psychology, 10(1), 43-47.

Job interviews are the age-old, strategy based, “survival of the fittest” in the business world. Now more than ever, people are entering the job market with university degrees, which can often make most job applicants appear to be the same. Because of this, many applicants seek to distinguish themselves by providing unique answers to interview questions.

The important question, however, is whether or not it is beneficial (or even appropriate) to “stand out from the crowd” in a job interview? Do the conventional or unconventional applicants receive job offers?

The Uniqueness Effect Defined

In selection situations, job applicants know that they are not only being judged by absolute qualities (ex. Educational background), but also by their relative qualities, such as their perceived quality in comparison to other applicants. This awareness causes many applicants to create a uniqueness effect.

In this context, the uniqueness effect is the effect of an applicant’s distinctive characteristics or answers on recruiters’ evaluations and decisions in the selection process. Similarly to the  previous rules of thumb that have told applicants to focus on differentiating their resumes from the many other resumes in the stack, in order to get the interview, that same notion is essentially used as a strategy during the interview.

The Value of Standing Out

Applicants who provide unique answers get better evaluations and are chosen more often than applicants providing common answers. When an applicant’s uniqueness is positive, such that it creates a particular social image, they are likely to receive prestige, aid, and love from others.

Providing unique responses was especially helpful in non-creative fields, like accounting, as opposed to creative fields, like marketing. One explanation for this could be that interviewers may have higher expectations for receiving unique answers from applicants who are seeking positions in creative fields than for those applicants who are seeking positions in non-creative fields.

Practical Implications

The benefits of providing unique answers to interview questions are clear. Job applicants who give unique answers receive both higher evaluations and a higher probability of getting the job offer, especially in non-creative jobs.

One important thing to note is that interviewers may be influenced by the uniqueness of the answers, regardless of the applicant’s true abilities. Therefore, it is important for job recruiters to assess whether or not they are prone to being swayed by the uniqueness effect, and for organizations to institute selection procedures that do account for a job applicant’s true ability, despite their uniqueness.

Interpretation by:

Kandace Waddy

DeGarmo Group

The following a summary of the research and practice implications from: Van Iddekinge, C.H., Campbell, J.P., and Putka, D.J. (2011). Reconsidering vocational interests for personnel selection: The validity of an interest-based selection test in relation to job knowledge, job performance, and continuance intentions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(1), 13-33.

Personality assessments are often used to help identify the applicants who are likely to succeed in a perspective job.  However, they are not the only solution available to help select an applicant that will be successful in the available position. Vocational interests may also serve as strong predictors of a job applicant’s future job performance, job knowledge, and intentions to continue with an organization.

Whether it is reading books on a specific topic, attending certain sporting or musical events, or spending time doing yard work, individuals tend to have strong preferences for activities that they find interesting. Although we may not often stop to consider it, our interests have a significant influence over the approach we take towards an activity, as well as how we choose to spend our time on various tasks. This same principle, that we are motivated to do activities we find interesting, also impacts the way employees act in the workplace.

Vocational Interests Defined

Vocational Interests (“VI’s), or interests specific to the workplace, can be thought of as having three important characteristics:

• Contextually-Grounded:  VI’s are embedded in the work context, and focus on the types of activities and work-environment that an individual prefers
• Stable over time: Just like personality and work values, an employee’s VI’s remain relatively consistent over time.
• Influential over behavior: Employees are more motivated to complete tasks that they find interesting, and are more likely to seek opportunities to increase their knowledge and skill levels if they find a topic interesting.

Points to Clarify

VI assessments have not generated as much hype as personality assessments in HR literature, in part because some of the information available is not correct. A few of the questions commonly associated with VI’s include:

Are VI assessments effective predictors in employee selection?

Yes – Vocational interests have been shown to predict employees’ intentions to stay with the organization, interpersonal knowledge, technical knowledge, and other important job-related outcomes.  Like all assessment methods, these results can vary.

Why have I heard that VI assessments don’t really predict job performance?

