DIVERSITY CASE STUDY

Question one

The most visible problem in this diversity case is job design. According to Judge et al. (2007), this is the way elements of a job are organized. Various tasks are organized to form a complete task. Various components of that task are therefore assigned various specialized individuals. In this case, James who is a human resource recruiter has already done his part in the recruitment process. He affirms that his role is to submit a list of the qualified candidates to Dave, the recruitment supervisor. In job design, every employee has his role to play. Therefore, James should not follow-up to see whether his supervisor gives preference to Maggie who seems to be his favorite candidate for the job. This portrays James as having a conflict of interest in the recruitment process, which is both unethical and illegal. In this case, other candidates are also qualified to get to the supervisor’s list according to James. James must have submitted the names of Tom Smith, Sally Jones, Greg Thomas and Maggie. It therefore follows that it was the role of the supervisor to filter the candidates at the second level. This was his role. According to Appelbum et.al (2000), each employee should have responsibilities to make decisions in the required function by his job description. It also appears there is a problem of canvassing between Maggie and James. The assurance that James give to Maggie concerning her qualifications for the job is unethical. This can be consider as a form of canvassing and therefore disqualify her.

Although James is a Human resource recruiter, reliance on only one human resource recruiter has highly been questioned on its validity and reliability of success (Guest, 2001). It is also visible that all the candidates in the short list are qualified since Dave affirms that he has worked with Smith, Sally and Greg and that he is confident of their abilities. This therefore means that there must be another filter to separate them and have the most qualified candidate for the job. At the end of it, James seems confused of what to tell Maggie. We can therefore infer that according to James, Maggie was the person to take on the job regardless of other competitors who had applied for the job. This would have eroded the need of interviewing other applicants in order to favor Maggie in the first instance. The reason for James submitting the names to his supervisor was to allow Dave to look into the resumes short listed and filter the candidates at that level. The question of diversity may not have come in this case since one of the parameters for filtering the candidate could have been language ability. This would have meant increased cost of training for Maggie to learn the new language in operation. The supervisor also affirms that he was in affix and needed a candidate that would hit the ground running hence training Maggie would have meant more man-hours lost in training. One of the filtering parameters Therefore Dave was playing his official role as a supervisor.

Question two

The training needs in this situation would be on job specialization. This is the degree to which tasks in the organization are subdivided into separate jobs. It can also be regarded as division of labor where a job is broken down into various tasks with each task being done by an individual. The human resource recruiter needs to be trained on his roles in the organization. An organization can gain abilities not only by training its workforce but also by getting new knowledge via recruitment and then selection (Gould, 2003). These roles are well spelt out in the organization structure. During job designing, various tasks are brought together to make a complete whole. Therefore, it is necessary to train James on his duties and the boundaries of his duties in order to avoid conflicts I the organization. For example, after short listing the qualified candidates, James was supposed to submit the list to his supervisor and allow them to play their role as stipulated in their job structure. Following the recruitment to see whether Maggie had qualified in the stage only amounted to conflict of interest.

James also needed training on diversity in the work place. Diversity does not mean getting a person from another race to perform a task they are not competitive in. Diversity is more than language, sexuality, gender and race. Diversity can be demonstrated by any change including new experiences and innovativeness. It means utilizing and understanding various divergent ideas, experiences, skills and knowledge. Diversity should not also be a limiting factor to organizational efficiency and effectiveness. For example, picking Maggie who did not speak the American accent may have meant delays, and more cost of training not only on her duties but also on language.

Question three

The appropriate outcome of the training would be behavioral change. The human resource recruiter should clearly understand his role in the recruitment process and its limits. James should also understand the dangers of any form of canvassing during the interview process since it is unethical and illegal. He should therefore shun putting himself as a recruiting officer and the organization in a compromising situation. It also paramount that James understands the consequences of conflict of interest in recruitment process since it can result in recruitment of unqualified candidates locking out the most qualified ones. This deprives an organization the chance of having a competitive human resource. James should also understand the meaning of diversity in workplace. He should appreciate that any change in structure and representation for example acquiring another new officer to a certain post is also a change. He should also appreciate that diversity without necessary skills for a certain job is void and only results in losses and inefficiency in an organization.

Question four

The most appropriate method of evaluation would be the Behavioral Anchored Rating scale (BARs). This is because it combines elements from critical incidence for example giving James a similar situation and evaluate how he will handle it again, and the graphical rating scale approaches. In graphical rating scale, the employee will be evaluated through his performance such as quality of work, depth of knowledge and cooperation. This is put in a rating scale. This method will suffice in this case since it will be possible to evaluate how James will cooperate with his supervisor Dave in various other recruitments. His depth of knowledge in diversity will also be seen when recruiting other candidates in future. His quality of work will be seen through ethical and legal parameters in his course of duty, for example whether he stops canvassing with individual candidates as a recruiter in the course of their recruitment or even giving them assurances of their qualifications for the job.

References

Appelbaum, E., Bailey, T., Berg, P. and Kalleberg, A. (2001). Manufacturing advantage: Why high performance work systems pay off, ILR Press, Ithaca, New York.

Gould-Williams, J. (2003). The importance of HR practices and workplace trust in achieving superior performance: A study of public-sector organizations. International journal of Human resource Management 14(1) 28

Guest, D.E. (1997). Human resource management and performance: a review and research agenda. The International Journal of Human Resource Management.8 (3) 263.

Judge, T.A., Thoresen, C.J., Bono, J.E., & Patton, G.K. (2007). The job satisfaction-job performance relationship: a qualitative and quantitative review. Psychological Bulletin. (127) pg 376.