Case Study a

1. JOB ANANLYSIS AND HIRING
DECISIONS AT OVANIA
CHEMICALS
By-
Aarathy Jayakrishnan
Amrita Banerjee
Agil V Joseph
Ananth Kumar
Anuroop
Vipul K

2. SYNOPSIS OF THE CASE STUDY
 Ovania Chemical Corporation – one of the smallest,
 successful chemical producers.
 Core product - PET(Polyethylene terephthalate) thermoplastic resins.
 Due to technological advances, Ovania is modernizing its facilities.

3.  The company decided to redesign it’s employees jobs.
 E.g. Boucherville Plant
 The plant needed new System Analysers to monitor the individual steps
and the processes of the processes.

4.  Pneumatics, Job
 Hydraulics
Specification
 IT
 Programming
 Electrical Wiring
 Finger Dexterity
 Mechanical Compensation,
 Numerical Ability,
 Spatial Ability,
 Visual Pursuit,
 Detection.

5. Three men currently working and three new men were to be recruited.
 The consultants did job analysis and found out the job description.

6. Job
description
 Maintaining spares and supplies
 Handling revisions and new installations
 Trouble Shooting
 Record Keeping
 Routing Maintenance

7.  The panel will qualify a candidate only if he/she had all the above qualities
mandatorily.
 The committee decided to recruit the new blood as well as promote within
the organization.
 Current System Analysers – encouraged to reapply for the job.

8.  For next two years, no change in positions.
 For the recruitment, only ability and aptitude factors are considered and not
the achievement tests.
 Some of the committee members doubt if women and the minority members
have the credentials to compete for the position.
 The panel adopted new strategy to encourage minorities and
women, ignoring past employment history.

9.  A concern that Ovania will be accused of prejudices if women or members
of minority are hired.
 Managers are committed to make fair and objective decisions.
 56 employees applied; women-21, visible minorities- 15, current system
analyzers-2/3.
 Selection criteria: Cut off of 800 in twelve tests, resulted in 20 primary
candidate.

10.  For the specific job of system analyzer, no normative or validity data.
 Test battery could be defended based on the content validity.
 Selection committee is having a difficult time to combine the multiple predictors
to reach the final cut-off scores.

11. SOLUTIONS
 Two of the three existing System Analysts are reapplying for the job
 Shows they are interested to work with the new technologies.
 The organization must motivate
 training them for the new job
 allow them to continue in the same field of work.
 Already have basic knowledge about the field

12.  Could collaborate with a consultancy to carry on and
understand the recruitment process better
 Consultancy might have better knowledge
 How the other organizations are conducting their recruitment processes.
 One female, minority member could be present in the panel
 To avoid prejudice charges.

13. System Analysts working in other organizations
 offering them attractive Salary packages.

14. QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
1. How would you go about conducting a job analysis for a
job that does not yet exist?
“A future oriented approach to job analysis”
Strategic analysis
Clear idea of how job should be restructured meeting organizational needs.
Identifying “TDR” of job that satisfy the organizational requirement.
Identify the key “KSAs”

15. Take the subject matter experts(managers, supervisors , etc…)
opinion
Assemble them in a workshop to understand how future issues are
likely to affect the job.
Knowledgeable individuals are consulted for the expected job
changes in future and the KSA’s that they have
the present V/s future job changes are identified
Tasks and KSA’s having greatest changes are isolated

16. 2. Do you think the abilities chosen for selection are content valid? What other
predictors might be generally useful for employee selection?
 Yes Content Valid
 Abilities match the skills required for the job
 The other predictors include
 Motivation
 Team work,
 Adaptability because of changing environment,
 The mentality to take up initiatives.

17. 3. What reasons did the selection committee have for selecting only those
factors which could be acquired through a two- year training program?
 The company was ready to take up candidates with the skills that could
be developed in a period if two years to satisfy the job requirements. As
the requirement of the job was not immediate, they wanted to hire
candidates with the skills that could be developed by training.

18. 4. Should the concern for women getting down into the dirty treatment tanks
have been a selection issue ? How might you include this factor in a
selection battery?
 Yes, the concern for women getting down into the dirty treatment tanks
have been a selection issue . The management feels that women might not
find it comfortable to perform such jobs.
 This factor could be resolved by asking for the approval of the women
candidates during the time of their selection for the system analyst position.

19. 5. For the abilities termed critical what score should someone receive in order to
be considered scoring “well” on that test? How should the test scores be
combined( ex. Compensatory, multiple hurdle, combination)?
 For abilities termed critical , a score of 80 can be considered as doing well on
the test.
 Test score should be combined in a multiple hurdle method because we need
people who are good in each of these critical areas. If we used a compensatory
or combination method, candidate who are very good in one field and
average or below average in another might also get selected, which would
hinder the performance of the company.

20. 6. Which three candidates seem most qualified? What are your reservations , if
any , about this recommendation?
 The three candidates who qualify the most are Sara E, Sherman A, and Snell
J. Some reservations we might have for these recommendations are
 Two are females
 All are whites
 Two of them are internal employees

21. 7. Would this test battery and selection procedure be defensible in
court?
 Yes, they can be defensible because the candidates are selected based on the
scores given here. Hence the factul data provided supports our selection .

22. IMPLICATIONS
Well Defined
Allying JOBS To
“TDR” And
Future
“KSA” For Any
Requirement
Job
Choose Right Avoid
Candidates. Discriminations

23. THANK YOU