Selection of the candidates

1. Which two candidates would you select if you were a member of the recruiting committee?

2. Evaluate SG Cowen’s recruitment and selection processes. Offer your recommendations to improve the processes?

1. If I would have to hire and make decisions on the same I would have taken a decision with dual effect.

a) Being the firm’s associate I am actually vested within all its success that depends to a vast degree upon quality of staffs working for the firm and this will of course include the quality of new hires also.

b) Potential mistakes while identifying correct candidate who would make functional as well as cultural fit intended for the firm will definitely bear vast negative effect upon my credibility plus reputation (Edenborough, 2005).

First candidate- Based on above two premises, I think that most suitable amongst the four candidates were Natalya Gadlewska. She not mere carried a very strong background of academics and has both MBA as well as graduation degree from a renowned college and also her past employers referenced her very strongly (Compton and Nankervis, 2009). Some other characteristics that she had were that she was very ambitious and always ready to learn new thinks and practice hard work. She even made a good impression which revealed a go-together along with optimistic attitude towards work having all positive energy within. The reservations that two members had regarding her stiffness and getting uncomfortable while small talks and also her less-than-perfect English might possibly have impact on her capability to work properly with managers who did not really had extra merit options. I think she had all the needed social skills which were required in this workplace and thus she was capable to earn higher marks even from her earlier supervisors (Dessler & Teicher., Dessler and Teicher, 2004). Even a comment regarding her English was thought to be very superficial. After all this candidate was totally able to handle the graduate course from one amongst top programs for MBA in USA which needed not merely rigorous quantitative yet even qualitative knowledge and skills comprising of efficiency within the oral as well as written communication. Most probably the negativity about her English was her accent but still I think that even this peculiarity might in reality be very positive element in her character and also might add on a very unique touch towards her extra strong as well as extraordinary personality. Thus I feel this candidate was best to be chosen as the correct person for this post in the firm (Currie and Horsfield, 2000).

Second candidate- When it would be a situation to choose from remaining three of the candidates it would be an extra difficult situation as all the three of these had some or the other vitally strong points in their personality and had some or other positive quality that was counterbalanced the defender’s shortcomings which might turn to be detrimental for the future career of these candidates with the firm (Panaro, 2000). However as I have to select one more to fill the position I would ultimately support Andy Sanchez. Major concern regarding Andy was actually his undergraduate GPA that raised few queries regarding his academic capability. Provided the actual learning curve that this candidate will have to attain if he gets hired in the SG Cowen, few managers also were not very sure whether he would actually be able to learn fast or not. Anyways the explanations given by the candidate for the lower grades in his studies was running self business while doing studies was seen very reasonable, thus this could be considered and thought that he is a hardworking person. This showed his commitment towards his work and that he can handle two things at the same time (Edenborough, 2005). His scores in Sat as well as GMAT revealed his strong control over academic abilities as well. Thus, ignoring his undergraduate marks I would like to concentrate upon his optimistic characteristics and his actual interest in the investment banking as well as in the firm (Sibley, 1948).

Evaluation of SG Cowen’s recruitment process

Different elements of hiring procedure have actually been evaluated within following way: 

1) Talent Pool through which the candidates were hired- SG Cowen actually hires three types of applicants for the Associate positions. They are

a) Analysts who in reality have completed proper three years at firm as well as do never have had any education from any business school.

b) Summer interns who have been trained in the firm

c) Novel external hires who are from several business schools (Sparrow, 2006)

The firm used a pattern of informal interviews towards gauging interest of the students within their company (Wanous, 1980). Each nucleus school carried Team Captains who usually were alumni of the schools as well as were accountable for communication with candidates. Also this was tremendously beneficial because it gave students an opportunity to study and learn about banking sector. Moreover, students at the noncore schools of business did never have any such opportunity (Sibley, 2004).

Two rounds actually were conducted within the campus.  Initial round was generally conducted by the associate otherwise senior associate. Students were even tested for all of their cultural fit in such interviews. All this even helped in selection of candidates who would later be capable to work professionally and satisfactorily within the firm. At end of first round of the interview, the two otherwise three persons who were actually interviewing the candidates talked about their annotations about candidates as well as compared each other’s notes about these candidates. They also had a predetermined count of candidates who were to be selected after this round. Having a predetermined number of candidates whom they would forward to the next round may also result in leaving behind and avoidance of good candidates otherwise selection of a not too good person for the job who might not be very much appropriate and good (Wanous, 2008).

