Rishi Desai
Section 13A
ComInTec Case Study

a. What strengths and shortcomings do you see in new system? The new recruiting system had its strengths and shortcomings. Their decision on using a two-tiered system to make a final decision on the selection of personnel was a strength because it allowed them to filter candidates better. The first tier consisted of viewing the applicants’ documents, a telephone conference in an unstructured manner with the applicants, and obtaining three references from former employers. These three modules were related to background research of the applicant. The Second Tier included a panel interview, a biography oriented in-depth interview, a simulated group exercise, and testing. They used the 6-eye method to view the application documents for each candidate. This method involved the use of a 3 person team evaluating the applicants’ documentation. This gave the company a broad perspective on each candidate. This also allowed them to screen out candidates that were obvious mismatches in relation to the job. This was followed by interviewing the candidates via telephone with the attendees being the candidate and a two person team that consisted the Supervisor at the APAC site and one person from the German headquarters. The purpose of this was to verify the candidate’s suitability for the position, his/her motivation for the position, and to gain an overall impression of the candidate. If a consensus was reached that the candidate was suitable for the position then they would be asked for three references. Asking for the references would allow the company to filter out any cheaters or impostors like they had done successfully in Europe. References could also give them more information about the candidate in relation to education, employment history, character and interpersonal competence, ability to perform the job, and the willingness of the past or current employer to rehire the applicant. The second tier consisted of 4 modules. The panel interview allowed the company to figure out competencies of the applicants, the validity of required skills, and some additional in-depth information about the candidate. The biography oriented interview provided valid data about the candidate. The testing procedures tested the candidate for “general intelligence” and the “big five”. The group exercise tested the candidate’s ability to work in teams and lead teams. Even with these strengths, there are some shortcomings in these procedures. For example, Asians try to keep harmony with others and care about what others think of them. As a result, the reference system might actually backfire as former employees might not provide an accurate recommendation. There is also an issue with the biography-oriented in-depth interview. According to the new system, this step is geared towards gaining general information about the applicant. Instead the focus here should be on job requirements. The current system may not be able to provide valid data about the applicant if the interview becomes too general. The simulated group interview also has its faults as it requires three other role players. The group interview might not allow the candidate to display their full potential as the role play might be limited to certain aspects only. The last flaw that I see in the system is that they are assuming that each country would be able to adopt these procedures without any hiccups. Koch knows this all too well that it is important to adapt to a country’s culture but by standardizing this entire process, they would actually be limiting themselves in regards to who they can hire. This might not necessarily be a good thing from a growth perspective. Any company needs good leaders to make it successful. If they can’t adapt then they would be limiting their own growth. b. If you were consulting the project team, what would you recommend? I would recommend that the team come up with a recruiting process that is adaptable to each country that it will be applied in. The problem with the new system is that it does not factor cultural differences in the hiring process. In fact, the cultural difference is visible in the very same meeting room where these recommendations are being made. The Asian employees have a hard time standing up to others and feel embarrassed when opposed. On the flip side, the Germans show the typical Western character of a strong opinion and openly disapproving of others opinions. The team should try and understand each other’s culture first and foremost before coming up with a solution. If they can’t even identify their own differences, how in the world are they going to hire people in different countries? The next recommendation would be that Koch should take more control of the situation and put the ship back on its course. It seems like due to the constant back and forth of the team members, Koch loses interest in the talks. However, as a leader he needs to control these things better so that the meeting doesn’t go off course. Members were constantly questioning each other’s suggestions which wasted a lot of time. Koch could have easily resolved this by making a decision. The third recommendation would be that team members be open to each other’s suggestions. It seems like everyone had their own agenda of making sure that their idea got implemented. Instead, they could have laid out all their ideas together and try to come up with a solution that would have been best for business. Koch could also have made a decision for them if there was uncertainty. From a system perspective, my only recommendation would be to not have a standardized recruiting process throughout the world. Each country has its own culture and ways of doing things. If you standardize things, then you could very well be swimming against the tide. Recruiting top talent is key for every organization to be successful. Google and Apple did not just become successful by hiring ordinary talent. A company needs to be flexible in its approaches if it is going to do business internationally. A standardized system means you are asking the country to adapt to your ways.