This study aims at identifying the most relevant indicators for evaluating the performance of applicant position in firm by using the factor analysis. A total of 245 observations and 15 variables are covered. Quantitative and Descriptive study is carried out in this research. Statistical technique of factor analysis was used for data analysis. In the process of that technique, the overall suitability of the model and of each variable were verified, in order to identify key indicators that will compose the analysis of applicant position in firm. Following the criteria of factor analysis techniques, the indicators that explain the maximum variance from the smallest possible number of variables were selected. The results show that the most relevant indicators for evaluating the performance of applicant position in firm are: Form of letter of application, Appearance, Academic ability, Likeability, Self-confidence, Lucidity, Honesty, Salesmanship, Experience, Drive, Ambition, Grasp, Potential, Keeness to join, Suitability. The factors Self-confidence, Ambition and Lucidity allow us to classify and compare the performance of applicant position in firm.
Keywords:Performance of Applicant Position; Factor Analysis
An organization’s reputation, defined as a public’s affective evaluation of a firms’ name relative to other firms affects many outcomes that are directly related to organizational performance. For example, organizational reputation affects work force composition because job seekers’ initial attraction to organizations are affected by their perceptions of organizational reputation. Moreover, applicants are potential consumers for most firms. Thus, creating a positive reputation during recruitment can affect brand equity and future marketing success.
Job seekers’ reputation perceptions are important because they can affect work force composition, brand equity, and future marketing . In an economy where capital is abundant, ideas are developed quickly, and people are willing to change jobs often, the most valuable organizational resource is human capital, or the talent of an organization’s workforce. However, according to a survey of over 6,000 executives from large U.S. companies, 75% of executives stated that their companies did not possess adequate human resources and that this talent shortage was hindering their ability to pursue growth opportunities. In this kind of environment, attracting “the best and the brightest” becomes a constant war for talent Fishman (1998).
Research has indicated that one major determinant of an organization’s ability to recruit new talent is organizational reputation, referring to the status of a firm’s name relative to compet
ing firms. This examination proposes that a given occupation is more appealing to employment searchers when the occupation is offered by an association with a positive reputation. Thus, organizational reputation acts as a “brand,” adding value to a job beyond the attributes of the job itself (e.g., work content, pay). People’s employers are an important part of their self-concept and their social identity Ashforth & Mael (1989). Dutton, Dukerich and Harquail (1994). The connection between an organization’s reputation and a person’s identity should be particularly strong during the jobpursuit process because the act of pursuing and accepting a job highlights the volitional nature of the affiliation. Job seekers’ reputation perceptions, in turn, should affect individuals’ perceptions of job attributes and the pride that they expect from membership, which in turn influence job-pursuit intentions, minimum salary required, and memory of recruitment materials.
Applicants can apply for the position by submitting a standardized resume´ to the employer. The employer screens the standardized resume´s and subsequently selects some applicants for an initial campus interview. We operationalized the size of firms’ applicant pools by counting the number of applicants who attempted to interview with the companies (by submitting their resume´ to the firms). The dimensions of applicant quality included academic performance, work experience, and extracurricular activities. Scholarly execution comprised of detailed general review point normal and the quantity of outside dialects that the candidate recorded on the institutionalized re’sume’. Work experience
was represented as the number of months of full-time work
The total number of extracurricular activities listed on the re´-
sume´ was used as the measure of extracurricular activities. On
the other hand, firms have more immediate incentives to provide
applicants with positive, rather than accurate, beliefs about organizational
culture. Openly discussing unfavorable cultural attributes
can turn applicants away, thereby limiting firms’ selection
ratios and their ability to hire new employees, particularly considering
shortages in the labor force Johnston (1992). To make
their organization more attractive to applicants, managers are
motivated to communicate a desirable image to applicants rather
than the cultural values that operate in the organization Tedeschi
& Melburg (1984).
This perspective suggests firms will overstate their positive
cultural attributes and understate unfavorable attributes. Focusing
on applicants’ beliefs is important, because applicants’ attraction
to firms does not always lead to positive outcomes if the
beliefs are misguided, and because firms have a high incentive to
communicate positive rather than accurate information. This review
recommended that organizations may attempt to exaggerate
sought qualities to candidates, for example, chance taking, while at
the same time downplaying undesired qualities, for example, rules
introduction. In several cases, the relationship between company
information and applicants’ culture beliefs was dramatic.
Fombrun and Shanley (1990) used the Fortune reputation
data to examine several different classes of reputation determinants
(e.g., profitability, advertising, charitable donations). Results
revealed that firms’ reputations were predicted by both financial
performance (e.g., accounting profitability, market value,
and dividend yield) and, to a far lesser degree, non-financial firm
attributes (e.g., media visibility, firm size, institutional ownership,
and demonstrations of social concern). Mcguire et al. (1988) examined
the Fortune rankings of firms’ reputations and found that
stock-market returns, and accounting-based measures of financial
performance were the best predictors.
The connection between an organization’s image and a person’s
identity should be particularly strong during the job pursuit
process, because the act of pursuing and accepting a job highlights
the volitional nature of the affiliation Popovich and Wanous
(1982). Accordingly, the criteria job seekers use to evaluate an organization’s
reputation may be attributes related to their personal
identity and needs, such as personal growth or the opportunity
to work with compatible coworkers. Highhouse et al. (1999) revealed
several antecedents to reputation that are very different
from the factors found to affect executives’ reputation perceptions,
including atmosphere, customers, and product image.
