How to pick your staff? Using data envelopment analysis

Purpose – This purpose of this paper is to present a tool for facilitating personnel selection when multiple heterogeneous human resource managers use multiple criteria. Two problems result from such a situation. First, when multiple criteria are applied, it is unusual for one candidate to dominate the other candidates in all areas, which requires assigning weights to the different criteria to be able to rank the candidates. Second, in a heterogeneous selection committee, finding weights that accurately reflect the individual preferences of all members is difficult. Design/methodology/approach – To deal with the multidimensional setting of selecting personnel, this paper introduces data envelopment analysis with assurance region (DEA-AR) to determine individually optimal weights for each applicant. Findings – DEA-AR leads to a score for each applicant that can serve as a signal for productivity and, thus, for evaluating the candidate. Based on linear programming, DEA-AR not only aggregates multiple dimens...

[1]  A. Fish,et al.  Modelling and predicting the performance of cross border managers , 2010 .

[2]  S. G. Deshmukh,et al.  Employee Performance Appraisal Using Data Envelopment Analysis: A Case Study , 2009 .

[3]  Joe Zhu,et al.  Quantitative Models for Performance Evaluation and Benchmarking: Data Envelopment Analysis with Spreadsheets and DEA Excel Solver , 2002 .

[4]  Emmanuel Thanassoulis,et al.  Weights restrictions and value judgements in Data Envelopment Analysis: Evolution, development and future directions , 1997, Ann. Oper. Res..

[5]  N. Petersen,et al.  Chance constrained efficiency evaluation , 1995 .

[6]  Mary Anne Devanna,et al.  Strategic Human Resource Management , 1984 .

[7]  Hal W. Hendrick,et al.  Adequacy of Group Decisions as a Function of the Decision-Making Process , 1972 .

[8]  Winfred Arthur,et al.  The Construct-Related Validity of Assessment Center Ratings: A Review and Meta-Analysis of the Role of Methodological Factors , 2003 .

[9]  K. Arrow.  A Difficulty in the Concept of Social Welfare , 1950, Journal of Political Economy.

[10]  Filip Lievens,et al.  Recent trends and challenges in personnel selection , 2002 .

[11]  Nancy K. Napier,et al.  Divergence or Convergence: A Cross‐National Comparison of Personnel Selection Practices , 2002 .

[12]  Cláudia S. Sarrico,et al.  Restricting virtual weights in data envelopment analysis , 2004, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[13]  Emmanuel Thanassoulis,et al.  Assessing productivity changes in UK hospitals reflecting technology and input prices , 2000 .

[14]  Joe Zhu,et al.  Rank order data in DEA: A general framework , 2006, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[15]  Bonifacio Llamazares,et al.  Preference aggregation and DEA: An analysis of the methods proposed to discriminate efficient candidates , 2009, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[16]  John E. Beasley,et al.  Restricting Weight Flexibility in Data Envelopment Analysis , 1990 .

[17]  Susanne Warning,et al.  Performance Differences in German Higher Education: Empirical Analysis of Strategic Groups , 2004 .

[18]  P. S. Dharmapala,et al.  DEA/AR efficiency and profitability of 14 major oil companies in U.S. exploration and production , 1996, Comput. Oper. Res..

[19]  George Ioannou,et al.  From task‐based to competency‐based , 2010 .

[20]  Katherine A. Karl,et al.  Patterns of Performance and Rating Frequency: Influence on the Assessment of Performance , 1989 .

[21]  B. Lupton.  Pouring the coffee at interviews , 2000 .

[22]  Neil Anderson,et al.  Fairness Reactions to Personnel Selection Methods: An International Comparison between the Netherlands, the United States, France, Spain, Portugal, and Singapore , 2008 .

[23]  W. Cook,et al.  A data envelopment model for aggregating preference rankings , 1990 .

[24]  Guido Capaldo,et al.  Applying fuzzy logic to personnel assessment : a case study , 2001 .

[25]  L. Bradley.  Perceptions of justice when selecting internal and external job candidates , 2006 .

