To: Terry Lloyd-Executive Vice president
From: John Munro-Vice president of production
Subject: Recommendation for a primary and back-up candidate for the post of production manager.
The Pittsburgh plant has been trying to hire a new production manager to replace the former Pittsburgh production manager. We have received a number of applications for this post both internally and externally. However after an initial screening, the list of potential candidates has been reduced to eight names. Apart from the interviewing process, the eight potential candidates were subjected to several selection devices for testing both their soft and hard skills.
Of the eight potential candidates, my recommendation is to consider George martin as a primary candidate for the post and Jay Davis as a back-up candidate.
Mr. Martin is a MA degree holder in industrial relations from Cornell University. He has 14 years of experience of which 6 years in the capacity of production manager. His personality and interview rating was amongst the highest and his intelligence test score was above average. Mr Martin works for one of Dynamo’s competitors and therefore it was difficult for him to provide references as he is concerned about his current employer reaction. Having said that, it is imperative to find out if there is a non-competition agreement that could prevent him from joining us. At this critical stage Pittsburgh plant is going through, I strongly believe that Mr. Martin’s qualification and experience is needed to control the extremely high production cost and labour strife. Further, hiring Mr. Martin externally would be a good opportunity to bring a fresh perspective and new solutions to the problems Pittsburgh plant is facing.
Mr. Davis is a Harvard educated BA and MBA. He has been with Dynamo for the last 10 years and served as an Assistant PM for the last 7 years. His annual performance review shows that he has performed exceptionally and is ready for an immediate promotion. He had an overall good rating in the personality test and an exceptional ranking in intelligence test. He also scored an average of 5 out of 7 on the overall interview ratings. Promoting Mr. Davis as a plant manager will certainly motivate him to exert all his experience and knowledge to succeed in his new role and provide quick solutions to the challenges Pittsburgh plant is facing.

To: Jill Sinclair- Vice president Human Resources
From: John Munro-Vice president of production
Subject: Improvement of recruitment and selection process:
To ensure that key positions are filled effectively and in a timely fashion, and the overall improvement of the recruitment and selection process, I recommend the following to be taken into consideration: * Maintaining a pool of talents for key positions:
Building and maintaining a pool of talents creates and sustain competitive advantage for filling future key positions in a timely fashion. This pool usually consists of candidates’ profile of specific talents to fill future key vacancies. However, for this to succeed, it is imperative to define exactly what talents we will need in the foreseeable future to sustain the company’s growth. I suggest that HR department work closely with all other departments to identify and plan their future needs of human resources. * Reliability of the candidate’s selection tools:
There seems to be inconsistencies in the data provided by the tools used to assess potential candidates and the interview rating methodology. For example Mr. Doyle scored 6 out of 7 in performance rating and relatively high rating in promotability while the background information collected shows that he was ineffective as a production manager and was later removed from the position. Mr. Hall scored exceptionally high on the average interview rating while his rating on personality and intelligence were relevantly low. Further, there was huge interview rating variances per candidates by the four interviewers. For example on a scale of 7 Mr. Martine was rated 6.5 by the VP while rated 4 by Atlanta PM. Similarly, Mr. Davis was rated 3.5 by Columbus PM while was rated 6.5 by Atlanta PM. * Include work sample test to be part of the selection process:
Work Sample tests are designed on the basis that the best predictor of future behaviour is observed behaviour under similar situations. These tests require the examinee to perform tasks that are similar to those that are performed on the job. Results are often a good indicator of on the job future behaviour.

| Candidate | Age | Internal /external | Experience | Qualifications | Issues | | | 1 | G. Martin | 44 | External | 6PM+14 | BA+MA(industrial relations | No references available-works for a competitor and 6 years PM | | | 2 | T. Caciopo | 59 | Internal | 24+10 | High school | Health-issue/recent heart attack | | | 3 | K. Joyce | 36 | Internal | 5+2PM | BA | Only 2 years as PM | | | 4 | B. Fein | 49 | External | 25-5PM | Associate Degree (2 years) | Excellent references-his plant discontinued a product line and was let go | | | 5 | R. Jackson | 33 | Internal | 6-no PM exp. | BA + MBA | No enough experience-only 2 years assistant PM | | | 6 | J. Davis | 46 | Internal | 10-Assis. PM for 7 | BA+MBA Harvard | | | | 7 | F. Hall | 58 | External | 18 | BS chemistry | No references-O/S reviews in trade publications-works for Dynamo major competitor. However he seeks for a demotion | | | 8 | T. Doyle | 36 | Internal | 5 | BA +MBA | Young and Ineffective as a PM | | |

| Martin | Caciopo | Joyce | Fein | Jackson | Davis | hall | Doyle | Personality profile-max 15 | 14 | 14 | 10 | 7 | 6 | 11 | 7 | 10 | Intelligence test-max 8 | 4 | 3 | 7 | 5 | 2 | 8 | 1 | 6 | Handwriting-max 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 3 | Promotability-max 7 | - | 6 | 5 | - | 5.5 | 7 | - | 5.5 | Performance max 7 | - | 5 | 6 | - | 5 | 7 | - | 6 | Interview-max 7 | 5.75 | 5.25 | 5.75 | 3.75 | 5 | 5 | 6 | 5.5 | | 24.75 | 34.25 | 34.75 | 15.75 | 25.5 | 40 | 17 | 36 |