Friday, October 21, 2011


If you order your essay from our custom writing service you will receive a perfectly written assignment on management. What we need from you is to provide us with your detailed paper instructions for our experienced writers to follow all of your specific writing requirements. Specify your order details, state the exact number of pages required and our custom writing professionals will deliver the best quality management paper right on time.

Out staff of freelance writers includes over 120 experts proficient in management, therefore you can rest assured that your assignment will be handled by only top rated specialists. Order your management paper at affordable prices with custom writing service/a>!

On dealing with the premiss that the practice of recruitment and selection is a long way

from the recommendations of personnel textbooks, distinction must be taken into account

between explicit recommendations and guidelines, on one hand, and, on the other, implicit

suggestions stemming from the author’s own stance. The implications of distancing from,

Help with essay on management

or identification with, such explicit recommendations and implicit suggestions will be

viewed in this paper as well as forms of overt and covert resistance, or adhesion, assumed

in actual practice. Also central to the argument is what the whole issue means in terms of

both existing problems and potential future problems for the employer and the candidate,

for organizational management, the labour market and macro-economic welfare and

progress in general. Employment decisions have traditionally been regarded as a privilege

exclusive to management. Many of the US personnel textbooks emphasize this aspect and

describe the process in terms of ‘hurdles over which prospective employees have to try to

leap to avoid rejection’ (Torrington and Hall, 118). In the UK recruitment and

selection is an issue which has in the past kept a low profile in personnel textbooks,

though the trend has changed (e.g., Torrington and Hall, 11, Keith Sisson, 14), which

appears to point out to an evolution from the paternalistic perspective according to which

recruitment tends to be dominantly viewed from the angle of providing candidates for the

selector to judge. Recommendations are being made with respect to the various stages of

the process of recruitment and selection, from approaching and seeking to interest

potential candidates to determining whether to appoint any of them. Codes of practice and

guidelines for their implementation have been produced with emphasis on different

aspects, e.g., on recruitment starting with a job description and person specification, by

IPM; on fair and efficient selection, by EOC (186); on avoidance of sex bias in selection

testing, by EOC (1); on avoidance of improper discrimination, by ACAS (181) and

negative bias against age, by IPM (1); on non-discriminatory advertising, by CRE and

EOC (177, 185); and on the use of cognitive and psychometric tests, by IPM and BPS

(1). 1. Moreover, legislation promoting equality of opportunity has underlined the

importance of using well-validated selection procedures (Torrington and Hall, 11), and

directives such as those issued by CRE (18) and EOC (185) emphasize the need to

comply with anti-discrimination legislation and this way enhance opportunities to

disadvantaged groups. Greater formality will both make the concealment of racial and

sexual discrimination more difficult and will permit more effective retrospective

surveillance by senior management and bodies such as the CRE (Jenkins, 18), thus to

some extent remedying the weakness of much of the EO literature in not frontally

addressing the different types of discriminatory decision, be it determinism, particularism,

patronage or rational-legality (Jewson & Mason, 186). As a counter-argument, however,

the definition of the employer’s role as that of implementing and monitoring formal

procedures can be seen to absolve senior staff of the responsibility for further investigation

of the causes of continuing inequality (Webb & Liff, 188). In fact, case studies have

shown that such directives can be misused and their intention subverted as often happens

with respect to IPM’s recommendations on job description and person specification

(Collinson et al., 10 6-108), and, furthermore, the legal definition of ‘justifiability’ is

sufficiently vague for the legislation to be ineffective; and the workforce can be

manipulated into becoming management’s accomplice in discrimination (ibid. 70-71).

Some recommendations are, in themselves, not socially and politically neutral enough to

avoid ambiguity and, as such, encourage covert discrimination. Highlighting the causes

behind the problem, EOC points out that gender discrimination is embedded in ‘myths’

(EOC, 186), while we are also reminded that motherhood still remains a stigma

(Curran, 188) as the general ideology of gender still associates feminity with nurturing,

and hence with servicing, which is translated directly into specific occupational terms

(Murgatroyd, 18). Accordingly - inspite of what has been achieved - women still face

‘bottleneck’ on the way to top jobs in personnel, a situation which has been aggravated by

a recent regression in the previous upward trend for women, the latest figures standing at

44% of all personnel managers but only .5% of personnel directors (PM Plus, 14).

