Data on a nationally representative sample of US establishments reveal that letters of reference are the most common approach to screening and selecting applicants for employment. Physical examinations, skills/proficiency tests, and tests for drug and/or alcohol use are used by substantial minorities of workplaces; very few draw on intelligence/personality tests. Multilevel analyses demonstrate that organizational, environmental, and occupational properties are related to the five staffing methods Organizations display clear propensities to rely on a given method for selecting employees for different occupations, but there are substantial occupational variations in selection practices as well Differences are especially strong for physical examinations and drug/ alcohol tests, which are apt to be required in large, formalized establishments within multisite complexes; in unionized workplaces, and in non-managerial occupations In addition, drug tests are more often required when an establishment has a separate personnel/labor relations department, and when a large percentage of the employees in an occupation is male.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Baron, J.N., Davis-Blake, A. & Bielby, W.T.1986. The Structure of Opportunity: How Promotion Ladders Vary Within and Among Organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly38, 408-437.
2.
Baron, J.N., Dobbin, F.R. & Jennings, P.D.1986War and Peace: The Evolution of Modern Personnel Administration in U.S. Industry. American Journal of Sociology92, 248-273.
3.
Baron, J.N., Jennings, P.D. & Dobbin, F.R.1988. Mission Control? The Development of Personnel Systems in U S. IndustryAmerican Sociological Review53, 497-514.
4.
Barron, J.M. & Bishop, J 1985. Extensive Search, Intensive Search, and Hiring Costs: New Evidence on Employer Hiring Activity. Economic Inquiry23, 363-382.
5.
Bryk, A.S. & Raudenbush, S.W.1992. Hierarchical Linear ModelsNewbury Park, CA: Sage.
Daft. R.L.1986. Organization Theory and Design, Second Edition. New York: West.
8.
Davis, J.A. & Smith, T.W.1991. General Social Surveys, 1972-1991: Cumulative Codebook . Storrs, CT: Roper Center for Public Opinion Research.
9.
Davis, J.A. & Smith. T.W.1992. The NORC General Social Survey: A User's Guide. Newbury Park, CASage.
10.
Dobbin, F.R., Edelman, L., Meyer, J.W., Scott. W.R. & Swidler, A.1988The Expansion of Due Process in Organizations. In L. G. Zucker (ed.), Institutional Patterns and Organizations Culture and Environment, pp. 71-98. Cambndge, MA: Ballinger
11.
Dobbin, F.R., Sutton. J.R. , Meyer, J.W. & Scott, W.R.1993Equal Opportunity Law and the Construction of Internal Labor Markets. American Journal of Sociology99, 396-427.
12.
Dunn, G.1989. Design and Analysis of Rehability Studies: The Statistical Evaluation of Measurement Errors. London: Edward Arnold.
13.
Edelman, L.B.1990. Legal Environments and Organizational Governance: The Expansion of Due Process in the Amencan Workplace. American Journal of Sociology95, 1401-1440.
14.
Herman, S.J.1994. Hiring Right : A Practical GuideThousand Oaks, CA. Sage.
15.
Jacobs, D.1981. Toward a Theory of Mobility and Behavior in Organizations: An Inquiry into the Consequences of Some Relationships between Individual Performance and Organizational Success. American Journal of Sociology87, 684-707.
16.
Jacoby, S.M.1985. Employing Bureaucracy: Managers, Unions, and the Transformation of Work in American Industry, 1900-1945. New York: Columbia University Press.
17.
Marsden, P.V.1994. The Hiring Process: Recruitment Methods. American Behavioral Scientist37, 979-991.
18.
Marsden, P.V. & Campbell, K.E.1990. Recruitment and Selection Processes: The Organizational Side of Job Searches In R. L. Breiger (ed.), Social Mobility and Social Structure , pp. 59-79. New York: Cambridge University Press.
19.
Marsden, P.V., Cook, C.R. & Kalleberg, A.L.1994. Organizational Structures: Coordination and Control. American Behavioral Scientist37, 911-929.
20.
Marsden, P.V., Cook, C.R. & Knoke, D 1994. Measuring Organizational Structures and Environments. American Behavioral Scientist37, 891-910.
21.
Nakao, K. & Treas, J.1994. Updating Occupational Prestige and Socioeconomic Scores: How the New Measures Measure Up. In P. V. Marsden (ed.), Sociological Methodology 1994, pp. 1-72. Oxford , UK: Blackwell Publishers.
22.
Olian, J.D. & Rynes, S.L.1984. Organizational Staffing: Integrating Practice with Strategy . Industrial Relations23, 170-183.
23.
Osterman, P.1994. How Common is Workplace Transformation and Who Adopts it? Industrral and Labor Relations Review47, 173-188.
24.
Parcel, T.L., Kaufman, R.L. & Jolly, L.1991Going Up the Ladder: Multiplicity Samphng to Create Linked Macro-to-Micro Organizational Samples. In P V. Marsden (ed ) Sociological Methodology 1991, pp. 43-79Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell, Ltd.
25.
Paterson, L.1991. Multilevel Logistic Regression. In R. Prosser, J. Rasbash & H Goldstein (eds.), Data Analysis with ML 3, pp 5-18. London, UK: Institute of Education, University of London
26.
Prosser, R., Rasbash, J. & Goldstein, H.1991ML3: Software for Multilevel Analysis User's Guide for V.2. London, UK: Institute of Education, University of London.
27.
Rees, A.1966. Information Networks in Labor Markets. American Economic Review56, 559-566.
28.
Reskin, B.1993. Sex Segregation in the Workplace. Annual Review of Sociology19, 241-70.
Spaeth, J.L. & O'Rourke, D.P.1994Design and Implementation of a National Probability Sample of Work Establishments. American Behavioral Scientist37, 872-890.
31.
Winship, C. & Radbill, L.1994. Sampling Weights and RegressionAnalysis Sociological Methods and Research22, (forthcoming).