The procedure for making of collective decision lacked an appropriate structure. The procedure was seen to be more qualitative and less quantitative. The procedure also relied upon recruiting knowledge and skills of bankers who were extra suitable to assess job talent and skill of candidates which makes only a fraction of objective of the procedure of recruitment.

There were some real problems than can be observed in the collective decision making procedure, they were:

All 5 interviewers who actually interviewed candidate were made to entrust to use Yes, No and Maybe before initiation of interview process. Thus when they bring in their views regarding candidate to interviewer set, they were representing candidate whom they already have said ‘Yes’ as well as have already filled a position and therefore will try their level best to defend that particular position. Also there was observed is very less chance for change of this position even after any discussion (Sparrow, 2006). Even, when interviewers were forced to attain a position, there were more possibility of final decision getting extra towards political decision and not a scientific one.

In meeting held on Saturday all the interviewers committed to an agenda of Yes or No and were to provide reply in the same about the people whom they interviewed. At the time of post-lunch talking process, the final call was taken on candidate and the possibility of biasness was very high. The answer was closed and many people were pressurized towards Yes or No. There was very low chance for rest members to take part in the process.

There were also few positives of the firm’s hiring process and they were as follows:

1) The firm holds its interviewers responsible and accountable for quality of the candidates they carry thus making sure that only best and most effective candidates are chosen and brought in the firm.

2) It was also ensures by the firm that the bankers were never merely a partial within the process of selection and also that favoring candidates and students from own alma will hamper the selection process for which the interviewers will be responsible (STAFSUDD, 2003).

3) They hunted for right people having correct attitude towards work at the firm and also people who would like to go extra mile towards creation of jobs intended for themselves if needed.

4) Documenting down the comments as well as making of widespread notes regarding candidates also made the process easier and more effective (Ruiz, 2010)

• A major gap found was that whole process fraught along with uncertainty regarding assurance of acceptance of the offer by the candidate. The firm must carry an alternative for mitigating such a risk.
• The process got sandwiched in extra short time period and thus caused too much stress. This time must be increased with an aim to make the process extra smooth and long lasting
• The number of candidates hired through summer interns group must be enhanced as summer interns are people who are already aware about the workplace culture and type and attitude and thus will easily be able to adjust in the firm (Boring, 2007).
• Since much emphasis was laid on personal fit within the firm, it also is very hard to gauge any individual’s fit objectively. For eliminating such discrepancy the firm can also make these people answer MBTI which is very standardized test towards this field.

With all above mentioned recommendations and suggestions the firm can attain better candidates in extra smooth and hurdle free way and would also be able to retain them for longer period of time (Agranov, 2008).

References

Agranov, M. (2008). Flip-Flopping, Intense Primaries and the Selection of Candidates. SSRN Journal.

Boring, P. (2007). Affirmative Action and the Recruitment Process. ADFL, pp.21-22.

Compton, R. and Nankervis, A. (2009). Effective recruitment & selection practices. North Ryde, N.S.W.: CCH Australia.

Currie, J. and Horsfield, T. (2000). Recruitment & selection. Manchester: Open College.

Dessler & Teicher., Dessler, G. and Teicher, J. (2004). Recruitment & selection. Frenchs Forest, N.S.W.: Pearson Education Australia.

Edenborough, R. (2005). Assessment methods in recruitment, selection, and performance. London: Kogan Page.

Panaro, G. (2000). Employment law manual. Boston: Warren, Gorham & Lamont.

Ruiz, J. (2010). Plant Recruitment Limitation. Encuentro, 42(85).

Sibley, E. (2004). The recruitment, selection, and training of social scientists. New York: Social Science Research Council.

Sparrow, P. (2006). International recruitment, selection, and assessment. London: Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development.

Stafsudd, A. (2003). Recruitment policy vs. Recruitment process: espoused theory and theory-in-use. Academy of Management Proceedings, 2003(1), pp.G1-G6.

Wanous, J. (2008). Organizational entry. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley Pub. Co.