Getting into the boardroom is not the same as getting into the ‘club’, a ‘glass ceiling’

made difficult to shatter (BM, 14) by the club members themselves who may also try to

psychologically manipulate women into consenting and thus becoming accomplices of

their own fate. At least on their face value, for the past two decades personnel textbooks

have been recommending equal opportunities in recruitment and selection. Rodger’s

‘Seven Point Plan’ (Rodger, 170) and Fraser’s ‘Five-Fold Framework’ (Fraser, 171

64-80) are checklists which emphasize the need for a logical link between job description

and person specification. Yet, Rodger’s headings ‘circumstances’ and ‘acceptability’ ‘have

strong potential to be used as a cloak for improper discrimination’ (Sisson, 1418). In

instances like this one the author of the personnel textbook is - consciously or

unconsciously, intentionally or unintentionally - an accomplice of reluctant management.

Recommendations become a vehicle of subversion of the proclaimed spirit. Even when

guidelines appear to be socially and politically sound, the identification of requirements

remains subjective when it comes to draft a job description as judgement greatly depends

on conclusions which are based on one’s conceptualizations. The effect of prejudice and

bias is, therefore, difficult to control, and unfairness in shortlisting is difficult to restrain. .

Other main initial steps in the recruitment and selection process offer no guarantee of

fairness. Application forms, multi-purpose as advised by Edwards (1864), or not, may

become a tool of discrimination as they can easily incorporate a discriminatory bias within

their highly structured framework. Letters of application and CVs appear to be seen as of

little relevance as a measure of performance in manual jobs (Duxfield, 1846-7) but to

be regarded of great importance and possibly decisive on other kinds of placement

(Knollys, 18 6-8) where they are left to the assessor’s subjective evaluation. It is

generally acknowledged that they are open to discriminatory use by the employer

(McIntosh and Smith, 174). Furthermore, the use of graphology, though controversial, is

being practised in Britain (PM,185). Inappropriate use of screening tests is another point

of concern. The use of cognitive and psychometric tests appears to be quite popular in the

UK, bearing in mind that the production of a personality questionnaire has been financed

by over fifty companies in this country (Saville and Holdsworth Ltd, 187). Discerning

and cautious use of psychological techniques of selection has been advocated by Rodger

(170; 171; 18) while Kline (1) is particularly concerned with ‘reliability’ and

‘validity’ as key requirements for selection methods to be technically sound as a measure

of both immediate suitability of a candidate and also of prediction of his/her future

performance, though the former function is more highly valued by Scholarios et al. (1).

Still with respect to psychological testing, Brotherton has drawn a distinction between

measures of ‘organizational performance’ and ‘job performance’ and emphasized that

successful non-discriminatory selection requires validation based on the latter (Brotherton,

180). Low validity interviewing is yet another point of concern. Evidence suggests that

the single interviewer tends to be the generalized practice with respect to manual workers

(Mackay and Torrington, 186 8-40), while in the case of non-manual employees the

general practice is the line manager and a personnel specialist to be involved, though this

results, in practice, in one-person interviewing as personnel specialists prefer a purely

advisory role (Collinson et al., 10). The final decision tends to be made by one

individual - usually a white middle-aged male -, which provides open ground for abuse

(Wanous, 180; Honey, 184; and Collinson et al., 10) and shortlisted prospective

appointees are let down at the final interview. Not just the outcome but the way interviews

are conducted can be arbitrary, and applicants may be subjected to invasion of privacy

with questions such as on their personal life and family background or on their political

beliefs. Another aspect to consider is that, on the other hand, interviews - particularly on a

one-to-one basis - may give the applicant the opportunity to impress beyond fact. In a

study of a university milk round candidates admitted to being far from truthfull in their

statements (Keenan, 180). The need to promote ethical awareness in the practice of

interviewing has been highlighted not only in order to improve selectors’ fairness but also

to control dubious honesty from applicants (Pocock, 18). Recommendations on the

issue of internal or external recruitment cannot be universally suitable. Courtis (18515)

does not give priority to internal recruitment which in itself presents the double advantage

of being economical and encouraging career development. However, as a

counter-argument, internal recruitment can also result in a delimitating effect for the

company and injustice to the supply side of the labour market. With respect to methods

used when aiming to interest potential candidates, deviation from . guide-lines and

supporting legislation can prove to be fruitful as in the case of the US-style ‘head-hunting’

and search consultancy, a practice at first hindered by UK legislation - or its interpretation