The answer may be very obvious – Some vocational interest surveys are, in fact, poor predictors of job performance.  This is because they were designed for another purpose.   For example, the Strong Interest Inventory is designed to guide individuals in finding a career that fits their interests, not to differentiate between high and low performers within that career. To effectively use VI assessments in employee selection, you must select an instrument that is designed for that specific purpose.

I thought most job applicants only applied for jobs that they found interesting?

Although people do tend to want jobs that align with their interests, this option is not always feasible. The decision to apply for employment is based upon a multitude of factors, such as the state of the economy, compensation rates for a job, location of a job, the applicant’s education level and prior experience, present or future rewards that a job may offer, etc.  These, and other factors, may supersede an individual’s desire to match his or her interests with the sought-after job.

How are applicants’ VI scores related back to the job?

Not all VI assessments are the same, but one common way is to organize and score the applicants’ interests by grouping their ratings of the various work activities into six categories of interests, known as Holland’s RIASEC model. These six categories of interests are as follows:

• Realistic – Practical, hands-on activities (i.e. Carpenters, Electricians, Athletic Trainers)
• Investigative – Scholastic, intellectual, and/or scientific activities (i.e. Pilots, Chemists, Police Detectives)
• Artistic – Creative and expressive activities (i.e. Interior Designers, Editors, Photographers)
• Social – Teaching, caring, and helping activities (i.e. Flight Attendants, Tour Guides, Concierges)
• Enterprising – Persuasive and leadership-oriented activities (i.e. First-Line Supervisors, PR Managers, Head Chefs)
• Conventional – Routine and well-ordered activities (i.e. Bank Teller, Accountants, Pharmacists)

HR managers or employers must have an idea of the work context prior to assessing applicants, so that the correct interests are focused upon during employee selection.

Practical Applications of VI Assessments

Vocational Interests should not be thought of as a reason to throw away personality assessments in selection.  Instead, they should be viewed as an option that offers you something unique to consider in the selection process. Unlike predictors such as cognitive ability, the validity of using VI scores in selection depends on the extent to which interests are reflected in the performance requirements of a job.  In jobs where this relationship is strong, VI assessments can help HR managers to select candidates that will actually enjoy their work and perform it well, have motivation to learn about their job, and stay with the company.

Interpretation by:

Kelly Whalen

DeGarmo Group

The following is a summary of the research and practice implications from: Sonnentag, S., Binnewies, C., Mojza, E. J. (2010). Staying well and engaged when demands are high: The role of psychological detachment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95(5), 965-976.

Should a person’s life revolve around work? High job demands, which are signified by a high level of quantitative job demands reflected in a high workload and time pressure, are very common in present-day jobs, and due to the fact that organizations see positive performance results from very demanding jobs, high job demands are not going anywhere anytime soon.

For employees who are faced with too many job demands, continuously being busy with job-related thoughts during their time off reduces work engagement and drains energy, which will impair their well-being in the long term. Fortunately, psychological detachment is a remedy for such a problem.

Detachment vs. Disengagement

Detachment from work (during off-job time) refers to the process of temporarily disengaging from work while one is not on the job. As a result, detachment provides employees the chance to calm down and rebuild or recover their emotional and energetic resources. Detachment can therefore be viewed as a buffer against the negative effects of having excessive job demands, such as constant mental or physical stress, and job strains.

This is an important distinction from disengagement, which occurs during work hours and can be viewed as a counterproductive work activity. Disengagement could be caused by a general lack of interest in one’s job or in the organization in which one works.

Detachment from High Job Demands

Demanding jobs produce a stressful short-term experience, cause poor well-being over time, and often result in high health care costs. However, detachment from work provides recovery for such impending issues. When organizations provide and encourage detachment outlets for employees, such as vacation days and leisure activities, it facilitates a buffering effect against the negative effects of having too many job demands.

This form of recovery is particularly important because, while high demands might be met with effort and energy investment in the short term, they will eventually lead to negative effects on work engagement in the long term. Excessive job demands are related to an increase in mental and physical complaints and to a decrease in work engagement over a period of time when detachment is low. Lack of detachment from work during off-job time indicates an increase in emotional exhaustion 1 year later.

