Skip to main content

The Influences of Recruitment Processes and Selection Predictors on New Employee Safety

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
New Employee Safety

Abstract

New employee safety is partly determined by how members of an organization behave toward them when they begin work. Research suggests that how members of an organization behave toward a new employee is partly determined by the employees’ perceptions of what the organization has done during the recruitment and selection processes (what they have done to hire the new employee). Where employees think that organizational processes have successfully delivered a new employee who is able to, and will work safely, they may be less inclined to engage in behaviors to ensure the new employee’s, or indeed their own, safety. In this chapter, research on how employees perceive recruitment and selection processes, and how these perceptions can influence the employees’ perception of new employee risk, and how they behave toward a new employee is discussed. This chapter also examines recruitment and selection processes, with a particular emphasis on methods which can be used by an organization to assess (predict) a new employee’s safety behavior. Recommendations for the adoption of recruitment and selection processes, and procedures to ensure employees correctly perceive the organization’s ability to predict new employee safety behavior, and ways of ensuring employees behave appropriately toward new employees, are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Arthur, W, Jr, Woehr, D. J., & Graziano, W. G. (2001). Personality testing in employment settings: Problems and issues in the application of typical selection practices. Personnel Review, 30(6), 657–676.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aschenbrenner, M., & Biehl, B. (1994). Improving safety through improved technical measures? Empirical studies regarding risk compensation processes in relation to anti-lock brake systems. In R. M. Trimpop & G. J. S. Wilde (Eds.), Changes in accident prevention: The issue of risk compensation. Groningen, The Netherlands: Styx Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barclay, J. M. (2001). Improving selection interviews with structure: Organisations’ use of behavioral interviews. Personnel Review, 30(1–2), 81–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (1991). The Big Five personality dimensions and job performance: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44, 1–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brannick, M. T., Levine, E. L., & Morgeson, F. P. (2007). Job and work analysis: Methods, research and applications for human resources management. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Breaugh, J. A. (2008). Employee recruitment: Current knowledge and important areas for future research. Human Resource Management Review, 18, 103–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Breaugh, J. A. (2013). Employee recruitment. Annual Review of Psychology, 64, 389–416.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Breaugh, J. A., & Starke, M. (2000). Research on employee recruitment: So many studies, so many remaining questions. Journal of Management, 26(3), 405–434.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burt, C. D. B., Chmiel, N., & Hayes, P. (2009). Implications of turnover for safety attitudes and behaviour in work teams. Safety Science, 47, 1002–1006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burt, C. D. B., & Hislop, H. (2013). Developing safety specific trust in new recruits: The dilemma and a possible solution. Journal of Health, Safety and Environment, 29(3), 161–173.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burt, C. D. B., & Stevenson, R. J. (2009). The relationship between recruitment processes, familiarity, trust, perceived risk and safety. Journal of Safety Research, 40, 365–369.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Campion, M. A., Palmer, D. K., & Campion, J. E. (1997). A review of structure in the selection interview. Personnel Psychology, 50, 655–702.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chao, E. L. & Henshaw, J. L. (2002). Job hazard analysis. OSHA publication 3071 2002 (revised). Occupational safety and health administration, US Department of Labor, Washington.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christian, M. S., Bradley, J. C., Wallace, J. C., & Burke, M. J. (2009). Workplace safety: A meta-analysis of the roles of person and situation factors. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(5), 1103–1127.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, S., & Robertson, I. T. (2005). A meta-analytic review of the Big Five personality factors and accident involvement in occupational and non-occupational settings. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 78, 355–376.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, S., & Robertson, I. T. (2008). An examination of the role of personality in work accidents using meta-analysis. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 57(1), 94–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, A. (1977). Factors in successful occupational safety programs. Journal of Safety Research, 9, 168–178.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conchie, S. M., & Donald, I. J. (2008). The functions and development of safety-specific trust and distrust. Safety Science, 46, 92–103.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cui, L., Fan, D., Fu, G., & Zhu, C. J. (2013). An integrative model of organizational safety behavior. Journal of Safety Research, 45, 37–46.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dahlback, O. (1990). Personality and risk-taking. Personality and Individual Differences, 11, 1235–1242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dahlback, O. (1991). Accident-proneness and risk-taking. Personality and Individual Differences, 12, 79–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eysenck, S. B. G., & Eysenck, H. J. (1977). The place of impulsiveness in a dimensions system of personality description. British Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 16, 57–68.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Flanagan, (1954). The critical incident technique. Psychological Bulletin, 51, 327–358.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fleishman, E. A., & Reilly, M. E. (1995). Handbook of human abilities: Definitions, measurement, and job task requirements. Management Research Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ford, M. T., & Wiggins, B. K. (2012). Occupational-level interactions between physical hazards and cognitive ability and skill requirements in predicting incidence rates. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 17(3), 268–278.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Glendon, A. I., Hoyes, T. W., Haigney, D. E., & Taylor, R. G. (1996). A review of risk homeostasis theory in simulated environments. Safety Science, 22, 15–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grandell-Niemi, H., Hupli, M., Leino-Kipli, H., & Puukka, P. (2003). Medication calculation skills of nurses in Finland. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 12, 519–528.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Grandjean, E. (1985). Fitting the task to the man: An ergonomic approach. London: Taylor & Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grant, B. A. & Smiley, A. (1993). Driver response to antilock brakes: A demonstration of behavioral adaption. In Proceedings, Canadian Multidisciplinary Road safety Conference VIII, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, June 14–16, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada: University of Saskatchewan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood, M., & Woods, H. M. (1919). A report on the incidence of industrial accidents with special reference to multiple accidents. Report 4, Industrial Fatigue Research Board.