-, but recently expanding to over eight hundred recruitment and search consultants

operating in this country (Clark, 11). High fees result in it being used mainly at rather

senior levels, thus offering the possibility of being a means of neutralizing the tendency for

females and certain other sectors of population being met with a career ceiling at middle

management level. In principle, beneficial to both interested parties in the labour market,

brokerage between them can have double-edged consequencies such as employers falling

victim to consultants who both both exploit their privileged access to knowledge of the

company’s needs and reuse candidates after they have remained with the firm for an

agreed period of time. A defensive stance against the prescriptions of textbooks is taken

by line managers who defend that recruitment can not be scientific but that it is a mixture

of what they define as gut and objectivity, as contradictory in terms as this may be. They

also stress how they are aiming in the selection process to gauge future job performance.

In other words, underlying the practices defended by line managers are certain principles

which seem to link to the organization’s culture and overall corporate strategy (Wood,

186). Acceptability criteria thus prevail over suitability criteria. As an excuse for arbitrary

selection, the formalization of the process of selection advocated by IPM, CBI, EOC and

CRE with a view to rendering recruitment more efficient, meritocratic, consistent and

accountable, is demeaned by general line managers as being bureaucratic encumbrance

(Collinson, 187) as an excuse for arbitrary selection. It is significant, though, that

conviction usually appears to be lacking in that the key to competitive advantage is to get

the best person for the job, who may be a woman, but the same argument gained

credibility in employer-led Opportunity 000 launched by Prime Minister John Major in

the early 10s (Liff, 15). Line managers prefer informal sources of recruitment such as

word-of-mouth recommendations or purchasing people’s names off the Professional and

Executive Register and contacting them directly. This enables autonomy and

unaccountability over the choice of successful applicant, and the stereotyped ideal recruit

is white, male, aged 0 to 40, and married, i.e. with wife, children and mortgage. This

state of affairs is difficult to change, as line managers are patriarchally elevated as the

‘providers’, the organization’s ‘breadwinners’, thus mirroring the gendered domestic

division of labour, while personnel managers and personnel advisers are equated to the

‘unproductive’ female welfare and administrative role (Collinson, 187). This

downgrading and devaluation of the sex-typed ‘female’ role (Legge, 187) relegates

personnel managers and advisers within the organizational culture to a peripheral position

and little or no authority (Wood, 186). The devolution of responsibility for human

resources from personnel specialists to line managers seems a rather negative

development, but even here it is possible to envisage favourable circumstances inasmuch,

as if line managers take responsibility for human resources issues, then EO has a better

chance of being treated more seriously (Liff, 15). This situation emerges against a

macro-economic background in which the dominant trends point to an increasingly more

intense competition in a global market-place. In the UK home labour market, the 180s

period of easy recruitment due to high levels of unemployment has given place to

recruitment difficulties with current skill shortages and 4. forecasts of a significant drop in

the number of young entrants and of at least a 50% female workforce. This situation looks

bleak for those employers who fail to adopt non-traditional methods of recruitment

(Curnow, 18), for a more proactive recruitment strategy is required as a source of

competitive advantage through a quality workforce (Torrington & Hall, 11), with a

move towards a focus on expected outcomes rather than procedures (Liff, 18). In other

words, EO is not just a problem of implementation, but, in contrast, important parts of the

process still need to be better understood, particularly at the organizational level

(Aitkenhead, 11 6). However, not just at organizational level. What EO initiatives

take place within organizations depends crucially upon how the concept is understood by

its members, and when organizational policy is translated into operational procedures it

has implications for a person’s activities and hence for his or her cognitive world, and the

relationship between organizational procedures and individual cognitive world is two-way

(Ibid 5-41). With respect to conceptualization, a positive trend can be found in voices

which value diversity (e.g. Copeland, 18) and managing diversity (e.g. Greenslade,

11, Jackson, 1) inasmuch as this stresses positive aspects of difference with respect

to ethnicity or with respect to gender (Rosener, 10), which suggests a favourable

change of perspective in industrial relations (Liff, 15). In conclusion, the past few

decades have seen the development of recommendations on recruitment and selection

which challenge the traditional outlook of employment matters as a prerogative of

management decision and the prospective employee as a relatively passive object of

employer’s judgement. Personnel textbooks, codes of practice and anti-discriminatory

legislation have put the focus on EO for women, ethnic and other disadvantaged groups.