Practical Implications

These findings are beneficial for those managers who are interested in preventing burnout, or the effects of long-term exhaustion, amongst employees. Managers should also note that factors that relate to job-stress recovery outside of work are important. An unhealthy preoccupation with work during off-job time speeds along employees’ energy depletion processes as well as their likelihood of burnout. Additionally, organizations may have annual training reminding at risk employees to detach from their jobs while away from work. On specific example of this would be for an organization to encourage employees to create an after work competitive intramural sports team that will facilitate detachment.

Employees should detach from work during off-job time, especially when job demands are high. For instance, employees could use rituals such as winding down at the end of the work day or actively use commuting time to disengage from job-related thoughts. Additionally, employees may seek to engage in off-job activities that command their full attention in order to increase their detachment from work during off-job time, such as participating in a special interest group or volunteering iin a church or community service organization.

Interpretation by:

Kandace Waddy

DeGarmo Group

DeGarmo Group recently published a whitepaper relating to talent acquisition in the healthcare industry.

“Leveraging Work Value Alignment to Drive Patient Satisfaction in Healthcare” is a report on the use of talent acquisition strategies to identify top-tier candidates for positions in healtcare settings.

To request a copy of the paper, please click here.

DeGarmo Group also will be hosting an informative webcast session on this topic on Tuesday, November 15th at 11am CT. To register for this session, simply follow this link:

https://www1.gotomeeting.com/register/438797449

The following is a summary of the research and practice implications from: Podsakoff, N.P., Whiting, S.W., Podsakoff, P.M., & Mishra, P. (2011). Effects of organizational citizenship behaviors on selection decisions in employment interviews. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(2), 310-326.

Organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) is thought to be one of the many factors that influence managers as they make selection decisions based upon job interviews. OCB is the behavior of an employee which may not be a part of the job role, but supports the work environment at large by supporting fellow employees and the organization as a whole. Applicants who display OCB during job interviews are less likely to voluntarily quit, are likely to be more productive, and are likely to be more efficient than their coworkers.  Questions that attempt to gauge OCB can be included in the job interview to help with selection decisions.

Types of OCB

The interview situation gives managers an opportunity to ask questions that tap into the applicant’s potential for future OCB while on the job; however, they should be aware that certain behaviors during the interview may influence their decision process.  Specifically, three aspects of OCB are influential in selection decisions and will be discussed further: helping behavior, voice behavior, and organizational loyalty behavior.

• Helping behavior.  This involves voluntarily helping others with work-related problems or helping to prevent them.
• Voice behavior.  This involves expression of constructive challenge intended to improve a situation within an organization.
• Organizational loyalty behavior. This involves the manifestation and evidence of employee commitment.

OCB and Interviewer Perceptions

Manager’s and interviewer’s expectations of a possible future employee (including perceptions of competence, overall evaluations, and salary recommendations) can be influenced by each of these three factors.  The more helping behavior, voice behavior, and organizational loyalty behavior an interviewee displays during an interview, the higher the perceptions of competence, overall evaluations, and salary recommendations will be.

Practical Implications

Those who make the selection decisions after an interview should not hesitate to look for these displays of OCB during the interview, because, as noted above, they can predict many positive outcomes for the organization.  Interviewers should be aware that the information gathered on OBCs in the interview should be taken cautiously though.  This is because not all OCBs are behaviors that affect the organization’s bottom line.  If the behaviors do not benefit the organization, but the interviewer allows this display to influence his or her decision, it may not lead to the best decision for the organization.

The aspects of OCB that are going to be relevant for an organization and be important to performance differ across organizations and jobs because every organization and job has different needs when it comes to this type of supportive behaviors.  Interviewers should be trained in advance so that they know what behavior it is that the organization is looking for.  Specifically, which OCBs are important to the bottom line and which are not.  Useful information can be obtained from the display of OCBs as long as the interviewer knows what to look for.

Interpretation by:

Ashley Niemczyk

DeGarmo Group

 DeGarmo Group announced today that Anthony Adorno will be facilitating an HR.com webcast titled “Reducing Employee Turnover in Front-Line Jobs“. The session will be held on October 20th, 2011 from 1:00 – 2:00 pm ET. Provided below is a description of the session, as well as registration information.

