HI FRENS,
my cmpny was just undergoing d recruitment process. i came across few candidates who were extremely good, who were immediately selected . dere were few who were just next to good and the third category was junk. Now cming to the second category , i smtimes sit n think being a recruiter what is easier "selecting or rejecting a candidate of this category", b'coz i knew dat dey may prove good after a training bt den y to incur an xtra cost to train dem, y nt just to hire best out of dem .
wht do u say???
dips
From India, Delhi
10my cmpny was just undergoing d recruitment process. i came across few candidates who were extremely good, who were immediately selected . dere were few who were just next to good and the third category was junk. Now cming to the second category , i smtimes sit n think being a recruiter what is easier "selecting or rejecting a candidate of this category", b'coz i knew dat dey may prove good after a training bt den y to incur an xtra cost to train dem, y nt just to hire best out of dem .
wht do u say???
dips
From India, Delhi
hie deepali,
first of all i will say no candidate is a junk... as an h.r try to empathise with them...we should respect human resource.... u can say they dnt match your company standards..... & ofcourse rejection is harder... as we dash the hopes of lot of people.... u really post interesting questions
what say???
regards
vishal
From India, Mumbai
first of all i will say no candidate is a junk... as an h.r try to empathise with them...we should respect human resource.... u can say they dnt match your company standards..... & ofcourse rejection is harder... as we dash the hopes of lot of people.... u really post interesting questions
what say???
regards
vishal
From India, Mumbai
hey,
right u r. i was really wrong on referring dem as junk, actually i realised it exactly after i posted it. it wasn't intentionally. U know i feel d same while dashing dere hopes. i come across candidates who have lost his father, who are teachers n hv great ex bt den cmin to call centre to earn gud money. it really smtimes leaves me thinkin.
dips
From India, Delhi
right u r. i was really wrong on referring dem as junk, actually i realised it exactly after i posted it. it wasn't intentionally. U know i feel d same while dashing dere hopes. i come across candidates who have lost his father, who are teachers n hv great ex bt den cmin to call centre to earn gud money. it really smtimes leaves me thinkin.
dips
From India, Delhi
Emotionally speaking : Rejection
Practically speaking : Selection
It is much easier to reject a person [if you are practical enough] whom you know that will not fit the job requirements...
But it is very difficult to select a person, as lots of things have to be taken into account before inducting a person in our organisation..
From India, Ahmadabad
Practically speaking : Selection
It is much easier to reject a person [if you are practical enough] whom you know that will not fit the job requirements...
But it is very difficult to select a person, as lots of things have to be taken into account before inducting a person in our organisation..
From India, Ahmadabad
hello deppalii ji
ji lets give them chance ah ya now u might ask for the cost of training them hey see let me ask uu what if u have taken in a very good candidate and afterall ur training what if he joins another company there too u will have the problem of cost .so better dont go for the cost ..and to be frank with uu of course as management practioners we all have to be cost sensitive but lets make sure that there is a touch of heart to our discission not necessarily empathy or sympathy but a bit of heart .hiring the best of junk and giving him training and making him compatible to our work environment will increase his commitment to the firm and since he is compatible to our work culture and practices he will try to grow within us not beyond usss..after all as hr managers u need that isn't it?
with prayers and regards
sachu
From India, New Delhi
ji lets give them chance ah ya now u might ask for the cost of training them hey see let me ask uu what if u have taken in a very good candidate and afterall ur training what if he joins another company there too u will have the problem of cost .so better dont go for the cost ..and to be frank with uu of course as management practioners we all have to be cost sensitive but lets make sure that there is a touch of heart to our discission not necessarily empathy or sympathy but a bit of heart .hiring the best of junk and giving him training and making him compatible to our work environment will increase his commitment to the firm and since he is compatible to our work culture and practices he will try to grow within us not beyond usss..after all as hr managers u need that isn't it?
with prayers and regards
sachu
From India, New Delhi
opps i forgottt selecting is the most easist thing to do,and after all as hr managers that must be the easist job . regards sachu
From India, New Delhi
From India, New Delhi
Are, Maine to Kuch Nahin Kaha!, Kya ho gaya Dips!
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
OK I say Selection of Wrong Candidate is Difficult Job, and Rejection of Right Candidate is Easy! :) (For me atleast, I cannot select wrong candidate!, it's more difficult than rejecting good candidate)
From India, New Delhi
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
OK I say Selection of Wrong Candidate is Difficult Job, and Rejection of Right Candidate is Easy! :) (For me atleast, I cannot select wrong candidate!, it's more difficult than rejecting good candidate)
From India, New Delhi
hi all , oops! :o , sorry manu dat wasn’t 4 u. dat was 4 sachu bt newaz wht u said is quite confusing. dips
From India, Delhi
From India, Delhi
Dear dips,
the role of selection in an organisation's effectiveness is crucial for at least two reasons.
1. work performance, depends upon individual - according to me n text og Hr concepts the best way to improve performance is to hire people who have the competence & willingness to work. Arguing from the employee's viewpoint, poor or inappropriate choice can be demorlising to the individual concerened (who finds himself or herself in wrong job) and demotivating to the rest of workforce.
2. cost incurred in recruiting and hiring personnel speaks volumes about the role of selection. here is one instatnce to prove how expensive recruitment has become. Pepsi has gone for crash recruitment drive. 6 people from the company took over the entire oberoi business center in mumbai for 6 days; 3000 applications in response to an advertisement issued earlier were scanned; applicants were asked to respond by fax within 100 hrs: finally, the shortlisted persons were flown in and interviwed. Quite an expensive affair by any standard!!!!! isnt it?
The my point of dimension is cost of wrong selection are much greater.
