Recruitment, Selection, and Talent Acquisition
This domain covers how to source talent, build a defensible selection system, and measure recruiting performance. Items typically ask you to judge the quality of a selection method, choose an interview structure, or compute adverse impact.
Core rules
- Reliability vs. validity: reliability is consistency of measurement; validity is whether the tool predicts job performance. A test can be reliable but invalid; it cannot be valid without being reliable.
- Validation strategies under the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures (UGESP): criterion-related (predictive or concurrent), content, and construct.
- Predictive power ranking: general mental ability and work samples are strongest, followed by structured interviews and job knowledge tests, then integrity tests and biodata; unstructured interviews, references, and graphology are weak.
- Structure beats intuition: standardized questions, anchored rating scales, the same questions in the same order, multiple trained interviewers, and independent scoring before discussion reduce bias and increase validity.
- Recruitment metrics: time-to-fill, cost-per-hire, source-of-hire effectiveness, offer acceptance rate, quality-of-hire, and 90-day retention. Track source effectiveness by hire quality, not by applicant volume.
- Adverse impact and the four-fifths rule: divide the protected group's selection rate by the highest group's rate; a result below 0.80 indicates adverse impact and requires validation, justification, or a changed procedure.
- Background checks: third-party checks trigger FCRA disclosure and authorization requirements, and criminal history exclusions must be job-related under EEOC guidance.
Worked example
100 male applicants, 60 hired (rate 0.60); 70 female applicants, 27 hired (rate 0.386). The ratio is 0.386 ÷ 0.60 = 0.64, below 0.80, so adverse impact is indicated. The employer must show the procedure is job-related and consistent with business necessity, or replace it. Had 48 women been hired (rate 0.686), the ratio would exceed 0.80 and no adverse impact would be flagged, although the employer should still monitor for future drift.
Traps that cost marks
- Confusing reliability with validity.
- Applying the four-fifths rule to raw counts instead of rates.
- Assuming a structured interview must be identical in every word; job-relatedness is the legal standard.
- Favoring references or unstructured interviews because they feel personal.
- Ignoring FCRA requirements when using a third-party background vendor.