Three candidates were referred for the Human Resources Director post. However, the best finalist for the job was Shawanda Jackson. Ms. Jackson was chosen as the qualifier using a well-planned strategy. The other two candidates, Mr. Sam Fein and Ms. Lola Vega were similarly remarkable, but they would not make the best HR Director for the Nairduwel, Inoalot, and Imslo (NII) Law Firm. It is crucial to understand the assessment methods that were used and why the other two candidates were rejected. Therefore, this report discusses the assessment methods that were used in selecting the HR Director and the rationale for choosing Ms. Jackson and rejecting Mr. Fein and Ms. Vega.
Assessment Methods for the Job of Human Resources Director
Knowledge of the job
Several assessment methods were used during the process of selection. The first evaluation method involved assessing the candidates’ knowledge of the job. The job description and duties involved overall administration tasks, supervision tasks, the recruitment process, communication policies, and assigning duties, among others. The candidates were required to state what they thought the job entailed. A majority of the initially shortlisted candidates were only aware of the HR Director’s influence in the recruitment process. This realization made it easier to eliminate the unfit candidates for the position.
Definition of success
The second assessment method involved evaluating the candidates’ definition of success. The question was aimed at determining the type of executive the candidate would be. The question had no right or wrong answer, but the answers provided helped in the selection process because they identified the candidates who had goals that were similar or related to those of the company. For instance, Mr. Fein explained success as the ability to do anything one wants to do. On the other hand, Ms. Jackson described success as the number of promotions and earnings one gets. The two answers were very different, yet Ms. Jackson was picked without necessarily having to state the right answer because her answer went hand in hand with the company’s goals. Ms. Jackson’s answer suggested that she had to perform exceptionally as the HR Director to get promotions and become successful. In turn, she would hire the best people who would increase the productivity level of the company and boost the profits made by the company. Looking at Mr. Fein’s answer, it implied that executives had the right to do whatever they wanted. For instance, the top executives should not go to work if they do not feel like going. In turn, such attitudes would reduce the company’s profits and lead to massive losses.
Describing a problem in the workplace
The candidates were also told to describe a problem in the workplace as an assessment procedure. This question was beneficial because it provided a hint of how the candidates would analyze situations. There are numerous cases where people perceive challenges, yet there are no challenges in reality; instead, there are only opportunities. The candidates not only described a problem in the workplace, but they also gave a possible solution to the problem. Providing a solution to the problem was meant to determine the cognitive prowess of the individual. The question: “What kinds of sports do you like?” was aimed at identifying some aspects of the candidate’s personality. For example, Mr. Fein appeared lazy because he said that he loved spectator sports, while Ms. Vega appeared to be active because she liked to golf and shuffleboard.
Several tests were also used for assessment. For instance, the structured behavioral test, the cognitive test, and the knowledge test measured different aspects of the candidate’s personality. The top three finalists scored better in these tests than the other candidates. The choice of the top three candidates heavily depended on the scores they got from the tests. It is crucial to point out that the candidates were not required to get 100% on the tests, but the different scores showed different levels of understanding, taking instructions, and critical thinking abilities of the candidates.
Candidate 1 – Ms. Lola Vega
Knowledge of the job
The first candidate presented was Ms. Lola Vega. She had very high skills, but she lacked some of the core skills for a Human Resources Director’s position. It was refreshing to see that she had a very strong GPA score. It meant that she was a quick learner, meaning that one would not need to keep giving her instructions. Additionally, Ms. Vega had 5 years of experience in the human resources department, with four of these years dedicated to recruiting. Whereas recruitment is a core function of the Human Resources Director, there are other tasks that the director will do; for instance, the HR Director will be tasked with some administrative duties. Given that Ms. Vega specifically mentioned that she had four years of experience in training and five years in total in the HR department, it would mean that she had only one year of experience in other HR tasks. One year for all the remaining duties was too little experience for the HR Director position. Moreover, Ms. Vega had no supervisory experience, which worked against her because the HR Director would be required to supervise numerous employees in the department.
Ms. Vega scored the highest points on the cognitive test. A high score on the cognitive test showed ease in making critical decisions. Cognitive skills are essential for any HR Director, as the director determines the employees who will make the company successful. The HR Director is tasked with the hiring and firing of workers, a task that can make or break a company. Having said this, it was a significant advantage for Ms. Vega to have scored so highly. The candidate also did very well in the structured interview, scoring 85%, and the knowledge test where she scored 94%. The outstanding scores indicated that she was not only knowledgeable, but she was also very composed.
Definition of success
Ms. Vega stated that her definition of success was the ability to influence others. The question was meant to determine the kind of personality the individual had. The answer provided showed that Ms. Vega was authoritative, which could be a problem for the firm if she replaced authority with force. Additionally, the answer was incomprehensive because people can be influenced in various ways. For instance, people can be influenced to become thieves or they can be influenced to become good people.
When asked what kind of sports she liked, Ms. Vega stated that she played golf and shuffleboard. The two games mentioned require a lot of cognitive prowess, as they depend on the mental capability of the individual to solve problems. With golf, one has to have a splendid aim and a very calculative mind. This characteristic is excellent for an HR Director because it allows them to decide on critical administrative issues.
Rationale for rejection
Overall, Ms. Vega was an exquisite candidate. However, her lack of proper experience would make her a one-sided Human Resources Director. She could be trusted to hire and fire people based on her education and experience, but she could not be trusted to handle other administrative duties properly. Ms. Vega lacked proper social skills, despite her cognitive prowess; therefore, she could be unsuccessful in any position she holds. Consequently, she was not picked as the final candidate for the position of Human Resources Director for the Nairduwel, Inoalot, and Imslo (NII) Law Firm.
