[Solved] WEEK 6 DISCUSSION HRA

Assignment Prompt & Instructions

SEE ATTACHED

– 2 years ago

**files (2)**

– ## GradDiscussionRubric.pdf

– ## WEEK6DISRESPHRA549.docx

**## GradDiscussionRubric.pdf**

TCOB Graduate Studies Discussion Rubric

Criteria No Submission

0 points

Novice
(Criterion is missing or not

in evidence)
1-13 points

Basic
(works towards meeting

expectations;
performance needs

improvement)
14-16 points

Proficient
(meets expectations;

performance is satisfactory)
17-18 points

Exemplary
(exceeds expectations;

performance is outstanding)
19-20 points

Support of
Week's Reading

No Student
Submission
(0 points)

Does not refer to the
readings to support postings

(1-13 points)

Alludes to the readings
to support postings

(14-16 points)

Refers to examples from the
readings to support postings

(17-18 points)

Provides concrete examples from
the readings to support postings;

integrates prior readings in
postings

(19-20 points)

Observations No Student
Submission
(0 points)

Does not integrate personal
observations or knowledge;

does not present new
observations
(1-13 points)

Integrates personal
observations and

knowledge in a cursory
manner; does not

present new
observations

(14-16 points)

Integrates personal
observations and knowledge
in an accurate way; presents

new observations
(17-18 points)

Integrates personal observations
and knowledge in an accurate and

highly insightful way; presents
new observations

(19-20 points)

Response to
Classmates

No Student
Submission

(0 points)

Responds in a cursory
manner to classmates’

postings
(1-13 points)

Constructively responds
to classmates’ postings

(14-16 points)

Constructively responds to
classmates’ postings; offers

insight that encourages other
students to think critically

about their own work.
(17-18 points)

Constructively responds to
classmates’ postings; masterfully
connects the material presented
in classmates’ postings to their

responses; encourages classmates
to think critically about their own

work.
(19-20 points)

Organization,
Word Choice,
and Sentence

Structure

No Student
Submission

(0 points)

Posts are disorganized and
information is not presented
in a logical sequence; word

choice and sentence
structure are not suitable

(1-13 points)

Posts are somewhat
disorganized, and
information is not

presented in a logical
sequence; word choice
and sentence structure

are not suitable
(14-16 points)

Posts are organized, and
information is presented in a

logical sequence; word
choice and sentence

structure are suitable; there
are a few errors; however,

errors do not affect
readability.

(17-18 points)

Posts are organized and
information is presented in a

logical sequence; word choice and
sentence structure are suitable;

no errors in the response.
(19-20 points)

References No Student
Submission

(0 points)

Includes no sources to
support conclusions

(1-13 points)

Includes 1 outside
source to support and
enrich the discussion;

Includes 2 or more outside
sources to support and
enrich the discussion;

sources are properly cited in

Includes 2 or more outside
sources to support and enrich the
discussion; sources are cited using

APA format; style guidelines are

TCOB Graduate Studies Discussion Rubric

sources are not properly
cited in APA format

(14-16 points)

APA format and are properly
integrated into the discussion

response
(17-18 points)

masterfully integrated into the
discussion response.

(19-20 points)

**## WEEK6DISRESPHRA549.docx**

1

4

**Please address each part of this assignment. APA format. Please cite scholarly authors.**

**1a.** Your boss sent you the following email this morning: "Headquarters just told us we need to cut our HR department costs and our time to hire. I need you to look at our selection procedures and recommend what tools we can eliminate from our process to save time and money."

Choose
**TWO of the following selection** procedures to eliminate. (
**Note:** when responding, assume none of these procedures are required by law):

·  Resume Check

· Biographical Information Blank

· Job Knowledge Test

· Panel Interview

· Application

· Reference Check

· Integrity Test

· Drug Test

Which procedures would you recommend eliminating? Defend your recommendations: Why did you suggest these specific procedures? Where and how could you compensate for the eliminated procedures?

Be sure to review the Discussion Guidelines in the Start Here menu before posting.

\*\*\********************************************************************************************

**1b.**

**Specifically, focus your responses to your peers' initial postings using the following prompts:**

· Why do you think your peers should not have eliminated specific procedures?

· What issues did your peers miss when they recommended specific procedures?

· What additional support can you add to your peers' recommendations?

**KW:** To address the challenge of cutting HR department costs and reducing the time to hire, I recommend eliminating two selection procedures: integrity testing and pre-employment drug testing.

Regarding pre-employment drug testing, it's important to note that it's not universally required by law across all industries. While certain industries, like those in the U.S. government, may have specific regulations that mandate drug testing (Clockfly, n.d.), federal law doesn’t require it for all job positions. Many employers choose to implement drug testing voluntarily, primarily to minimize risks related to substance abuse and to ensure a safe work environment. However, this process can be both costly and time-consuming, as it adds steps to the hiring process. Drug tests require scheduling, and waiting for results can significantly delay hiring timelines. By eliminating this step, we could significantly expedite the hiring process and cut down on associated costs (Nagele-Piazza, 2020). Furthermore, state laws vary on drug testing, which adds unnecessary complexity. Removing drug testing from our selection procedure could help us standardize our hiring practices and reduce unnecessary expenses.

