IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ids/ijicbm/v18y2019i1p85-103.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How important is applicants' perception about job relatedness of selection process?

Author

Listed:
  • Mrityunjay Kumar Tiwary
  • Divya Upadhyay
  • Shobhit Aggarwal

Abstract

We study how the perception of job applicants about job-relatedness of the selection procedure impacts: 1) the outcome of the selection process; 2) willingness of the applicants to recommend the employer to others; 3) the decision to accept the job offer after the applicant successfully clears the test process. We survey graduating MBA students appearing in campus recruitment processes at the premier management schools in India in order to measure the perception about selection procedures of firms. We use two measures to identify applicants' perception: face validity (FV) and perceived predictive validity (PPV). The results suggest that when the candidates are unable to understand the relevance of a test, they are less likely to get selected in the test or recommend the employer to other applicants. However, we find that it is only the face validity and not the predictive perceived validity of the selection tests, which positively affects the likelihood of a selected candidate accepting the offer. The findings of the study have direct implications for the practitioners. The study shows that organisations that explain the relevance of their selection procedures to applicants are more likely to increase their access to talent pool.

Suggested Citation

  • Mrityunjay Kumar Tiwary & Divya Upadhyay & Shobhit Aggarwal, 2019. "How important is applicants' perception about job relatedness of selection process?," International Journal of Indian Culture and Business Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 18(1), pages 85-103.
  • Handle: RePEc:ids:ijicbm:v:18:y:2019:i:1:p:85-103
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=96924
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ids:ijicbm:v:18:y:2019:i:1:p:85-103. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sarah Parker (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.inderscience.com/browse/index.php?journalID=235 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.