Reference no: EM133028246

CASE STUDY

Balancing principles and pragmatism in selection Matt is an HR adviser with a large engineering company. The company has a comprehensive selection policy that requires all positions to be filled after a formal selection process. The process includes interviews by a panel of at least two people, reference checking, and assessment against specific selection criteria. The policy also requires that the selection panel prepare a report justifying their choice of candidate. The report needs to be signed off by a senior manager from the relevant division as well as by the HR manager. The policy applies to all appointments, whether internal or external. The rationale for the policy is to ensure that selection processes are rigorous, fair, and equitable.

Recently, the labour market has tightened considerably and competition for staff, particularly engineers and accounting professionals, has increased. Managers have begun to question the policy as being too bureaucratic. Because the policy demands a high level of rigour and accountability, selections can take 2 to 3 weeks to complete, and this has resulted in several instances where preferred candidates have been lost to other job offers.

Managers have also questioned the necessity of applying the policy to internal appointments, preferring to have the capacity to simply appoint internal candidates to vacant positions without any formal process. The HR manager has asked Matt to review the policy with a view to streamlining the process.

Case study questions

1. Is it possible to improve the efficiency and speed of the process without compromising the principles of rigour, fairness and equity?

2. Is there justification for making the process less rigorous? If so, what aspects of the policy could be amended?

3. Is it reasonable to have different policies for internal and external appointments?

4. What might be the risks of removing some or all of the policy requirements?