As for integrity testing, it’s commonly used by organizations to identify individuals who may pose a risk to the company due to dishonesty or a lack of strong moral principles. While these tests are appropriate in high-risk environments, they are neither required by law nor necessary for every role. Integrity tests are often costly, time-consuming, and can slow down the hiring process (Fedweek, 2019). In many cases, integrity tests identify candidates who are likely to fail at later stages, like background checks, but they are not essential for all positions (Fedweek, 2019). Eliminating integrity testing could save time, reduce costs, and allow us to make quicker decisions when evaluating candidates.

By eliminating both integrity testing and pre-employment drug testing, we would streamline the hiring process, reduce costs, and improve efficiency. Removing these steps would allow us to focus more on assessing candidates' core competencies while minimizing delays and expenses tied to unnecessary procedures.

**References**

Clockify. (n.d.).
_Pre-employment drug testing laws by state — Detailed guide_. Clockify. Retrieved February 18, 2025, from
[https://clockify.me/learn/business-management/pre-employment-drug-testing-laws-by-state](https://clockify.me/learn/business-management/pre-employment-drug-testing-laws-by-state)

FEDweek Staff. (2019, May 29).
_MSPB weighs pros, cons of ‘integrity testing’_. FEDweek. Retrieved February 18, 2025, from
[https://www.fedweek.com/issue-briefs/mspb-weighs-pros-cons-of-integrity-testing/](https://www.fedweek.com/issue-briefs/mspb-weighs-pros-cons-of-integrity-testing/)

Nagele-Piazza, L. (2020, January 21).
_Workplace drug testing: Weighing the pros and cons_. Society for Human Resource Management. Retrieved February 18, 2025, from
[https://www.shrm.org/topics-tools/employment-law-compliance/workplace-drug-testing-weighing-pros-cons](https://www.shrm.org/topics-tools/employment-law-compliance/workplace-drug-testing-weighing-pros-cons)

**JA.**

When implementing the best interview, the first step should be to create policies and procedures that abide by federal and state laws while supporting the company’s vision, mission, values, and strategy, regardless of the candidate's area (Burgess-Wilkerson, 2008). The two selection procedures I would recommend eliminating are reference check and biographical information blank.

**Reference Checks**

Our reading of the HR Specialist: Texas Employment Law (2013) article found that using discretion in hiring while still thoroughly investigating candidates' backgrounds will ensure that a “duty of care” was taken to protect workers, customers, and clients from injury caused by an unfit employee who showed signs during the hiring process of posing a risk. A resume check verifies that what a candidate submitted on their employment application is accurate. Since we already have this as part of the hiring process, reference checks seem to be an additional layer that does not provide a true picture of the candidate's skills, work style, or work ethic.

Reference checks, while seemingly a valuable tool, often fall short in providing a comprehensive view of a candidate's skills and work ethic. Candidates typically select references who will speak favorably of them, leading to a biased and subjective perspective on their performance and workplace behavior (Dewar, 2025).

**Biographical Information Blank**

The accurate measure of validity for an employment test should not just be based on the ability to master and take a test but also include ways to measure the performance of the developed abilities in areas such as diligence, persistence, energy, and drive (Sackett et al., 2008).        Selection tests for potential employees have long been scrutinized for companies' fairness and true ability to “funnel” the knowledge, skills, abilities, and other characteristics (KSAOs) they are searching for to pool the right candidates to interview. Biographical Information or BioData is a software or document providing comprehensive details about an individual’s personal and professional life (TemPostions, 2024). This information is collected based on a series of questions and other sources such as education, publications, awards, and other academic achievements. BioData shows a potential candidate's cultural and personal background, not just professional capabilities (Dewar, 2025).  This information is nice to have, but the amount of time, resources, and money spent to find out this new hire’s cultural and personal background can be answered by specific questions during the panel interview. As a side note, be careful when including BioData because this could violate equal employment opportunity laws (EEO).

Hiring processes should be adaptive, tailored to the unique skills, hiring practices, and ethical norms of each job. No one-size-fits-all set of selection procedures exists. It's crucial to go beyond selection systems and personally interview candidates. This direct interaction allows for a more accurate assessment of their individual drive and level of work ethic.

