R&scase job analysis PDF

Preview

Summary

r&s case job analysis...

Description

JOB ANALYSIS AND HIRING DECISIONS AT OVANIA CHEMICAL C O M PA N Y B A C K GR O U ND

Ovania Chemical Corporation is a specialty chemicals producer. Its core product is polyethylene terephthalate (PET) thermoplastic resins, which are used mainly to make containers and packages for bottled water, soft drinks, foods, and pharmaceuticals. Ovania is one of the smaller chemical producers but has competed successfully in its niche. In recent years, technological advances have shaken up the industry, and like other firms in it, Ovania is modernizing its facilities. Not surprisingly, the company has had to redesign its employees’ jobs as a result. In fact, in the past three years those jobs have changed drastically. Following is an example, from Ovania’s Boucherville plant. SY S T E M A N A LYZ ER

Because chemical production is such a complex process, workers are needed who can monitor all of the individual steps and procedures simultaneously. This is what system analyzers do. It is one of the most prestigious nonmanagerial jobs in the entire plant, and its importance is likely to grow. The position was once classified as semiskilled (i.e., maintenance technician); however, with automation, the requirements for the job are expanding dramatically. A system analyzer will soon have to know pneumatics, hydraulics, information technology, programming, and electrical wiring. Ovania has estimated that within two years, a system analyzer’s tasks, duties, and responsibilities will have changed by over 70 percent. The three men who currently hold the position admit that they will soon be unable to perform their duties adequately. For these reasons, the decision has been made to recruit three new people for the position. J OB A N A LYS I S A N D N E W PO S I T I O N A NA LYS I S

The manager of Ovania’s Boucherville plant, Pierre Landry, the HR manager, Emily Bouchard, and two senior engineers, Jeet Singh and David Parizeau, formed a selection committee. With the help of two consultants, they have just completed a job analysis for the changed position of system analyzer. They have had to project into the future regarding the specific requirements of the job, but feel that their conclusions are quite justifiable. Figure 3A lists the major performance dimensions of the job; it also indicates the specific tasks that will be characteristic of each dimension. The selection committee has drawn from this list of tasks to arrive at a set of personal qualities that system analyzers will need. These qualities include the twelve abilities shown in Figure 3B. Beside each ability are numbers corresponding to the tasks to which it is related (see Figure 3A). The abilities marked with an asterisk (*) are considered by the committee to be “critical.” Any applicant not

scoring well on each of the critical dimensions will be considered unqualified for the job.

A NT I C I PAT E D S E LE C T I O N P R O CE S S

The committee hopes to acquire “new blood” for the redesigned system analyzer job; this will entail recruiting outside the organization for the best talent available. Yet as a matter of policy, management is strongly committed to promoting from within. After careful deliberation, the committee has decided to recruit both inside and outside Ovania for the new position. It has also decided to encourage the current system analyzers in particular to “reapply” for the job. Because the changes in the position will not be in place for two more years, the committee is being very careful not to include in the selection battery any skills or knowledge that could reasonably be trained within that two-year period. Only aptitude or ability factors have been incorporated into the selection process; achievement tests have not been. In a private session, some of the committee members admit candidly that they seriously doubt whether any women or minority members currently in the relevant labour market have the credentials to compete for the position. The three system analyzers presently employed are white males. However, because Ovania Chemical has a rather unenviable history of employment discrimination charges, the decision has been made to do no unnecessary prescreening of applicants’ qualifications, previous experience, and so on. It is hoped that this strategy will encourage minorities and women to apply for the new positions, whatever their past employment history. There is some concern that Ovania will be accused of prejudice if women or members of minority groups are hired for the jobs. Word through the grapevine is that many do not consider these people suitable for such a prestigious position. Moreover, several comments have been heard that a woman would not get down into the treatment tanks to check gauge readings. All of these factors, taken together, are making for a very sensitive selection process. Ovania’s managers, however, are committed to making the procedures and decisions fair and objective. The job is posted, and fifty-six employees apply for the new position of system analyzer. Twenty-one are women; fifteen belong to visible minorities. Only two of the three current system analyzers have reapplied for the new position. The company had decided that a total score of 800 on the twelve tests would be the cutoff score for an applicant to be seriously considered for the position. This criterion has resulted in a pool of twenty primary candidates (see Figure 3C). Note that although each of the aptitude tests has been published, standardized (100 points possible for each test), and validated on

other jobs, there are no normative or validity data for the specific job of system analyzer. This means that the test battery can be defended solely on the basis of content validity. The selection committee is having a difficult time arriving at a method for combining the multiple predictors to reach the final cutoff scores.

Questions 1.

How would you go about conducting a job analysis for a job that does not yet exist?

2.

Do you think the abilities chosen for selection are content valid? What other kinds of predictors might be generally useful for employee selection?

3.

What reasons did the selection committee have for selecting only those factors which could not be acquired through a two-year training program?

4.

Should the concern for women getting down into the dirty treatment tanks have been a selection issue? How might you include this factor in a selection battery?

5.

For the abilities termed “critical,” what score should someone receive in order to be considered scoring “well” on that test? How should the test scores be combined (e.g., compensatory, multiple hurdle, combination)?

6.

Which three candidates seem most qualified? What are your reservations, if any, about this recommendation?

7.

Would this test battery and selection procedure be defensible in court?...