The hierarchical characteristics of kind of possession, nationality
of the director, and firm recognition in authoritative depictions
were controlled and their impacts were measured on firm
appeal. In addition, the authors adopted a person–organization
fit perspective to investigate how individual difference characteristics
moderated the effects of these organizational attributes
on attractiveness. Although, in general, participants were more
attracted to foreign than state-owned firms and too familiar than
unfamiliar firms, results provided support for the person–organization
fit perspective in that the individual differences moderated
the effects of the organizational attributes on firm attractiveness.
Organization reputation, job and organizational attributes, and
recruiter behaviors influence applicant attraction to firms. A few
studies have investigated how interviews influence applicant attraction
to firms, as noted by Wanous and Colella (1989).
Gary N Powell (1984) suggests that the factors which affect
applicant decisions concerning jobs has focused on the effects of
either job attributes or recruiting practices. The present review
inspected the synchronous effect of occupation properties and selecting
rehearses on the probability of employment acknowledgment
by genuine employment applicant.
Brian R Dineen  identify the ability of firms to attract qualified
job applicants is a critical component of the human resource
management process. However, while a large body of research has
examined the relationship between firm recruitment practices
and applicant pool attributes, very little research has investigated
what factors are associated with organizational decision makers’
utilization of specific recruitment tactics. Richard T Cobe (2004)
commented that the use of organizational web sites for recruitment
has become increasingly common. Despite their widespread
growth, however, little is known about how these web sites influence
recruitment outcomes [3-5].
Paul W Mulvey (2000) concentrate on the convictions that
candidates create about organizational culture during the anticipatory
stage of socialization. Work candidates recommended that
an association utilized item and organization data to urge candidates
to hold good, as opposed to precise, culture convictions. Pay
is a vital employment quality Jurgensen (1978) and affects work
allure and consequent occupation decision choices Rynes (1987).
Research on the relationship between compensation systems also,
job attractiveness regularly has inspected the impacts of pay level
Daniel B Turban and Thomas L Keon (1993) examine an interactionist
perspective to investigate how the personality characteristics
of selfesteem and need for achievement moderated the
influences of organizational characteristics on individuals’ attraction
to firms. Subjects read an organization description that manipulated
reward structure, centralization, organization size, and
geographical dispersion of plants and offices and indicated their
attraction to the organization.
The data were taken from the Kendall M (1975) Multivariate
analysis. Griffin, London corresponding to 245 Applicants for position in firm who have been judged on 15 variables. In the study
following empirical Multivariate technique is used to identify the
applicant position in firm by using Factor Analysis.
As Shown in (Table 1) Unrotated factor loadings and communalities,
the first five factors have variances (eigenvalues) that are
greater than 1. The eigenvalues change less markedly when more
than 6 factors are used. Therefore, 6 factors appear to explain
most of the variability in the data. The percentage of variability explained
by factor 1 is 0.168 or 16.8%. The percentage of variability
explained by Factor 5 is 0.073 or 7.3%. The scree plot shows
that the first five factors account for most of the total variability in
data (given by the eigenvalues). The remaining factors account for
a very small proportion of the variability (close to zero) and are
likely unimportant (Figure 1) [6-8].
As shown in (Table 2) Rotated factor loadings and communalities,
varimax rotation was performed on the data. Using the rotated
factor loadings. Self-Confidence (0.765) and Ambition (0.699)
have large positive loadings on factor 1, so this factor describes
that self-confidence and ambition for growth in the company.
Appearance (0.712) have large positive loadings on factor 2, so this factor describes that Appearance for growth in the company.
Suitability (0.758) have large positive loadings on factor 3, so this
factor describes that Suitability for growth in the company. All six
factors explain 0.586 or 5.86% of the variation in the data [9,10].
In this study, we find out the factor analysis on evaluating the
applicant’s position in firm data. In this study, multivariate data
were recorded from the Kendall M (1975) Multivariate analysis.
Griffin, London. Data consists of 245 observations and 15 variables.
For this purpose, the Multivariate data technique “Factor
Analysis” is used. All data analysis was done on Minitab16. The
factor analysis was conducted on 15 different variables of applicant’s
position in firm then 6 factors were selected from the selected
variable all other variables are well explained by the chosen
factors explain most of the variation (0.58.6 or 58.6%) .
For the applicants a position in firm data, 6 factors were extracted
from the 15 variables. All variables are well represented by
the 6 chosen factors, given that the corresponding communalities
are generally high. The percent of the total variability explained by
the factors does not change with rotation and the communalities
remain the same. But, after rotation, the factors are more evenly
balanced in the percent of variability that they account for (compare
the %Var rows from the unrotated and rotated output).
We conclude that the percent of the total variability explained
by the factors does not change with rotation and the communalities
remain the same. But, after rotation, the factors are more
evenly balanced in the percent of variability that they account for
(compare the % Var rows from the unrotated and rotated output).
Cortázar JC, Fuenzalida, Lafuente M (2016) Merit-based selection of public managers: Better public sector performance. An exploratory study (Technical Note Nº IDB-TN-1054). Washington, DC: Inter-American Development Bank. USA.