**References**

Burgess-Wilkerson, B. (2008). Selection and Interview Procedures at a Multinational Company.
_Business Communication Quarterly_,
_71_(1), 100–102.
[https://doi-org.saintleo.idm.oclc.org/10.1177/1080569907313379](https://doi-org.saintleo.idm.oclc.org/10.1177/1080569907313379)

Dewar, J. (2025, February 4). Reference Checks: Templates, Questions, and Best Practices for 2025. JobScore.
[https://www.jobscore.com/articles/reference-checks/#the-benefits-of-reference-checks](https://www.jobscore.com/articles/reference-checks/)

Hidden liability: Understand the risks of negligent hiring. (2013).
_HR Specialist: Texas Employment Law_,
_8_(7), 4.

Sackett, P. R., Borneman, M. J., & Connelly. (2008). High-Stakes Testing in Higher Education and Employment: Appraising the Evidence for Validity and Fairness.
_American Psychologist_,
_63_(4), 215–227.

TemPositions (2024, January 3). What is BioData? An In-depth Understanding for Job Seekers and Employers. Recruitment Blog.
[https://www.tempositions.com/blog/what-is-biodata/](https://www.tempositions.com/blog/what-is-biodata/)

**## WEEK6DISRESPHRA549.docx**

1

4

**Please address each part of this assignment. APA format. Please cite scholarly authors.**

**1a.** Your boss sent you the following email this morning: "Headquarters just told us we need to cut our HR department costs and our time to hire. I need you to look at our selection procedures and recommend what tools we can eliminate from our process to save time and money."

Choose
**TWO of the following selection** procedures to eliminate. (
**Note:** when responding, assume none of these procedures are required by law):

·  Resume Check

· Biographical Information Blank

· Job Knowledge Test

· Panel Interview

· Application

· Reference Check

· Integrity Test

· Drug Test

Which procedures would you recommend eliminating? Defend your recommendations: Why did you suggest these specific procedures? Where and how could you compensate for the eliminated procedures?

Be sure to review the Discussion Guidelines in the Start Here menu before posting.

\*\*\********************************************************************************************

**1b.**

**Specifically, focus your responses to your peers' initial postings using the following prompts:**

· Why do you think your peers should not have eliminated specific procedures?

· What issues did your peers miss when they recommended specific procedures?

· What additional support can you add to your peers' recommendations?

**KW:** To address the challenge of cutting HR department costs and reducing the time to hire, I recommend eliminating two selection procedures: integrity testing and pre-employment drug testing.

Regarding pre-employment drug testing, it's important to note that it's not universally required by law across all industries. While certain industries, like those in the U.S. government, may have specific regulations that mandate drug testing (Clockfly, n.d.), federal law doesn’t require it for all job positions. Many employers choose to implement drug testing voluntarily, primarily to minimize risks related to substance abuse and to ensure a safe work environment. However, this process can be both costly and time-consuming, as it adds steps to the hiring process. Drug tests require scheduling, and waiting for results can significantly delay hiring timelines. By eliminating this step, we could significantly expedite the hiring process and cut down on associated costs (Nagele-Piazza, 2020). Furthermore, state laws vary on drug testing, which adds unnecessary complexity. Removing drug testing from our selection procedure could help us standardize our hiring practices and reduce unnecessary expenses.

As for integrity testing, it’s commonly used by organizations to identify individuals who may pose a risk to the company due to dishonesty or a lack of strong moral principles. While these tests are appropriate in high-risk environments, they are neither required by law nor necessary for every role. Integrity tests are often costly, time-consuming, and can slow down the hiring process (Fedweek, 2019). In many cases, integrity tests identify candidates who are likely to fail at later stages, like background checks, but they are not essential for all positions (Fedweek, 2019). Eliminating integrity testing could save time, reduce costs, and allow us to make quicker decisions when evaluating candidates.

By eliminating both integrity testing and pre-employment drug testing, we would streamline the hiring process, reduce costs, and improve efficiency. Removing these steps would allow us to focus more on assessing candidates' core competencies while minimizing delays and expenses tied to unnecessary procedures.

**References**

Clockify. (n.d.).
_Pre-employment drug testing laws by state — Detailed guide_. Clockify. Retrieved February 18, 2025, from
[https://clockify.me/learn/business-management/pre-employment-drug-testing-laws-by-state](https://clockify.me/learn/business-management/pre-employment-drug-testing-laws-by-state)

FEDweek Staff. (2019, May 29).
_MSPB weighs pros, cons of ‘integrity testing’_. FEDweek. Retrieved February 18, 2025, from
[https://www.fedweek.com/issue-briefs/mspb-weighs-pros-cons-of-integrity-testing/](https://www.fedweek.com/issue-briefs/mspb-weighs-pros-cons-of-integrity-testing/)

Nagele-Piazza, L. (2020, January 21).
_Workplace drug testing: Weighing the pros and cons_. Society for Human Resource Management. Retrieved February 18, 2025, from
[https://www.shrm.org/topics-tools/employment-law-compliance/workplace-drug-testing-weighing-pros-cons](https://www.shrm.org/topics-tools/employment-law-compliance/workplace-drug-testing-weighing-pros-cons)

**JA.**

When implementing the best interview, the first step should be to create policies and procedures that abide by federal and state laws while supporting the company’s vision, mission, values, and strategy, regardless of the candidate's area (Burgess-Wilkerson, 2008). The two selection procedures I would recommend eliminating are reference check and biographical information blank.