 Session Overview

Ever hire an employee with all the right skills for the job, only to watch that person walk out the door for good three weeks later? Where did you go wrong? What did you miss?

Most organizations often overlook the importance of measuring an applicant’s work tolerance as part of the talent acquisition process. Unfortunately, it doesn’t matter if the applicant has the skills to do the work if they can’t tolerate the demands of the job!

During this session we’ll discuss the concept of work tolerance as applied to jobs in several settings including retail sales and customer service. We’ll talk about the process of analyzing jobs to discover their underlying work tolerance demands, as well as approaches for using work tolerance information to improve the talent acquisition process to reduce employee turnover, and increase levels of job satisfaction.

Finally, we’ll share the results of research using work tolerance measures in several organizations representing industries such as telecommunications and financial services, but the concepts learned during this session can apply to any job, in every organization.

What will participants learn?
1) The difference between the work tolerance and skill demands of jobs
2) How to analyze jobs to determine their underlying work tolerance demands
3) Methods for using work tolerance demands for improving talent acquisition
4) The impact of work tolerance characteristics for reducing employee turnover in front-line jobs

Who should attend?
1) Recruiters, Managers, Directors, VPs, etc., responsible for HR, Staffing, and Talent Acquisition.
2) Those interested in learning about the impact of work tolerance on organizational success.
3) Business leaders

Registration Information

To register for the event, please visit: http://www.hr.com/stories/1317068692478

The following is a summary of the research and practice implications from: Harrison, S.H., Sluss, D.M., & Ashforth, B.E. (2011). Curiosity adapted the cat: The role of trait curiosity in newcomer adaptation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(1), 211-220.

Most employees do not stay at the same job their entire career. As such, managers often find themselves overseeing the adaptations that employees make when starting a new job.  Newcomer adaptation, the time during which a new employee is trying to adapt to an organization, is influenced by the employee’s level of curiosity.  Curiosity is defined as the desire for new information that leads to inquisitive and exploratory behaviors.  Individuals who are curious like to explore and experiment to draw on a variety of experiences to make sense of one’s situation.  As a manager, by knowing about a newcomer’s type of curiosity, you can do more to ensure retention.

Types of Curiosity

Two types of curiosity, specific and diversive, have been linked to adaptive behaviors in employees which will be explained further.

• Specific curiosity: Experienced as motivation to seek a new distinct piece of information in narrow and direct ways. An employee with specific curiosity might enjoy refining and extending information that already exists.
• Diversive curiosity: Experienced as a desire to explore that can be satisfied by a diverse range of data in broad and indirect ways. An employee with diversive curiosity might enjoy coming up with novel approaches to reach maximum performance levels.

How is Curiosity Related to Adaptation on the Job?

Specific and diversive curiosity are each related to different actions of a newcomer on the job.  First, a newcomer who exhibits the narrowly focused, specific curiosity, is more likely to actively seek information to fill in the gaps in his or her knowledge.  Second, a newcomer with the broadly based diversive style of curiosity is more likely to positively frame the workplace.  This means that while they are adapting, they are prone to view situations in a positive light.  This positive framing of a situation improves motivation for doing a job which also improves performance on the job.  The motivation an employee feels on the job will increase the retention rate.  If an employee is not curious and does not feel excited about the job they are performing, they are more likely to leave the organization.

Curiosity motivates newcomer adaptation and the different forms of curiosity spark and speed up adaptive behaviors.  Newcomers will explore in different ways.  Specifically, those with specific curiosity will look for details and distinct cues while those with diversive curiosity will look for new ways of framing a situation.

Practical Implications

This information can prove useful because individuals are likely to be a “newcomer” to different organizations multiple times in their lives, so every organization and manager will inevitably be dealing with newcomers.  More specifically, it is important to learn more about how individuals adapt in new situations, as it is increasingly becoming the responsibility of the newcomer who may not know how to handle it.  An educated manager may be able to provide the guidance necessary for adaptation.

Given the relationship between adaptation and curiosity, managers should look into ways to spark this curiosity.  This curiosity, as discussed above, leads to motivation which is related to lower employee turnover for the organization.

Interpretation by:

Ashley Niemczyk

DeGarmo Group