Here is the synopsis of our sample research paper on Perception of Fairness in Recruitment Processes. Have the paper e-mailed to you 24/7/365.
Essay / Research Paper Abstract
This 6 page paper looks at a research article assessing the perceived fairness of two recruitment tools; a background information gathering tool and an exam. The way in which each is seen as fair is discussed and considered in the context of existing knowledge. The bibliography cites 11 sources.
Page Count:
6 pages (~225 words per page)
File: TS65_TErecfair.doc
Buy This Term Paper »
Unformatted sample text from the term paper:
potential employees background and many may use different types of testing to assess knowledge, skills, aptitude or personality. Fosberg and Shultx, (2009, p33) note that the use of
biodata has the potential to accurately reflect the probable success of the recruit in the job. It is also noted that the processes used should be deemed as fair by
the applicants it may undermine the recruitment process; it may damage the firms reputation limiting those who are attracted to the firm, as well as having a potential impact on
the cooperation of the applicants who may not perform to their optimum, reducing the ability of the processes to accurately assess the potential of the candidates (Fosberg and Shultx, 2009,
p.33). The utilization of assessment tools which are perceived as unfair may also increase the potential for a claim of the allegation of discrimination through adverse affect, leading to possible
exposure to legal action (Fosberg and Shultx, 2009, p.33). Fosberg and Shultx, (2009) assess the way in which different to different types of job assessment tools are perceived by job
candidates in terms of fairness. Two selection devices were utilized, and one was a questionnaire designed to provide a systematic approach to collecting background information on the candidate; gathering only
information which was classified as objective and could be verified (Fosberg and Shultx, 2009, p.36). The second tool was a written exam, with a number of multiple-choice questions which were
directly relevant to the job for which the candidate was applying (Fosberg and Shultx, 2009, p.37). The tests were applied to 2 sample groups, 52 candidates applying for position as
an engineering aid, 72 candidates applied for a job as a plumber (Fosberg and Shultx, 2009, p.36). The tools were adapted for each sample group, with questions relevant to
...