**Reference Checks**

Our reading of the HR Specialist: Texas Employment Law (2013) article found that using discretion in hiring while still thoroughly investigating candidates' backgrounds will ensure that a “duty of care” was taken to protect workers, customers, and clients from injury caused by an unfit employee who showed signs during the hiring process of posing a risk. A resume check verifies that what a candidate submitted on their employment application is accurate. Since we already have this as part of the hiring process, reference checks seem to be an additional layer that does not provide a true picture of the candidate's skills, work style, or work ethic.

Reference checks, while seemingly a valuable tool, often fall short in providing a comprehensive view of a candidate's skills and work ethic. Candidates typically select references who will speak favorably of them, leading to a biased and subjective perspective on their performance and workplace behavior (Dewar, 2025).

**Biographical Information Blank**

The accurate measure of validity for an employment test should not just be based on the ability to master and take a test but also include ways to measure the performance of the developed abilities in areas such as diligence, persistence, energy, and drive (Sackett et al., 2008).        Selection tests for potential employees have long been scrutinized for companies' fairness and true ability to “funnel” the knowledge, skills, abilities, and other characteristics (KSAOs) they are searching for to pool the right candidates to interview. Biographical Information or BioData is a software or document providing comprehensive details about an individual’s personal and professional life (TemPostions, 2024). This information is collected based on a series of questions and other sources such as education, publications, awards, and other academic achievements. BioData shows a potential candidate's cultural and personal background, not just professional capabilities (Dewar, 2025).  This information is nice to have, but the amount of time, resources, and money spent to find out this new hire’s cultural and personal background can be answered by specific questions during the panel interview. As a side note, be careful when including BioData because this could violate equal employment opportunity laws (EEO).

Hiring processes should be adaptive, tailored to the unique skills, hiring practices, and ethical norms of each job. No one-size-fits-all set of selection procedures exists. It's crucial to go beyond selection systems and personally interview candidates. This direct interaction allows for a more accurate assessment of their individual drive and level of work ethic.

**References**

Burgess-Wilkerson, B. (2008). Selection and Interview Procedures at a Multinational Company.
_Business Communication Quarterly_,
_71_(1), 100–102.
[https://doi-org.saintleo.idm.oclc.org/10.1177/1080569907313379](https://doi-org.saintleo.idm.oclc.org/10.1177/1080569907313379)

Dewar, J. (2025, February 4). Reference Checks: Templates, Questions, and Best Practices for 2025. JobScore.
[https://www.jobscore.com/articles/reference-checks/#the-benefits-of-reference-checks](https://www.jobscore.com/articles/reference-checks/)

Hidden liability: Understand the risks of negligent hiring. (2013).
_HR Specialist: Texas Employment Law_,
_8_(7), 4.

Sackett, P. R., Borneman, M. J., & Connelly. (2008). High-Stakes Testing in Higher Education and Employment: Appraising the Evidence for Validity and Fairness.
_American Psychologist_,
_63_(4), 215–227.

TemPositions (2024, January 3). What is BioData? An In-depth Understanding for Job Seekers and Employers. Recruitment Blog.
[https://www.tempositions.com/blog/what-is-biodata/](https://www.tempositions.com/blog/what-is-biodata/)

**## GradDiscussionRubric.pdf**

TCOB Graduate Studies Discussion Rubric

Criteria No Submission

0 points

Novice
(Criterion is missing or not

in evidence)
1-13 points

Basic
(works towards meeting

expectations;
performance needs

improvement)
14-16 points

Proficient
(meets expectations;

performance is satisfactory)
17-18 points

Exemplary
(exceeds expectations;

performance is outstanding)
19-20 points

Support of
Week's Reading

No Student
Submission
(0 points)

Does not refer to the
readings to support postings

(1-13 points)

Alludes to the readings
to support postings

(14-16 points)

Refers to examples from the
readings to support postings

(17-18 points)

Provides concrete examples from
the readings to support postings;

integrates prior readings in
postings

(19-20 points)

Observations No Student
Submission
(0 points)

Does not integrate personal
observations or knowledge;

does not present new
observations
(1-13 points)

Integrates personal
observations and

knowledge in a cursory
manner; does not

present new
observations

(14-16 points)

Integrates personal
observations and knowledge
in an accurate way; presents

new observations
(17-18 points)

Integrates personal observations
and knowledge in an accurate and

highly insightful way; presents
new observations

(19-20 points)

Response to
Classmates

No Student
Submission

(0 points)

Responds in a cursory
manner to classmates’

postings
(1-13 points)

