 Being Selected for Critical Job AssignmentsInes Wichert Chapter 3 in Where Have All the Senior Women Gone?, 2011, pp 29-41 from Palgrave Macmillan Abstract: Abstract Most of us know relatively little about the decision-making processes that go on when senior managers decide whom to promote or whom to select for a crucial assignment. This is not surprising, as many decision-makers are probably not even fully aware themselves of all the reasons for making their decisions. Biases in decision-making are rarely overt and we are often not aware of how our own deeply held prejudices influence our decisions and actions on a daily basis. In an ideal world, all roles would be advertised widely and contain clearly specified success criteria, which would then be assessed consistently at the selection stage. The process would be completely transparent, objective and fair to all. However, this is not always the case in reality, and while good selection processes and training help to make the overall process fairer and more objective, best practice is not always in place. Furthermore, the more senior an appointment, the more subjective the selection criteria become and the fewer objective selection tools, such as reasoning tests or work simulation exercises, are routinely used. Keywords: Personal Achievement; Glass Ceiling; Hewlett Packard; Promotion Decision; Unwritten Rule (search for similar items in EconPapers) There are no downloads for this item, see the EconPapers FAQ for hints about obtaining it. Related works: Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:pal:palchp:978-0-230-35425-8_3 Ordering information: This item can be ordered from Access Statistics for this chapter More chapters in Palgrave Macmillan Books from Palgrave Macmillan |
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to .
EconPapers is hosted by the
School of Business at Örebro University.