COM 220 Module 4 Communication in Hiring and Promotion Example

Honest Previews, Structured Interviews and Fair Explanations: Communicating Through a Hire and a Promotion

Student Name

Business Administration Program, Aspen University

COM 220: Management Communication

Instructor Name

Month Day, Year

Honest Previews, Structured Interviews and Fair Explanations: Communicating Through a Hire and a Promotion

Two personnel decisions are on Tasha Greene's desk. Bay Crest's community manager resigned after nine months, saying the job was nothing like the posting. At Palm Hollow, an assistant manager position has opened, and three current leasing agents have applied. Both decisions involve communication at every step, and the internal promotion carries a particular risk: two of the three candidates will not get the job, and how they hear that will shape whether they stay. This paper plans the communication.

What the Old Posting Said

The previous posting described "a dynamic leadership role in a beautiful community with competitive pay." It did not mention evening and weekend emergencies, the pressure from owners on occupancy or the hours spent on resident complaints. The manager who left said she felt misled, and the vacancy has already cost Bay Crest two months of slower leasing.

Realistic Previews

Premack and Wanous (1985) conducted a meta-analysis of experiments on realistic job previews, which give candidates an honest picture of a job's negative as well as positive features. They found that previews lowered candidates' initial expectations, increased the number who withdrew from consideration, raised organizational commitment and job satisfaction slightly and increased job survival. The effects were modest but consistent, and they suggested that an honest preview helps candidates decide whether the job fits them.

The new posting includes a short section titled "What this job is really like": responsibility for a 260-unit community, on call for emergencies one weekend in four, regular conversations with owners about occupancy and a share of difficult resident situations. Finalists will spend half a day shadowing another community manager.

Structuring the Interviews

Campion et al. (1997) reviewed research on structure in employment interviews and identified fifteen components. Some concern content: basing questions on a job analysis, asking every candidate the same questions, limiting follow-up prompting, using better question types such as situational and behavioral questions and limiting candidates' questions until the end. Others concern evaluation: rating each answer, using anchored rating scales, taking detailed notes, using several interviewers, keeping the same interviewers across candidates, not discussing candidates between interviews and training interviewers. Their conclusion was that structured interviews yield steadier ratings, predict later performance better and leave less room for bias.

Both interviews will use six standard questions based on the jobs' main duties, such as "Tell us about a time you handled a resident who was angry about a repair," with a rating guide describing poor, adequate and strong answers. The same two interviewers will see every candidate and rate independently before discussing.

Fairness in the Eyes of Candidates

Gilliland (1993) applied organizational justice to selection and proposed rules candidates use to judge whether a process is fair. They include formal characteristics, such as job relatedness, a chance to show one's abilities, a chance for reconsideration and consistency; explanations, such as timely and informative feedback, information about the process and honesty; and interpersonal treatment, such as respect, two-way communication and appropriate questions. Fair processes, he argued, affect candidates' reactions, their intentions to accept offers and, for current employees, their later attitudes.

Telling the Internal Candidates

Tasha will meet each of the two leasing agents not chosen, privately, on the morning of the announcement. She will thank them, state the decision clearly, explain the main reasons with reference to the interview results and give each two specific strengths and one area to develop. She will offer each a development step, such as leading the next resident event or training on renewals, and schedule a follow-up conversation in three months. She will also listen: an internal candidate who feels the process was unfair is more likely to say so in a private meeting than later, and hearing it gives Tasha a chance to explain or to learn something about the process.

The Offer Call

The chosen candidates will hear by phone within two days of the final interview, from Tasha herself, with the offer details followed by a written letter the same day. Gilliland's rules include timely feedback, and long silences after interviews are among the most common complaints candidates make about hiring. Outside candidates who reach the final round but are not chosen will receive a call rather than an email, with a brief explanation and an invitation to apply for future openings.

Preparing the Interviewers

The two interviewers, Tasha and Rob Delgado, Palm Hollow's community manager, will spend an hour together before the interviews agreeing on what strong, adequate and weak answers look like for each question, using examples from real situations at Harborline. Campion and colleagues listed interviewer training among the components of structure, and agreement on the rating guide in advance keeps the interviewers from judging candidates by different standards. They will also agree not to look at candidates' resumes during the interview itself, so ratings rest on the answers given.

The Announcement

The staff announcement will introduce the new assistant manager, describe the process and note that all candidates were strong. It goes out by email and is repeated in person at Palm Hollow's next staff meeting, where the new assistant manager can say a few words and staff can ask how the role will change their work. Tasha will avoid naming the other candidates, whose interest in the job was not public, and will not compare them with the person chosen.

Conclusion

Premack and Wanous support an honest preview, Campion, Palmer and Campion show how structure improves interviews and Gilliland shows which parts of the process candidates judge. Planned communication at each step makes both decisions fairer and more likely to last.

References

Campion, M. A., Palmer, D. K., & Campion, J. E. (1997). A review of structure in the selection interview. Personnel Psychology, 50(3), 655-702. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1997.tb00709.x

Gilliland, S. W. (1993). The perceived fairness of selection systems: An organizational justice perspective. Academy of Management Review, 18(4), 694-734. https://doi.org/10.2307/258595

Premack, S. L., & Wanous, J. P. (1985). A meta-analysis of realistic job preview experiments. Journal of Applied Psychology, 70(4), 706-719. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.70.4.706