Constructively responds
to classmates’ postings

(14-16 points)

Constructively responds to
classmates’ postings; offers

insight that encourages other
students to think critically

about their own work.
(17-18 points)

Constructively responds to
classmates’ postings; masterfully
connects the material presented
in classmates’ postings to their

responses; encourages classmates
to think critically about their own

work.
(19-20 points)

Organization,
Word Choice,
and Sentence

Structure

No Student
Submission

(0 points)

Posts are disorganized and
information is not presented
in a logical sequence; word

choice and sentence
structure are not suitable

(1-13 points)

Posts are somewhat
disorganized, and
information is not

presented in a logical
sequence; word choice
and sentence structure

are not suitable
(14-16 points)

Posts are organized, and
information is presented in a

logical sequence; word
choice and sentence

structure are suitable; there
are a few errors; however,

errors do not affect
readability.

(17-18 points)

Posts are organized and
information is presented in a

logical sequence; word choice and
sentence structure are suitable;

no errors in the response.
(19-20 points)

References No Student
Submission

(0 points)

Includes no sources to
support conclusions

(1-13 points)

Includes 1 outside
source to support and
enrich the discussion;

Includes 2 or more outside
sources to support and
enrich the discussion;

sources are properly cited in

Includes 2 or more outside
sources to support and enrich the
discussion; sources are cited using

APA format; style guidelines are

TCOB Graduate Studies Discussion Rubric

sources are not properly
cited in APA format

(14-16 points)

APA format and are properly
integrated into the discussion

response
(17-18 points)

masterfully integrated into the
discussion response.

(19-20 points)

**## WEEK6DISRESPHRA549.docx**

1

4

**Please address each part of this assignment. APA format. Please cite scholarly authors.**

**1a.** Your boss sent you the following email this morning: "Headquarters just told us we need to cut our HR department costs and our time to hire. I need you to look at our selection procedures and recommend what tools we can eliminate from our process to save time and money."

Choose
**TWO of the following selection** procedures to eliminate. (
**Note:** when responding, assume none of these procedures are required by law):

·  Resume Check

· Biographical Information Blank

· Job Knowledge Test

· Panel Interview

· Application

· Reference Check

· Integrity Test

· Drug Test

Which procedures would you recommend eliminating? Defend your recommendations: Why did you suggest these specific procedures? Where and how could you compensate for the eliminated procedures?

Be sure to review the Discussion Guidelines in the Start Here menu before posting.

\*\*\********************************************************************************************

**1b.**

**Specifically, focus your responses to your peers' initial postings using the following prompts:**

· Why do you think your peers should not have eliminated specific procedures?

· What issues did your peers miss when they recommended specific procedures?

· What additional support can you add to your peers' recommendations?

**KW:** To address the challenge of cutting HR department costs and reducing the time to hire, I recommend eliminating two selection procedures: integrity testing and pre-employment drug testing.

Regarding pre-employment drug testing, it's important to note that it's not universally required by law across all industries. While certain industries, like those in the U.S. government, may have specific regulations that mandate drug testing (Clockfly, n.d.), federal law doesn’t require it for all job positions. Many employers choose to implement drug testing voluntarily, primarily to minimize risks related to substance abuse and to ensure a safe work environment. However, this process can be both costly and time-consuming, as it adds steps to the hiring process. Drug tests require scheduling, and waiting for results can significantly delay hiring timelines. By eliminating this step, we could significantly expedite the hiring process and cut down on associated costs (Nagele-Piazza, 2020). Furthermore, state laws vary on drug testing, which adds unnecessary complexity. Removing drug testing from our selection procedure could help us standardize our hiring practices and reduce unnecessary expenses.

As for integrity testing, it’s commonly used by organizations to identify individuals who may pose a risk to the company due to dishonesty or a lack of strong moral principles. While these tests are appropriate in high-risk environments, they are neither required by law nor necessary for every role. Integrity tests are often costly, time-consuming, and can slow down the hiring process (Fedweek, 2019). In many cases, integrity tests identify candidates who are likely to fail at later stages, like background checks, but they are not essential for all positions (Fedweek, 2019). Eliminating integrity testing could save time, reduce costs, and allow us to make quicker decisions when evaluating candidates.

By eliminating both integrity testing and pre-employment drug testing, we would streamline the hiring process, reduce costs, and improve efficiency. Removing these steps would allow us to focus more on assessing candidates' core competencies while minimizing delays and expenses tied to unnecessary procedures.