Success False negative True positive
Error High hit
Failure True negative False positive
Low hit Error
Failure predicted Success predicted
the above grid shows 4 possible outcomes of selection decisions.
so dips, what i feel that, organisation with flase positive error incurs few costs.
1. iccured while the person is employed, this can be result of process or profit losses, damaged company reputation, and like.
2 tarining cost what you mentioned, costs of replacing an employee with fresh one (oppurtunity cost).....
so what i feel you should mainatin a true blue professional approach without getting into human emotions coz' you are on the most deliverable side representing ur org.
so...according to me slection, on the other hand is negative in its application asmuch as it seeks to eliminate as many unqualified applicants as possible in order to identify the right candidates
hai na deepali????
animesh
the role of selection in an organisation's effectiveness is crucial for at least two reasons.
1. work performance, depends upon individual - according to me n text og Hr concepts the best way to improve performance is to hire people who have the competence & willingness to work. Arguing from the employee's viewpoint, poor or inappropriate choice can be demorlising to the individual concerened (who finds himself or herself in wrong job) and demotivating to the rest of workforce.
2. cost incurred in recruiting and hiring personnel speaks volumes about the role of selection. here is one instatnce to prove how expensive recruitment has become. Pepsi has gone for crash recruitment drive. 6 people from the company took over the entire oberoi business center in mumbai for 6 days; 3000 applications in response to an advertisement issued earlier were scanned; applicants were asked to respond by fax within 100 hrs: finally, the shortlisted persons were flown in and interviwed. Quite an expensive affair by any standard!!!!! isnt it?
The my point of dimension is cost of wrong selection are much greater.
Success False negative True positive
Error High hit
Failure True negative False positive
Low hit Error
Failure predicted Success predicted
the above grid shows 4 possible outcomes of selection decisions.
so dips, what i feel that, organisation with flase positive error incurs few costs.
1. iccured while the person is employed, this can be result of process or profit losses, damaged company reputation, and like.
2 tarining cost what you mentioned, costs of replacing an employee with fresh one (oppurtunity cost).....
so what i feel you should mainatin a true blue professional approach without getting into human emotions coz' you are on the most deliverable side representing ur org.
so...according to me slection, on the other hand is negative in its application asmuch as it seeks to eliminate as many unqualified applicants as possible in order to identify the right candidates
hai na deepali????
animesh
Dear dips,
the role of selection in an organisation's effectiveness is crucial for at least two reasons.
1. work performance, depends upon individual - according to me n text og Hr concepts the best way to improve performance is to hire people who have the competence & willingness to work. Arguing from the employee's viewpoint, poor or inappropriate choice can be demorlising to the individual concerened (who finds himself or herself in wrong job) and demotivating to the rest of workforce.
2. cost incurred in recruiting and hiring personnel speaks volumes about the role of selection. here is one instatnce to prove how expensive recruitment has become. Pepsi has gone for crash recruitment drive. 6 people from the company took over the entire oberoi business center in mumbai for 6 days; 3000 applications in response to an advertisement issued earlier were scanned; applicants were asked to respond by fax within 100 hrs: finally, the shortlisted persons were flown in and interviwed. Quite an expensive affair by any standard!!!!! isnt it?
The my point of dimension is cost of wrong selection are much greater.
Success False negative True positive
Error High hit
Failure True negative False positive
Low hit Error
Failure predicted Success predicted
the above grid shows 4 possible outcomes of selection decisions.
so dips, what i feel that, organisation with flase positive error incurs few costs.
1. iccured while the person is employed, this can be result of process or profit losses, damaged company reputation, and like.
2 tarining cost what you mentioned, costs of replacing an employee with fresh one (oppurtunity cost).....
so what i feel you should mainatin a true blue professional approach without getting into human emotions coz' you are on the most deliverable side representing ur org.
so...according to me slection, is negative in its application asmuch as it seeks to eliminate as many unqualified applicants as possible in order to identify the right candidates
hai na deepali????
animesh
the role of selection in an organisation's effectiveness is crucial for at least two reasons.
1. work performance, depends upon individual - according to me n text og Hr concepts the best way to improve performance is to hire people who have the competence & willingness to work. Arguing from the employee's viewpoint, poor or inappropriate choice can be demorlising to the individual concerened (who finds himself or herself in wrong job) and demotivating to the rest of workforce.
2. cost incurred in recruiting and hiring personnel speaks volumes about the role of selection. here is one instatnce to prove how expensive recruitment has become. Pepsi has gone for crash recruitment drive. 6 people from the company took over the entire oberoi business center in mumbai for 6 days; 3000 applications in response to an advertisement issued earlier were scanned; applicants were asked to respond by fax within 100 hrs: finally, the shortlisted persons were flown in and interviwed. Quite an expensive affair by any standard!!!!! isnt it?
The my point of dimension is cost of wrong selection are much greater.
Success False negative True positive
Error High hit
Failure True negative False positive
Low hit Error
Failure predicted Success predicted
the above grid shows 4 possible outcomes of selection decisions.
so dips, what i feel that, organisation with flase positive error incurs few costs.
1. iccured while the person is employed, this can be result of process or profit losses, damaged company reputation, and like.
2 tarining cost what you mentioned, costs of replacing an employee with fresh one (oppurtunity cost).....
so what i feel you should mainatin a true blue professional approach without getting into human emotions coz' you are on the most deliverable side representing ur org.
so...according to me slection, is negative in its application asmuch as it seeks to eliminate as many unqualified applicants as possible in order to identify the right candidates
hai na deepali????
animesh
Find answers from people who have previously dealt with business and work issues similar to yours - Please Register and Log In to CiteHR and post your query.
Staff Selection Techniques Handbook.pdf
Case studies on Recrutiment and selection.doc
Manpower Planning,Rect & Selection PPTs.zip