Fairness reactions to personnel selection techniques in France and the United States

The authors examined the bases for fairness reactions to different selection practices and considered cross-cultural differences in these reactions by comparing respondents from 2 cultures. College students (Ar = 259) from France and the United States rated the favorability of 10 selection procedures and then indicated the bases for these reactions on 7 procedural dimensions. Selection decisions based on interviews, work-sample tests, and resumes were perceived favorably in both cultures. Graphology was perceived more favorably in France than in the United States, but even French reactions toward graphology were somewhat negative. The perceived face validity of the selection procedure was the strongest correlate of favorability reactions among both samples. Beyond comparing the results from each culture, the discussion addresses implications for multinational companies establishing selection systems in foreign countries.

[1]  David E. Smith,et al.  THE EFFECTS OF APPLICANTs' REACTIONS TO COGNITIVE ABILITY TESTS AND AN ASSESSMENT CENTER , 1994 .

[2]  S. Gilliland,et al.  Effects of procedural and distributive justice on reactions to a selection system. , 1994 .

[3]  Winfred Arthur,et al.  Hunter and Hunter (1984) revisited: Interview validity for entry-level jobs. , 1994 .

[4]  J. Greenberg,et al.  Using socially fair treatment to promote acceptance of a work site smoking ban. , 1994, The Journal of applied psychology.

[5]  S. Gilliland.  The Perceived Fairness of Selection Systems: An Organizational Justice Perspective , 1993 .

[6]  S. Rynes,et al.  Applicant reactions to alternative selection procedures , 1993 .

[7]  Rosalie L. Tung,et al.  Incorporating International Dimensions in Management Theory Building , 1991 .

[8]  Sue Newell,et al.  Management selection: A comparative survey of methods used in top British and French companies , 1991 .

[9]  M. Bruchon-Schweitzer,et al.  Le recrutement en Europe : recherches et pratiques , 1991 .

[10]  M. Bruchon-Schweitzer,et al.  Un enquête sur le recrutement en France , 1991 .

[11]  R. Lewicki.  Research on Negotiation in Organizations , 1990 .

[12]  Michael M. Harris,et al.  Preemployment screening procedures: How human resource managers perceive them , 1990 .

[13]  Ivan T. Robertson,et al.  Advances in selection and assessment. , 1989 .

[14]  Ivan T. Robertson,et al.  Personnel selection methods. , 1989 .

[15]  T. Tyler,et al.  The Social Psychology of Procedural Justice , 1988 .

[16]  A. Ryan,et al.  Pre-employment honesty testing: Fakability, reactions of test takers, and company image , 1987 .

[17]  R. Bies.  Interactional justice : communication criteria of fairness , 1986 .

[18]  Michael P. Kirsch,et al.  METAANALYSES OF VALIDITY STUDIES PUBLISHED BETWEEN 1964 AND 1982 AND THE INVESTIGATION OF STUDY CHARACTERISTICS , 1984 .

[19]  G. Hofstede,et al.  Culture′s Consequences: International Differences in Work-Related Values , 1980 .

[20]  W. Dodd.  CHAPTER 9 – ATTITUDES TOWARD ASSESSMENT CENTER PROGRAMS , 1977 .

[21]  William C. Byham,et al.  Applying the assessment center method , 1977 .

[22]  Neal Schmitt,et al.  Applicant decisions in the employment interview. , 1976 .