**References**

Clockify. (n.d.).
_Pre-employment drug testing laws by state — Detailed guide_. Clockify. Retrieved February 18, 2025, from
[https://clockify.me/learn/business-management/pre-employment-drug-testing-laws-by-state](https://clockify.me/learn/business-management/pre-employment-drug-testing-laws-by-state)

FEDweek Staff. (2019, May 29).
_MSPB weighs pros, cons of ‘integrity testing’_. FEDweek. Retrieved February 18, 2025, from
[https://www.fedweek.com/issue-briefs/mspb-weighs-pros-cons-of-integrity-testing/](https://www.fedweek.com/issue-briefs/mspb-weighs-pros-cons-of-integrity-testing/)

Nagele-Piazza, L. (2020, January 21).
_Workplace drug testing: Weighing the pros and cons_. Society for Human Resource Management. Retrieved February 18, 2025, from
[https://www.shrm.org/topics-tools/employment-law-compliance/workplace-drug-testing-weighing-pros-cons](https://www.shrm.org/topics-tools/employment-law-compliance/workplace-drug-testing-weighing-pros-cons)

**JA.**

When implementing the best interview, the first step should be to create policies and procedures that abide by federal and state laws while supporting the company’s vision, mission, values, and strategy, regardless of the candidate's area (Burgess-Wilkerson, 2008). The two selection procedures I would recommend eliminating are reference check and biographical information blank.

**Reference Checks**

Our reading of the HR Specialist: Texas Employment Law (2013) article found that using discretion in hiring while still thoroughly investigating candidates' backgrounds will ensure that a “duty of care” was taken to protect workers, customers, and clients from injury caused by an unfit employee who showed signs during the hiring process of posing a risk. A resume check verifies that what a candidate submitted on their employment application is accurate. Since we already have this as part of the hiring process, reference checks seem to be an additional layer that does not provide a true picture of the candidate's skills, work style, or work ethic.

Reference checks, while seemingly a valuable tool, often fall short in providing a comprehensive view of a candidate's skills and work ethic. Candidates typically select references who will speak favorably of them, leading to a biased and subjective perspective on their performance and workplace behavior (Dewar, 2025).

**Biographical Information Blank**

The accurate measure of validity for an employment test should not just be based on the ability to master and take a test but also include ways to measure the performance of the developed abilities in areas such as diligence, persistence, energy, and drive (Sackett et al., 2008).        Selection tests for potential employees have long been scrutinized for companies' fairness and true ability to “funnel” the knowledge, skills, abilities, and other characteristics (KSAOs) they are searching for to pool the right candidates to interview. Biographical Information or BioData is a software or document providing comprehensive details about an individual’s personal and professional life (TemPostions, 2024). This information is collected based on a series of questions and other sources such as education, publications, awards, and other academic achievements. BioData shows a potential candidate's cultural and personal background, not just professional capabilities (Dewar, 2025).  This information is nice to have, but the amount of time, resources, and money spent to find out this new hire’s cultural and personal background can be answered by specific questions during the panel interview. As a side note, be careful when including BioData because this could violate equal employment opportunity laws (EEO).

Hiring processes should be adaptive, tailored to the unique skills, hiring practices, and ethical norms of each job. No one-size-fits-all set of selection procedures exists. It's crucial to go beyond selection systems and personally interview candidates. This direct interaction allows for a more accurate assessment of their individual drive and level of work ethic.

**References**

Burgess-Wilkerson, B. (2008). Selection and Interview Procedures at a Multinational Company.
_Business Communication Quarterly_,
_71_(1), 100–102.
[https://doi-org.saintleo.idm.oclc.org/10.1177/1080569907313379](https://doi-org.saintleo.idm.oclc.org/10.1177/1080569907313379)

Dewar, J. (2025, February 4). Reference Checks: Templates, Questions, and Best Practices for 2025. JobScore.
[https://www.jobscore.com/articles/reference-checks/#the-benefits-of-reference-checks](https://www.jobscore.com/articles/reference-checks/)

Hidden liability: Understand the risks of negligent hiring. (2013).
_HR Specialist: Texas Employment Law_,
_8_(7), 4.

Sackett, P. R., Borneman, M. J., & Connelly. (2008). High-Stakes Testing in Higher Education and Employment: Appraising the Evidence for Validity and Fairness.
_American Psychologist_,
_63_(4), 215–227.

TemPositions (2024, January 3). What is BioData? An In-depth Understanding for Job Seekers and Employers. Recruitment Blog.
[https://www.tempositions.com/blog/what-is-biodata/](https://www.tempositions.com/blog/what-is-biodata/)

**## GradDiscussionRubric.pdf**

TCOB Graduate Studies Discussion Rubric

Criteria No Submission

0 points

Novice
(Criterion is missing or not

in evidence)
1-13 points

Basic
(works towards meeting

expectations;
performance needs

improvement)
14-16 points

Proficient
(meets expectations;

performance is satisfactory)
17-18 points

Exemplary
(exceeds expectations;

performance is outstanding)
19-20 points

Support of
Week's Reading

No Student
Submission
(0 points)

Does not refer to the
readings to support postings

(1-13 points)

Alludes to the readings
to support postings

(14-16 points)

Refers to examples from the
readings to support postings

(17-18 points)