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hogan, J., & Foster, J. (2013). Multifaceted personality predictors of workplace safety performance: More than conscientiousness. Human Performance, 26, 20–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hsiao, H. (2013). Anthropometric procedures for protective equipment sizing and design. Human Factors, 55(1), 6–35.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Huffcutt, A. I. (2011). An empirical review of the employment interview construct literature. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 19(1), 62–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kethley, R. B., & Terpstra, D. E. (2005). An analysis of litigation associated with the use of the application form in the selection process. Public Personnel Management, 34(4), 357–375.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, S., & Bro, R. (2008). Regional differences in world human body dimensions: The multi-way analysis approach. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 9(4), 325–345.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levashina, J., Hartwell, C. J., Morgenson, F. P., & Campion, M. A. (2014). The structured employment interview: Narrative and quantitative review of the research literature. Personnel Psychology, 67(1), 241–293.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. (1990). Personality in adulthood. New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • McEvily, B., Perrone, V., & Zaheer, A. (2003). Trust as an organizing principle. Organization Science, 14, 91–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGovern, P. M., Vesley, D., Kochevar, L., Gershon, R., Rhame, F. S., & Anderson, E. (2000). Factors affecting universal precaution compliance. Journal of Business and Psychology, 15, 149–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McMullan, M., Jones, R., & Lea, S. (2010). Patient safety: Numerical skills and drug calculation abilities of nursing students and registered nurses. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 66(4), 891–899.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Morgeson, F. P., & Campion, M. A. (1997). Social and cognitive sources of potential inaccuracy in job analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(5), 627–655.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morgeson, F. P., Campion, M. A., Dipboye, R. L., Hollenbeck, J. R., Murphy, K., & Schmitt, N. (2007). Reconsidering the use of personality tests in personnel selection contexts. Personnel Psychology, 60(3), 683–729.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neal, A., & Griffin, M. A. (2004). Safety climate and safety at work. In J. Barling & M. Frone (Eds.), The psychology of work place safety (pp. 15–34). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Pelot, R. P., Dwyer, J. W., Deakin, J. M., & McCabe, J. F. (1999). The design of a simulated forcible entry test for fire fighters. Applied Ergonomics, 30, 137–146.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Postlethwaite, B., Robbins, S., Rickerson, J., & McKinniss, T. (2009). The moderation of conscientiousness by cognitive ability when predicting workplace safety behavior. Personality and Individual Differences, 47, 711–716.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prien, E. P., Goodstein, L. D., Goodstein, J., & Gamble, L. G. (2009). A practical guide to job analysis. San Francisco: Pfeiffer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Probst, T. M., Graso, M., Estrada, A. X., & Greer, S. (2013). Consideration of future safety consequences: A new predictor of employee safety. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 55, 124–134.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ramsey, J. R. (1985). Ergonomic factors in task analysis for consumer product safety. Journal of Occupational Accidents, 7, 113–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rozenfeld, O., Sacks, R., & Rosenfeld, Y. (2009). CHASTE—construction hazard analysis with spatial and temporal exposure. Construction Management and Economics, 27(7), 625–638.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rozenfeld, O., Sacks, R., Rosenfeld, Y., & Baum, H. (2010). Construction job safety analysis. Safety Science, 48, 491–498.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rundmo, T. (1996). Associations between risk perception and safety. Safety Science, 24, 197–209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rundmo, T., & Hale, A. R. (2003). Managers attitudes towards safety and accidents prevention. Safety Science, 41, 557–574.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salgado, J. E. (1997). The five factor model of personality and job performance in the European community. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 30–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. (1998). The validity and utility of selection methods in personnel psychology: Practical and theoretical implications of 85 years of research findings. Psychological Bulletin, 124(2), 262–274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scroggins, W. A., Thomas, S. L., & Morris, J. A. (2009). Psychological testing in personnel selection, part III: The resurgence of personality testing. Public Personnel Management, 38(1), 67–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simonet, S., & Wilde, G. J. S. (1997). Risk: Perception, acceptance and homeostasis. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 46(3), 235–252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, M. J., Cohen, H. H., Cohen, A., & Cleveland, R. J. (1978). Characteristics of successful safety programs. Journal of Safety Research, 10, 5–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, D. E., & Thompson, T. A. (1982). Court standards for job analysis in test validation. Personnel Psychology, 35, 865–874.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Visser, E., Pijl, Y. J., Stolk, R. P., Neeleman, J., & Rosmalen, J. G. M. (2007). Accident proneness, does it exist? A review and meta-analysis. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 39, 556–564.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Walker, A. (2013). Outcomes associated with breach and fulfillment of the psychological contract of safety. Journal of Safety Research, 47, 31–37.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Walker, A., & Hutton, D. H. (2006). The application of the psychological contract to workplace safety. Journal of Safety Research, 37, 433–441.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wallace, J. C., & Vodanovich, S. J. (2003). Workplace safety performance: Conscientiousness, cognitive failure and their interaction. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 8(4), 316–327.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wilde, G. J. S., Robertson, L. S., & Pless, I. B. (2002). For and against: Does risk homoeostasis theory have implications for road safety. British Medical Journal, 324, 1149–1152.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, M. (2012). The handbook of work analysis: Methods, systems, applications and science of work measurement in organizations. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wood, R., & Payne, T. (1998). Competency-based recruitment and selection. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christopher D. B. Burt .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Burt, C.D.B. (2015). The Influences of Recruitment Processes and Selection Predictors on New Employee Safety. In: New Employee Safety. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-18684-9_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics