[IPAC-List] Manager-level interviews involving peers or rank-and-file ...

[RPClare at aol.com]

I don't believe the composition of the panel would necessarily change  our 
obligations regarding the functions of the panel. it does give the advantage 
 of varied perspectives (and perhaps more "accurate" ones). Wouldn't  
leadership/management style be important to have the perspective of those to be  
led/managed? Our real challenge is to determine how we structure the panel 
and  to ensure that our analysis is designed to uncover the characteristics 
that  can be better tapped with the panels competency. Regardless of the 
composition  of the panel, the issue of controlling "hidden agendas"(and some 
not so  hidden)/bias/feelings among panelists is a continuing and difficult 
challenge.  This type of panel in "merely" the selection equivalent of a 360 
performance  evaluation. 
 
 
In a message dated 5/2/2012 10:03:18 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
ppluta at hr.lacounty.gov writes:

I  believe this would qualify as a 'fit' type of evaluation, rather than a  
competency-based assessment.  If it is part of an overall selection  
battery, I would certainly make it the last hurdle.  I would also develop  some 
structure for the panels to provide their evaluations, such as ratings on  
specific indexes of person-organization fit.  The extant literature  (e.g., 
Adkins, Russell, & Werbel, 1994; Amiot, Vallerand, & Blanchard,  2006; Chatman, 
1991; Hult, 2005; Westerman, & Cyr, 2004) indicates that  values congruence 
is one of the best indicators of person-organization  fit.  So identifying 
your organization's shared values and identifying  the extent to which the 
candidate shares those values may be helpful.  I  believe there are potential 
pitfalls to leaving these interactions completely  unstructured and making 
it an evaluation of how the people "feel" about the  candidate.

Paul E. Pluta, ABD
Human Resources Analyst
Department  of Human Resources
Talent Management Division
Phone:  213.738.2021
ppluta at hr.lacounty.gov 

-----Original  Message-----
From: ipac-list-bounces at ipacweb.org  [mailto:ipac-list-bounces at ipacweb.org] 
On Behalf Of  keith.poole at phoenix.gov
Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 3:10 PM
To:  ipac-list at ipacweb.org
Subject: [IPAC-List] Manager-level interviews  involving peers or 
rank-and-file employees

We (central HR) occasionally  get asked by departments to bless "synergy" 
interview panels or  discussions with candidates.  Usually this is for a 
management level  position, and the department wants to invite all employees, 
or a cross-section  of employees, to meet candidates and have either 
structured or unstructured  Q&A with that potential manager. Another
variation:  a panel of  the existing, equivalent-level managers in that 
department will interview and  assess candidates, potentially picking their 
next coworker/peer. 

The  trick seems to be, how do we incorporate their feedback and assessment 
 
into the overall selection decision, while avoiding hidden  agendas.   In 
some cases the synergy panels do seem to reveal  fatal flaws.  In other 
cases you get camps rooting for candidate A vs B  vs C and everything just gets 
muddy.

Is there an industry term for this  type of interview?  Any research or 
suggestions on how this can be a  meaningful part of the selection process? 


Keith Poole
Human  Resources Supervisor
City of Phoenix HR Department
135 N 2nd  Ave
Phoenix, AZ  85003
Phone: (602) 262-7140
Fax: (602)  495-5498
Email:   keith.poole at phoenix.gov
_______________________________________________________
IPAC-List
IPAC-List at ipacweb.org
http://www.ipacweb.org/mailman/listinfo/ipac-list
_______________________________________________________
IPAC-List
IPAC-List at ipacweb.org
http://www.ipacweb.org/mailman/listinfo/ipac-list