Provides concrete examples from
the readings to support postings;

integrates prior readings in
postings

(19-20 points)

Observations No Student
Submission
(0 points)

Does not integrate personal
observations or knowledge;

does not present new
observations
(1-13 points)

Integrates personal
observations and

knowledge in a cursory
manner; does not

present new
observations

(14-16 points)

Integrates personal
observations and knowledge
in an accurate way; presents

new observations
(17-18 points)

Integrates personal observations
and knowledge in an accurate and

highly insightful way; presents
new observations

(19-20 points)

Response to
Classmates

No Student
Submission

(0 points)

Responds in a cursory
manner to classmates’

postings
(1-13 points)

Constructively responds
to classmates’ postings

(14-16 points)

Constructively responds to
classmates’ postings; offers

insight that encourages other
students to think critically

about their own work.
(17-18 points)

Constructively responds to
classmates’ postings; masterfully
connects the material presented
in classmates’ postings to their

responses; encourages classmates
to think critically about their own

work.
(19-20 points)

Organization,
Word Choice,
and Sentence

Structure

No Student
Submission

(0 points)

Posts are disorganized and
information is not presented
in a logical sequence; word

choice and sentence
structure are not suitable

(1-13 points)

Posts are somewhat
disorganized, and
information is not

presented in a logical
sequence; word choice
and sentence structure

are not suitable
(14-16 points)

Posts are organized, and
information is presented in a

logical sequence; word
choice and sentence

structure are suitable; there
are a few errors; however,

errors do not affect
readability.

(17-18 points)

Posts are organized and
information is presented in a

logical sequence; word choice and
sentence structure are suitable;

no errors in the response.
(19-20 points)

References No Student
Submission

(0 points)

Includes no sources to
support conclusions

(1-13 points)

Includes 1 outside
source to support and
enrich the discussion;

Includes 2 or more outside
sources to support and
enrich the discussion;

sources are properly cited in

Includes 2 or more outside
sources to support and enrich the
discussion; sources are cited using

APA format; style guidelines are

TCOB Graduate Studies Discussion Rubric

sources are not properly
cited in APA format

(14-16 points)

APA format and are properly
integrated into the discussion

response
(17-18 points)

masterfully integrated into the
discussion response.

(19-20 points)

**## WEEK6DISRESPHRA549.docx**

1

4

**Please address each part of this assignment. APA format. Please cite scholarly authors.**

**1a.** Your boss sent you the following email this morning: "Headquarters just told us we need to cut our HR department costs and our time to hire. I need you to look at our selection procedures and recommend what tools we can eliminate from our process to save time and money."

Choose
**TWO of the following selection** procedures to eliminate. (
**Note:** when responding, assume none of these procedures are required by law):

·  Resume Check

· Biographical Information Blank

· Job Knowledge Test

· Panel Interview

· Application

· Reference Check

· Integrity Test

· Drug Test

Which procedures would you recommend eliminating? Defend your recommendations: Why did you suggest these specific procedures? Where and how could you compensate for the eliminated procedures?

Be sure to review the Discussion Guidelines in the Start Here menu before posting.

\*\*\********************************************************************************************

**1b.**

**Specifically, focus your responses to your peers' initial postings using the following prompts:**

· Why do you think your peers should not have eliminated specific procedures?

· What issues did your peers miss when they recommended specific procedures?

· What additional support can you add to your peers' recommendations?

**KW:** To address the challenge of cutting HR department costs and reducing the time to hire, I recommend eliminating two selection procedures: integrity testing and pre-employment drug testing.

Regarding pre-employment drug testing, it's important to note that it's not universally required by law across all industries. While certain industries, like those in the U.S. government, may have specific regulations that mandate drug testing (Clockfly, n.d.), federal law doesn’t require it for all job positions. Many employers choose to implement drug testing voluntarily, primarily to minimize risks related to substance abuse and to ensure a safe work environment. However, this process can be both costly and time-consuming, as it adds steps to the hiring process. Drug tests require scheduling, and waiting for results can significantly delay hiring timelines. By eliminating this step, we could significantly expedite the hiring process and cut down on associated costs (Nagele-Piazza, 2020). Furthermore, state laws vary on drug testing, which adds unnecessary complexity. Removing drug testing from our selection procedure could help us standardize our hiring practices and reduce unnecessary expenses.

As for integrity testing, it’s commonly used by organizations to identify individuals who may pose a risk to the company due to dishonesty or a lack of strong moral principles. While these tests are appropriate in high-risk environments, they are neither required by law nor necessary for every role. Integrity tests are often costly, time-consuming, and can slow down the hiring process (Fedweek, 2019). In many cases, integrity tests identify candidates who are likely to fail at later stages, like background checks, but they are not essential for all positions (Fedweek, 2019). Eliminating integrity testing could save time, reduce costs, and allow us to make quicker decisions when evaluating candidates.

