Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.
Although the hiring process involves mutual decision making between the organization and the job candidate, available literature demonstrates that hiring the best person from among many good candidates is often a challenging task for many leaders (Lin & Kleiner 108).
However, as suggested by these authors, several devices, models and approaches have been developed over the years to assist in making this decision. This paper employs a model known as the Kepner-Tregoe (KT) decision making model to come to the conclusion that Candidate C is best suited for the job.
Available literature demonstrates that the KT model is a thinking method for management that was developed by C. Kepner and B. Tregoe to resolve organizational issues better through the employment of a systematic process that is grounded in reason, verification and creativity (Kepner-Tregoe, Inc 2).
The model comprises four key constituents, namely problem analysis, decision analysis, situational appraisal, and potential problem/opportunity analysis (Kepner-Tregoe, Inc 3; Nakamura et al 49-50).
Employing the model into the case scenario, it is evident that the problem analysis revolves around finding an experienced person to fill a vacancy, where the successful candidate must demonstrate close cooperation and coordination with others inside and outside the department.
The actual problem, however, is that none of the three top candidates seem to fulfill this job fit. The second constituent – decision analysis – involves marrying reason, expertise, creativity and factual information to guide organizational leaders in selecting the most suitable means for multiple problem resolutions (Nakamura et al 49).
It is here that the departmental head should employ reason, experience and factual information to decide that all the three candidates are qualified based on intelligence tests. However, Candidate A cannot fit in the job description since he is very unsociable.
Equally, Candidate B may fail to develop the needed characteristics needed for close cooperation and coordination as factual information demonstrates that having a pleasant personality does not automatically translate into a sociable person.
Lastly, reason demonstrates that Candidate C may not have the experience needed for the job but he has a business experience in a different industry.
In the third constituent, which is the situational appraisal, the departmental head is not only expected to reveal all the aspects of the situation and their relative priority, but must also determine what different courses of action are needed and what stakeholders need to be involved (Kepner-Tregoe, Inc 3).
The chances for Candidate A are minimal given that he does not meet the technical demands of the job and the expected profile of skills (Bottgner & Barsoux 34). Having an outgoing character is an inborn characteristic that may be hard to train and internalize in employees.
The chances for Candidate B are moderate given that he has experience in a related job and has a pleasant personality. However, it may also be difficult to train the candidate to internalize an outgoing character.
The chances for Candidate C can be appraised as high since he already have an extremely sociable character and may bring additional skills into the organization from his business experience in a different industry.
What’s more, the manager can always engage a consultant trainer to train Candidate C on the specific skills needed for the job. This analysis clearly demonstrates that Candidate C is best suited for the job
The fourth constituent – potential problem/opportunity analysis – entails preparing approaches aimed at responding to future threats and opportunities that the organization may be exposed to based on the decision taken.
This analysis “…combines past experience and creative insights about the future to logically analyze and prepare for the risks and rewards that could occur” (Kepner-Tregoe, Inc 3).
While Candidate C presents no foreseeable future threats in that he has an extremely sociable character that is needed for the job, he is likely to bring into the department some opportunities linked to his experience and involvement in a totally different sector. Candidate C, in my view, is therefore better qualified for the job.
Works Cited
Bottgner, Preston and Jean-Louis Barsoux. “Masters of fit: How leaders enhance hiring.” Strategy & Leadership. 40.1 (2011): 33-39. Emerald. Web.
Kepner-Tregoe, Inc 2006, Kepner-Tregoe Problem Solving & Decision Making. Web.
Lin, Yei-Fang and Brian H. Kleiner. “How to Hire Employees Effectively.” Management Research News. 27.4 (2004): 108-115. Emerald. Web.
Nakamura, Keiichi, Rihito Yaegashi, Satoshi Suzuki, Manabu Nakamaru, Takaaki Ido and Seiichi Komiya. “A Group Problem Solving System based on Kepner-Tregoe Program: Experiment Based Confirmation of Effectiveness as Coordinator Support Facilities.” Journal of Integrated Design & Process Science. 9.2 (2005): 47-64. Business Source Premier. Web.
Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.