[26]  Russell G. Thompson,et al.  DEA/AR efficiency and profitability of Mexican banks a total income model , 1997 .

[27]  Peng Zhou,et al.  A survey of data envelopment analysis in energy and environmental studies , 2008, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[28]  Mao-Jiun J. Wang,et al.  Personnel selection using fuzzy MCDM algorithm , 1994 .

[29]  A. Ali,et al.  The Impact of Deregulation during 1990–1997 on Banking in Austria , 2000 .

[30]  Kin Fai Ellick Wong,et al.  Effects of rater goals on rating patterns: evidence from an experimental field study. , 2007, The Journal of applied psychology.

[31]  Michael A. Campion,et al.  A REVIEW OF STRUCTURE IN THE SELECTION INTERVIEW , 1997 .

[32]  Brian R. Dineen,et al.  Perceived fairness of web‐based applicant screening procedures: Weighing the rules of justice and the role of individual differences , 2004 .

[33]  School Outcomes: Sharing the Responsibility Between Pupil and School1 , 2002 .

[34]  Kwai-Sang Chin,et al.  A data envelopment analysis method with assurance region for weight generation in the analytic hierarchy process , 2008, Decis. Support Syst..

[35]  Francisco Pedraja-Chaparro,et al.  On the Role of Weight Restrictions in Data Envelopment Analysis , 1997 .

[36]  Alvaro López-Cabrales,et al.  The contribution of core employees to organizational capabilities and efficiency , 2006 .

[37]  Avraham N. Kluger,et al.  MAKING DECISIONS FROM AN INTERVIEW: EXPERT MEASUREMENT AND MECHANICAL COMBINATION , 2000 .

[38]  Abraham Charnes,et al.  Measuring the efficiency of decision making units , 1978 .

[39]  Lorraine R. Gardiner,et al.  Employee selection under anti-discrimination law: implications for multi-criteria group decision support , 2000 .

[40]  T. Judge,et al.  Fairness Reactions to Personnel Selection Techniques in Greece: The Role of Core Self-Evaluations , 2007 .

[41]  Alan Jessop,et al.  Minimally biased weight determination in personnel selection , 2004, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[42]  Emmanuel Thanassoulis,et al.  Introduction to the Theory and Application of Data Envelopment Analysis: A Foundation Text with Integrated Software , 2001 .

[43]  F. Schmidt,et al.  The validity and utility of selection methods in personnel psychology: Practical and theoretical implications of 85 years of research findings. , 1998 .

[44]  G. C. Thornton,et al.  Selection versus development assessment centers: an international survey of design, execution, and evaluation , 2009 .

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

[46]  Philip L. Roth,et al.  A research agenda for muti-attribute utility analysis in human resource management , 1997 .

[47]  B. Chen,et al.  A generalized model for weight restrictions in data envelopment analysis , 2005, J. Oper. Res. Soc..

[48]  T. Payne,et al.  Assessor Decision Making Information Processing and Assessor Decision Strategies in a British Assessment Centre , 1994 .

[49]  Eva Jereb,et al.  A Hierarchical Multi-Attribute System Approach to Personnel Selection , 2005 .

[50]  Yannis Siskos,et al.  Multicriteria job evaluation for large organizations , 2001, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[51]  Barton A. Smith,et al.  Comparative Site Evaluations for Locating a High-Energy Physics Lab in Texas , 1986 .

[52]  Ole Bent Olesen,et al.  The Use of Data Envelopment Analysis with Probabilistic Assurance Regions for Measuring Hospital Efficiency , 2002 .

[53]  Phillip E. Lowry.  The Assessment Center: Effects of Varying Consensus Procedures , 1992 .

[54]  Sylvia G. Roch.  Discussion and Consensus in Rater Groups: Implications for Behavioral and Rating Accuracy , 2006 .

[55]  J. Arnold.  Tensions between assessment, grading and development in development centres: a case study , 2002 .

[56]  William W. Cooper,et al.  Introduction to Data Envelopment Analysis and Its Uses: With Dea-Solver Software and References , 2005 .