By eliminating both integrity testing and pre-employment drug testing, we would streamline the hiring process, reduce costs, and improve efficiency. Removing these steps would allow us to focus more on assessing candidates' core competencies while minimizing delays and expenses tied to unnecessary procedures.

**References**

Clockify. (n.d.).
_Pre-employment drug testing laws by state — Detailed guide_. Clockify. Retrieved February 18, 2025, from
[https://clockify.me/learn/business-management/pre-employment-drug-testing-laws-by-state](https://clockify.me/learn/business-management/pre-employment-drug-testing-laws-by-state)

FEDweek Staff. (2019, May 29).
_MSPB weighs pros, cons of ‘integrity testing’_. FEDweek. Retrieved February 18, 2025, from
[https://www.fedweek.com/issue-briefs/mspb-weighs-pros-cons-of-integrity-testing/](https://www.fedweek.com/issue-briefs/mspb-weighs-pros-cons-of-integrity-testing/)

Nagele-Piazza, L. (2020, January 21).
_Workplace drug testing: Weighing the pros and cons_. Society for Human Resource Management. Retrieved February 18, 2025, from
[https://www.shrm.org/topics-tools/employment-law-compliance/workplace-drug-testing-weighing-pros-cons](https://www.shrm.org/topics-tools/employment-law-compliance/workplace-drug-testing-weighing-pros-cons)

**JA.**

When implementing the best interview, the first step should be to create policies and procedures that abide by federal and state laws while supporting the company’s vision, mission, values, and strategy, regardless of the candidate's area (Burgess-Wilkerson, 2008). The two selection procedures I would recommend eliminating are reference check and biographical information blank.

**Reference Checks**

Our reading of the HR Specialist: Texas Employment Law (2013) article found that using discretion in hiring while still thoroughly investigating candidates' backgrounds will ensure that a “duty of care” was taken to protect workers, customers, and clients from injury caused by an unfit employee who showed signs during the hiring process of posing a risk. A resume check verifies that what a candidate submitted on their employment application is accurate. Since we already have this as part of the hiring process, reference checks seem to be an additional layer that does not provide a true picture of the candidate's skills, work style, or work ethic.

Reference checks, while seemingly a valuable tool, often fall short in providing a comprehensive view of a candidate's skills and work ethic. Candidates typically select references who will speak favorably of them, leading to a biased and subjective perspective on their performance and workplace behavior (Dewar, 2025).

**Biographical Information Blank**

The accurate measure of validity for an employment test should not just be based on the ability to master and take a test but also include ways to measure the performance of the developed abilities in areas such as diligence, persistence, energy, and drive (Sackett et al., 2008).        Selection tests for potential employees have long been scrutinized for companies' fairness and true ability to “funnel” the knowledge, skills, abilities, and other characteristics (KSAOs) they are searching for to pool the right candidates to interview. Biographical Information or BioData is a software or document providing comprehensive details about an individual’s personal and professional life (TemPostions, 2024). This information is collected based on a series of questions and other sources such as education, publications, awards, and other academic achievements. BioData shows a potential candidate's cultural and personal background, not just professional capabilities (Dewar, 2025).  This information is nice to have, but the amount of time, resources, and money spent to find out this new hire’s cultural and personal background can be answered by specific questions during the panel interview. As a side note, be careful when including BioData because this could violate equal employment opportunity laws (EEO).

Hiring processes should be adaptive, tailored to the unique skills, hiring practices, and ethical norms of each job. No one-size-fits-all set of selection procedures exists. It's crucial to go beyond selection systems and personally interview candidates. This direct interaction allows for a more accurate assessment of their individual drive and level of work ethic.

**References**

Burgess-Wilkerson, B. (2008). Selection and Interview Procedures at a Multinational Company.
_Business Communication Quarterly_,
_71_(1), 100–102.
[https://doi-org.saintleo.idm.oclc.org/10.1177/1080569907313379](https://doi-org.saintleo.idm.oclc.org/10.1177/1080569907313379)

Dewar, J. (2025, February 4). Reference Checks: Templates, Questions, and Best Practices for 2025. JobScore.
[https://www.jobscore.com/articles/reference-checks/#the-benefits-of-reference-checks](https://www.jobscore.com/articles/reference-checks/)

Hidden liability: Understand the risks of negligent hiring. (2013).
_HR Specialist: Texas Employment Law_,
_8_(7), 4.

Sackett, P. R., Borneman, M. J., & Connelly. (2008). High-Stakes Testing in Higher Education and Employment: Appraising the Evidence for Validity and Fairness.
_American Psychologist_,
_63_(4), 215–227.

TemPositions (2024, January 3). What is BioData? An In-depth Understanding for Job Seekers and Employers. Recruitment Blog.
[https://www.tempositions.com/blog/what-is-biodata/](https://www.tempositions.com/blog/what-is-biodata/)