The End of an Era: The Time Has Come to Demote the Resume November 27, 2014 Presenter: Edwin Jansen [email protected] @EdwinJnsn CharityVillage Webinar
Jul 14, 2015
The End of an Era:
The Time Has Come to Demote the Resume
November 27, 2014 Presenter: Edwin Jansen [email protected] @EdwinJnsn
CharityVillage Webinar
Today’s Agenda
The Problems in Hiring
Predictive Validity of Selection Methods
Challenges & Solutions
Special Announcement!
Remaining Q&A
Ask Questions!
Interactive Polls!
Meta-Analysis of 19 Selection Methods
The Validity and Utility of Selection Methods in Personnel Psychology: Practical and Theoretical Implications of 85 Years of Research Findings.
John E. Hunter
Frank L. Schmidt
Poll Which of the following do you think have been proven to be the most predictive of future success in a job?
– Structured Interviews
– Psychometric Tests
– Skills & Experience Scoring
– Work Sample Tests
Predictive Validity of Selection Methods
Sources: The Validity and Utility of Selection Methods in Personnel Psychology: Practical and Theoretical Implications of 85 Years of Research Findings. John E. Hunter, Frank L. Schmidt, 1998.
John E. Hunter
Frank L. Schmidt
1. Work Sample Tests (.54)
2. Structured Interviews (.51)
3. General Mental Ability (.51)
4. Peer Ratings (.49)
5. Job Knowledge Tests (.48)
6. Skills & Experience Scoring (.45)
7. Job Tryout (.44)
8. Integrity Tests (.41)
9. Unstructured Interviews (.38)
10. Assessment Centers (.37)
11. Biographical Data (.35)
12. Conscientiousness Tests (.31)
13. Reference Checks (.26)
14. Resume/Job Experience (.18)
15. Resume/Point Method (.11)
16. Resume/Education (.10)
17. Personal Interests (.10)
18. Graphology (.02)
19. Age (-.01)
Correlation Scale trivial small moderate large very large nearly perfect perfect
0 0.1 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.9 1
Use Multiple Valid Selection Methods
Sources: The Validity and Utility of Selection Methods in Personnel Psychology: Practical and Theoretical Implications of 85 Years of Research Findings. John E. Hunter, Frank L. Schmidt, 1998.
John E. Hunter
Frank L. Schmidt
Correlation Scale trivial small moderate large very large nearly perfect perfect
0 0.1 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.9 1
Selection Methods Validity (r) Multiple R
Work sample tests 0.54 0.63 Integrity tests 0.41 0.65
Conscientiousness tests 0.31 0.60 Structured interviews 0.51 0.63 Unstructured interviews 0.38 0.55
Job knowledge tests 0.48 0.58 Job tryout procedure 0.44 0.58
Peer ratings 0.49 0.58
Skills & Experience Scoring 0.45 0.58
Predictive Validity for Overall Job Performance of General Mental Ability (GMA) Scores Combined with a Second Predictor Using (Standardized) Multiple Regression
The 3 Mistakes of Resume Screening
1. All are Missing Key Information
“Yes, I think I have good people skills.
What kind of idiot question is that?”
The 3 Mistakes of Resume Screening 2. They Are Misleading
78% misleading
53% falsified
“My resume is not all lies.
My name is correct!”
Source: SHRM, ADP, Accu-Screen, 2012
The 3 Mistakes of Resume Screening
3. They are Manual
“Upon further review of your resume,
I’m sorry I wasted my time.”
(.18) = Big Chance of ‘False’
True Positive
False Positive
False Negative
True Negative
Screening
Job Success Good Bad
Good
Bad
The Challenge
How can we cost-effectively insert validated methods into
the initial screening and shortlisting process?
“How Can We Address Our Matching Problem and Connect More People with Meaningful Work?”
Predictive Applicant Tracking System
Validly assess & score unlimited candidates
Takes 30-70% less time than resume screening
1. Qualifications
“Actually, the ‘ability to smell fear’ is not one of the qualifications
we’re looking for.”
Skills, Experience, Achievements
2. Personality Fit
Validated Science 15 million tests in 30 years
Normative, not ipsative
125 nonprofit job profiles
“According to our personality test you are best suited to retirement.”
Predictive & objective
“For me, it’s not just a job, it’s a way of life.”
3. Work Environment Fit
Identify Red Flags for Interviewing
“I feel as if I’m more than just a resume.”
“It was actually kinda fun to fill this out.”
“Best application process I have experienced.”
Better Applicant Experience
Rating Percentage
1% 1% 9%
39% 50%
Total 100%
Please rate your own experience in applying for this job. The feedback will not be attached to you application, but will be used solely to help refine and improve the application process.
89%
“We compared this assessment against our own resume screening and came away with a high
degree of confidence in the shortlisting process.”
-Joanne Rousseau, HR Manager
Experiment
Resume vs Predictive Screening
76 applicants
Manual resume screening 1st
Results
Save hours of screening time
Avoid wasted interviews
Found & hired a ‘false negative’
Previous Posting
Director, Employer Relations
Formal job ad
Underwhelming applicants
New Posting
Director, Employer Programs
Compelling job ad with program mgmt
50+ applicants, many well qualified
“The assessment really helped us to better screen candidates, and the new
job description and title were key to [our hire’s] interest - she saw it the last time
we posted and took a pass.” - Margaret Eaton, Executive Director
CharityVillage Mission
To help strengthen the nonprofit sector in Canada
Leverages NFP strengths
Out-recruit the corporations
Better hiring = higher engagement
Poll
I anticipate posting a job in December and I may be interested in using an early release of Talent Predictor:
Yes, please consider me for the early release in December
No thanks