Case :  Recruiting in a Competitive Environment   When qualified applicants are scarce, recruiting becomes extremely competitive, particularly when two companies go after the same candidate, as often happens in the case of searching for professionals

Subject:ManagementPrice:8.89 Bought3

Share With

Case :  Recruiting in a Competitive Environment

 

When qualified applicants are scarce, recruiting becomes extremely competitive, particularly when two companies go after the same candidate, as often happens in the case of searching for professionals. 

After interviewing three shortlisted candidates, a high-tech company, Company X, made an offer to one and advised the other two candidates that they were unsuccessful. He successful candidate was given one week to consider the offer. The candidate asked for a week's extension to consider the offer but was granted only an additional 3 days. 

At the end of the time period, the candidate verbally accepted the offer and was sent a contract to sign. Rather than returning the signed contract, the candidate informed Company X that he had accepted a position at Company Y. He had received the second offer after verbally accepting the first position at Company X. The second company knew that the candidate had verbally accepted Company X's offer.

Before accepting Company's offer, the candidate had consulted a respected mentor who advised him to ignore his verbal commitment to Company X and to accept Company Y's offer. There were no substantial differences in the salaries being offered by each company or in the work that each would expect the candidate to perform. The candidate simply saw Company Y as the more prestigious of the two employers.

 

Case Questions:

 

1.     Did the candidate act in an appropriate manner?

2.    What should the candidate have done?

3.    Did Company Y act ethically, knowing that the candidate had verbally accepted another offer?

4.    Does a verbal acceptance constitute a legal and binding contract?

5.    Should Company X take any action to enforce the verbal commitment? Should it take any legal action against the candidate or Company Y? Why or why not?

6.    Describe what Company X should have done to maintain the candidate's interest in the position. 

 

 

Case : Emotional Intelligence or Cognitive Ability?

Cognitive ability tests are very reliable and validly measures of job performance. Cognitive ability tests normally assess reasoning, verbal, and quantitative ability. A recent survey, however found that 71% of the 2661 employers sampled valued emotional intelligence (EI) over cognitive ability. EI assesses a person's ability to accurately perceive emotions in themselves and others; and to be aware of how their emotions shape their thinking, decisions, and coping mechanisms; their ability to understand and analyze their emotions; and their ability to regulate their emotions. EI correlates with job performance at a much lower level and in many cases the specific measure of EI did not correlate with job performance. The survey found that 59% of employers would not hire someone with high cognitive ability but low EI. 75% said they would promote someone with high EI over someone with a lower value of EI. When asked why emotional intelligence is more important than high IQ, employers said (in order of importance) high EI employee:

Are more likely to stay calm under pressure:

Know how to resolve conflict effectively

Are empathetic to their team members and react accordingly:

Lead by example

And tend to make more thoughtful business decisions

In discussing the survey results a VP of Human Resources at CareerBuilder, the organization that carried out the survey said : the competitive job market allows employers to look more closely at the. Intangible qualities that pay dividends down the road - like skilled communicators and perspective team members. Technical competency and intelligence are important assets for every worker, but when its down to you and another candidate for promotion or new job, dynamic interpersonal skills will set you apart. In a recovering economy, employers want people who can effectively make decisions in stressful situations and can empathize with the needs of their colleagues and clients to deliver the best results.

Case Questions

 

1.     What do you think? Should the hiring managers prefer EI over cognitive ability in predicting job performance? Why?

 

2.     If you planned to use EI as part of your selection system, discuss the steps that you would take to ensure that you were able to make reliable and accurate inferences about job performance in your work situation. That is, what would you have to do to show that your measure was reliable and valid?

 

3.     EI tests are prone to applicant faking. What can you do to limit faking on an EI test? Would these procedures lower the reliability and validity of the tests?

 

4.     What are the legal considerations of using EI tests with poor reliability and validity? What are the business costs?

 

5.    If you were hiring for a leadership positions, what mix of tests related to the questions/case above, would you implement to ensure you are hiring the best person for the role?