Such prescriptions appear to be seen by the employer as a conflict of interests with his

managerial strategy and a threat to his established position of authority and privilege. This

has been the reaction of the white male manager. Some of the prescriptions themselves

have been informed by the cognitive framework of the white male culture and thus,

intentionally or unintentionally, rendered less efficient in their formulation. Others have

been, and continue to be, subverted in practice by false compliance. In either case EO

principles are defeated, and a self-reproducing phenomenon persists of acceptability over

suitability in the recruitment and selection process. This status quo poses a complex

problem which affects, more immediately, both the recruiter and the candidate and, at a

larger scale, the whole economic scene. Mainly preoccupied with repressing change, the

employer appears to be reluctant to consider that this same change can be to his own

advantage, inasmuch as it will promote a recruitment and selection approach which could

contribute not only to a fairer but also to a more cost-effective decision making. As far as

the employer is concerned, the felt problem appears to be the outside pressure put on him

to change, while the real problem appears to be his difficulty in evolving cognitively.

Managerial refusal in a more effective staffing will have far-reaching consequencies as it

will render organizations inadequate to compete in an increasingly global market, a

problem of major repercussions, if a proactive response is not given to the need for a

quality workforce that will guarantee competitiveness through quality goods and services.

5. On the supply side of the labour market the problem of discrimination has been felt so

acutely as to prompt the overall awareness that led to the recommendations in question. A

foreseable demographic change seems to favour the previously excluded groups so far as

it may result in more of a seller’s market for labour which should, in turn, encourage the

labour buyer to concentrate on outcomes rather than on procedure; and this shift away

from the focus on procedure may help reduce antagonism and elusive compliance.

Another opening can be seen in the fact that literature has become possible on diversity as

a positive asset to be profitably managed, a development which remains, however,

problematic so far as it may also be perceived and resisted as a social issue. It is

nevertheless a landmark in industrial relations evolution in what it represents of a two-way

interaction between the cognitive world of both assessors and assessed, on one side, and,

on the other, textbook recommendations and related formal directives. However,

ambiguity and ambivalence persist at each stage of evolution and progress towards a more

just and effective management of human resources, and evidence presented above - as in

the case of Opportunity 000 - suggests that, paradoxically and dangerously, the

promotion of objective recruitment and selection on merit is resorting, for credibility, to

being implemented within the traditional recruiter’s framework of conceptualization

Bibliography REFERENCES ACAS 181 Recruitment and Selection. Advisory Booklet

nº 6. London Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service. Aitkenhead, M. & Liff, S.

(11) The Effectiveness of Equal Opportunity Policies. In Firth-Cozens, J. & West, M

A. (eds) Women at Work, Psychological and Organizational Perspectives. Milton Keynes

Open University Press. BM 14, The Glass Ceiling. Business Matters video Series. In

Equality & Diversity course 14-5, Week 6. University of Warwick. Brotherton, C.

(180) Paradigms of Selection Validation. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 5,

March, 7-. Clark, T. (11) A survey and critique of selection methods used by

executive recruitment consultancies in management recruitment. Paper presented to the

1 Occupational Psychology Conference of the British Psychological Society.

Collinson, D. (187) The ‘Safe-between’ Candidate , Personnel Management, May

Collinson D., Knights, D. & Collinson, M (10) Managing to Discriminate. London

Routledge. Copeland, L. (188) Making the Most of Cultural Differences at the

Workplace. Personnel, June, 5-60. Courtis, J. (185) The IPM Guide to Cost-effective

Recruitment, nd ed. London Institute of Personnel Management. Curnow, B. (18)

Recruit, retrain, retain; personnel management and the three Rs, Personnel Management,

Nov. 40-7. Curran, M. (188) Gender and Recruitment People and Places in the Labour

Market. Work, Employment & Society, vol , nº . Duxfield, P. (18) Sales Staff. In

Ungerson, B. (ed.) Recruitment Handbook, rd edn. 6. Aldershot Gower, -47.