Candidate 2 – Sam Fein
Knowledge of the job
The second candidate was Sam Fein, who had a lot of strengths that got him to the top three candidates. For example, he had a twenty-year experience in human resources management. The broad experience was good because it portrayed Mr. Fein as familiar with how the department works. Going with the experience, it would be expected that he would know what to do in almost all scenarios that may occur in the department. Also, his vast experience meant that he was good in human resources management. It suffices to mention that Mr. Fein had fifteen years out of the twenty years in HR in a supervisory position. NII was very keen on this aspect because the HR Director would be responsible for some administrative work, including the supervision of the employees.
One of the things that narrowed down Mr. Fein’s chance of being the top candidate was his low GPA. It was true that he did not fail in school; however, he had the lowest GPA among the three candidates. A low GPA was a sign of stubbornness, which could translate to a lack of accountability. Mr. Fein also scored the lowest on the cognitive test. It was disadvantageous for him because it denoted that he was the weakest at making critical decisions among the three candidates. As an HR Director, he would have had to make critical decisions daily. Some of these decisions would touch on the hiring and firing of staff, while others would touch on various administrative duties. As the HR Director, he would also have to make decisions concerning the employees under him. Unfortunately, this task would prove a bit challenging for him compared to the other two candidates. It suffices to mention that Mr. Fein also had a lower score in the structured interview, which denoted that he was not well-organized. Organization and management are crucial for managers to achieve success. On the upside, Mr. Fein scored highly on the knowledge test. A high score on this test proved that the candidate was knowledgeable on issues related to human resources. The broad knowledge could be attributed to his long experience in the human resources field.
Definition of success
When asked to define success, Mr. Fein stated that it is the ability to do what one wants to do. The answer echoed the characteristic of the stubbornness noted earlier. He appeared to love power, which could be very negative because he could become dictatorial to the staff. Similarly, the idea of doing what one wishes because they are the boss could lead to cases of unaccountability. Again, this echoed the characteristic of stubbornness that was observed earlier.
On the other hand, Mr. Fein stated that he enjoyed spectator sports. The answer portrayed him as a lazy person, who liked to enjoy the fruits of other people’s hard work. The HR department would not need a lazy person, as there are numerous critical decisions made in the department. These decisions could either make or break the whole company.
Rationale for rejection
Mr. Fein had an impressive experience, but he was the wrong choice due to his low GPA and a poor personality. He had the potential to become a dictator, in addition to the tendencies of laziness. These two characteristics were undesirable for the executive role he would take. Moreover, Mr. Fein appeared to be unaccountable, which would lead to wrong decision-making in the department.
Candidate 3 – Shawanda Jackson
Knowledge of the job
As mentioned earlier, Ms. Jackson was the top candidate among the three individuals. One of her biggest advantages was the outstanding job experience she had. She had worked for eight years in the human resources department. Out of these eight years, she dedicated three years to general HR duties and four years as a compensation analyst. Consequently, it was clear that Ms. Jackson has amassed critical skills that would be needed by an HR Director. She started as a general HR assistant, where she did all manner of duties associated with the HR office. Consequently, she was molded to become an all-round person. Additionally, her experience as a compensation analyst made it easier for her to perform administrative duties in the department, compared to the other two candidates.
Ms. Jackson had a very high GPA. It was true that she did not have the top score among the three finalists. However, her score was equally high, which denoted that she would take instructions easily and would not need to be reminded of her duties. Moreover, Ms. Jackson had five years of supervisory experience. As mentioned, the HR Director would have to be good at supervision because they would be in charge of an entire department. Therefore, the supervisory experience was a huge advantage for Ms. Jackson.
It suffices to mention that Ms. Jackson scored well in the tests that were given. She got 84% in the cognitive test and 91% on the knowledge test. The score on the cognitive test showed that she could handle the role of making critical decisions. Similarly, the high score on the knowledge test showed that she was knowledgeable, which was advantageous for her because knowledge was deemed to be very crucial for decision-making. Ms. Jackson scored 75% in the structured interview. Although it was not the highest, a 75% score indicated that she was well-organized and composed.
Definition of success
When asked to define success, Ms. Jackson stated that success could be measured using the number of promotions and earnings an individual gets. The answer indicated that she was very ambitious; thus, she would do her job excellently to get a promotion and earn more money in return. Whereas some people would argue that such a kind of ambition was a negative thing for a manager, the characteristic was positive because such a manager would ensure that everything works as expected.
Additionally, Ms. Jackson stated that her favorite games were basketball and tennis. The two games denote teamwork and aggression respectively. Basketball is all about teamwork and the ability to share the ‘burden’. Playing basketball requires a lot of fairness; it does not tolerate blame games. On the other hand, tennis requires a lot of aggression. A love for the two games showed that Ms. Jackson could not only work alone under no supervision, but she could also excel in teamwork.
Rationale for selection
Ms. Jackson was the best candidate for the job because she scored well in the tests and had enough experience in the HR department. On top of this, she showed the potential of being aggressive and the willingness to work hard to get promotions. She did not portray signs of relishing power. Consequently, she would work well both alone and as a group. The company can be sure that she will be accountable and without any form of bias because she does not tolerate the blame game.
All three candidates were excellent and would make good employees. However, only one proved good enough to become the Human Resources Director for NII. Shawanda Jackson was not only smart, but she was also aggressive, a team leader, and had enough experience in the human resources management department to emerge the best candidate. She understood the challenges the employees face because she started her career with general HR duties in her previous workplace. Consequently, she would relate to the employees better compared to the other two candidates. Moreover, she scored highly in the assessment tests, and her ability to interact with other people would make her an excellent boss. The other two candidates lacked prowess, aggression, and their personalities did not fit into the company’s strategic plan.