Edwards, B. J. (18) Application Forms. In Ungerson, B. (ed.) Recruitment Handbook,

rd edn. Aldershot Gower, 64-8. EOC 186 Fair and Efficient Selection guidance of

EO policies in recruitment and selection procedures. Manchester Equal Opportunities

Commission. Fordham, K. G. (18) Job Advertising. In Ungerson, B. (ed.) Recruitment

Handbook, rd edn. Aldershot Gower, 46-6. Fraser, J. M. (171) Introduction to

Personnel Management. London Nelson. Honey, J. (184) Accents at Work. Personnel

Management, January, 16, 1, 18-1. Jenkins, R. (18) Mangers, Recruitment

Procedures and Black Workers. Working Papers on Ethnic Relations, nº 18. SSRC

Research Unit on Ethnic Relations. Jewson, N. & Mason, D. (186) Modes of

Discrimination in the Recruitment Process Formalisation, Fairness ans Efficiency.

Sociology, vol. 0 nº1. Keenan, T. (180) Recruitment on the campus a closer look at

tools of the trade. Personnel Management, March Kline, P. (1) The Handbook of

Psychological Testing. London Routledge. Knollys, J. G. (18) Clerical Staff. In

Ungerson, B. (ed.) Recruitment Handbook, rd edn. Aldershot Gower, 0-8. Legge, K.

(187) Women in personnel management uphill climb or downhill slide?. In Spencer, A.

& Palmore, D. (eds), In a Man’s World, London Tavistock Lewis, C. (185) Employee

Selection. London Jutchinson. Liff, S. (18) Assessing Equal Opportunities Policies.

Personnel Review, 18, 1, 7-4. Liff, S. (15 (to appear)) Continuing Patterns of

Discrimination in a Context of Formal Equality. In Edwards, P K (ed) Industrial

Relations Theory and Practice in Britain. Oxford Blackwell. Mackay, L. & Torrington,

D. (186) The Changing Nature of Personnel Management. London Institute of

Personnel Management. McIntosh, N. & Smith, D. (174) The Extent of Racial

Discrimination. PEP Broadsheet, 547. London Political and Economic Planning.

Murgatroyd, L. (18) Gender and Occupational Stratification. Sociological Review, 0.

Parkinson, E. N. (186) Parkinson’s Law. London Sidgewick & Jackson. PM (185)

Graphology. Personnel Management, March. Pocock, P. (18) Is business ethics a

contradition in terms?, Personnel Management, November Ray, M. (180) Recruitment

Advertising. London Institute of Personnel Management. Roger, A. (170) The Seven

Point Plan, rd edn. London National Foundation for Education Research. Roger, A.

(171) Recent Trends in Personnel Selection. NIIP Bulletin, Spring, . Roger, A. (18)

Using Interviews in Personnel Selection. In Ungerson, B. (ed.) Recruitment Handbook,

rd edn. Aldershot Gower, 161-77. Saville and Holdsworth Ltd 187 Consultants

Publicity Booklet. London Saville and Holdsworth. Scholarios, D. M., Johnson, C. D. &

Zeisner, J. (1) Maximising the efficiency of personnel assignment. Paper presented to

the annual Occupational Psychology conference of the British Psychological Society.

Brighton. Sisson, K. (14) Personnel Management. Oxford Blackwell Business.

Torrington, D. & Chapman, J. (18) Personnel Management, nd edn. London 7.

Prentice Hall. Torrington, D. & Hall, L (11) Personnel Management - A New

Approach. London Prentice Hall. Wanous, J. P. (180) Organizational Entry. Reading;

MA Addison-Wesley. Webb, J, & Liff, S. (188) Play the White Man The social

construction of fairness and competition in equal opportunity Policies, The Sociological

Review, ,. Wood, S. (186) Personnel Management and Recruitment, Public Relations,

15, . Word Count 86

Please note that this sample paper on management is for your review only. In order to eliminate any of the plagiarism issues, it is highly recommended that you do not use it for you own writing purposes. In case you experience difficulties with writing a well structured and accurately composed paper on management, we are here to assist you. Your persuasive essay on management will be written from scratch, so you do not have to worry about its originality.

Order your authentic assignment from custom writing service/a> and you will be amazed at how easy it is to complete a quality custom paper within the shortest time possible!


Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.