SELEKSI DAN PENEMPATANPSIKOLOGI INDUSTRI DAN ORGANISASI

Dosen : Laila Meiliyandrie I Wardani, PhD

Disusun Oleh :De Ani cyntya46113210010Eky Yohana46113210002Ellenoor Tasya46113210009

FAKULTAS PSIKOLOGIUNIVERSITAS MERCU BUANABEKASI2014

1. Pengertian

Pengertian seleksi adalah cara atau prosedur yang di pakai oleh perusahaan untuk mencari dan menyaring calon pegawai untuk mengisi suatu lowongan kerja.Pengertian penempatan adalah proses atau cara suatu perusahaan untuk menempatkan calon disuatu kedudukan atau jabatan tertentu.Seleksi dan penempatan merupakan fungsi batas atau fungsi dari komponen rentang-batas dari sistem. (Munandar, 2001).Seleksi dan penempatan adalah suatu proses yang berisi persyaratan dari kebijakan suatu perusahaan atau instansi yang bersangkutan untuk menyaring para pegawai yang akan melamar pekerjaan. Biasanya yang menyeleksi adalah bagian personalia, cara menyeleksinya menggunakan alat ukur yaitu dengan tes, kuisioner, wawancara dan lain-lain. Tugas seleksi dan penempatan sbb : Tugas Seleksi: Memilah dan menilai calon dengan alat ukur yang berisi persyaratan perusahaan atau instansi tersebut dan menyaring untuk di rekomendasikan kepada perusahaan. Tugas Penempatan : Menempatkan calon di suatu kedudukan berdasarkan bakat, minat, dan kecocokan.

2. Perbedaan Individual

Perbedaan Individual sering sekali di golongkan dan di kaitkan dengan perbedaan kelamin, perbedaan kebudayaan, status pendidikan, perbedaan usia, maupun perbedaan agama. Yang terpenting sebenarnya bukan perbedaannya tetapi dapat lulus dari persyaratan yang di berikan oleh perusahaan dan dapat memenuhi kriteria perusahaan tersebut. Adapun perbedaan individual berdasarkan kapasitas memori. Studi meneliti perbedaan individu dalam bekerja kapasitas memori telah mengemukakan bahwa individu dengan kapasitas memori kerja yang rendah menunjukkan penurunan kinerja dan tugas memori dibandingkan dengan individu dengan kapasitas memori kerja yang tinggi. Memori kerja terbatas ini dapat dipahami dari timbulnya 2 komponen : komponen perhatian dinamis (primer memory) dan tergantung isyarat pencarian komponen probabilistik (memori sekunder). (Engle, 2007). Kerangka kerja ini digunakan untuk menguji perbedaan individu sebelumnya pada studi kapasitas memori kerja. (Engle, 2007). Kapasitas memori seseorang sangat berpengaruh penting untuk seorang pekerja dalam mengingat, memahami, dan mempertahankan informasi apa saja dan dapat mencapai tujuan dari tugas yang diberikan.

3. Metode dan Strategi

Ada 2 macam strategi seleksi yang mendasar menurut (Munandar, 2001) yaitu :1. Pengumpulan data MekanikalData yang dikumpulkan telah berpatokan pada pedoman, peraturan, dan prosedur yang telah ada. Pengolahan data mekanikal dapat di lakukan oleh siapa saja atau orang yang bukan sarjana psikologi2. Pengumpulan data secara KlinikalData yang dikumpulkan boleh keluar dari pedoman yang ada, data tergantung dari seorang psikolog yang mengumpulkannya. Pengolahan data klinikal harus dilakukan oleh ahli sarjana psikologi dan lebih bermanfaat jika dimanfaatkan oleh ahlinya.Ada 6 strategi diteliti oleh Sawyer dan hasilnya di ringkas oleh Campbel dkk (1970) : Interpretasi Profil. Mengumpulkan data secara mekanikal dan diolah secara klasikal. Statistikal Murni. Mengumpulkan data dan mengolah secara mekanikal. Klinikal Murni. Mengumpulkan dan mengolah secara klinikal. Pengharkatan Perilaku (Behaviour Rating). Mengumpulkan data secara klinikal dan mengolah data secara mekanikal. Gabugan Klinikal. Mengumpulkan data secara mekanikal dan klinikal dan mengolah secara klinikal. Gabungan Mekanikal. Mengumpulkan data secara mekanikal dan klinikal mengolah secara mekanikal.Keuntungan dan kelemahan metode statistikal dan klinikal menurut (Munandar, 2001) ialah :Keuntungan dari metode statistikal Kecermatan dalam menyatakan besarnya kemungkinan timbulnya satu taraf perilaku kerja tertentu. Pengetahuan diperoleh dari belajar melalui pengalaman-pengalaman yang tepat yang berkaitan dengan perilaku kerja yang berbeda-beda.Kelemahan metode stastistikal Kesulitannya untuk mengadakan kajian-kajian validasi dan validasi silang. Kesulitan untuk menggunakannya untuk memperoleh keputusan yang benar-benar diindividualisasiKeuntungan metode klinikal Setiap orang ditangani dengan cara lebih sesuai dengan dirinya. Psikologmenggunakan keterampilan khusus dan pengalamannya.Kelemahan metode klinikal Hanya ada sedikit pengetahuan sebelumnya tentang ketepatan pengambilan keputusan tetntang di terima atau tolaknya berdasarkan metode klinis. Masalah pembentukan kesan-kesan, dan aturan optimal untuk mengkombinasikan informasi dengan bentuk ramalan.

4. Proses Seleksi

Dibawah ini adalah tahap-tahap proses seleksi menurut (Munandar, 2001).

Tahap 1 Pencarian Calon Tenaga Kerja

Pencarian calon tenaga kerja dilakukan melalui :

A. Iklan di harian-harian, media cetak dan lainnya.B. Pendekatan langsung kesekolah-sekolah atau lembaga pendidikan kejuruan.C. Para tenaga kerjanya sendiri yang mengajukan kenalan atau anggota keluarganya yang dapat mereka jamin kebaikan kerja mereka.D. Pencari kerja melamar sendiri ke perusahaan-perusahaan.

Tahap 2 Seleksi Calon Tenaga KerjaSecara garis besar proses seleksi berlangsung sesuai dengan tahapan-tahapan berikut :A. Tahap I : Seleksi Surat-surat LamaranB. Tahap II : Wawancara AwalC. Tahap III : Ujian, Psikotes, Wawancara.D. Tahap IV : Penilaian AkhirE. Tahap V : Pemberitahuan dan Wawancara AkhirF. Tahap VI : Penerimaan.Penelitian melaporkan temuan data survei pada perekrutan dan metode seleksi pra kerja yang digunakan oleh departemen sumber daya manusia di Perusahaan-perusahaan besar di Amerika Serikat. Selain itu, data tentang penggunaan pra kerja secara online tes, dalam waktu dekat ini, akan dikumpulkan. Analisis ini didasarkan pada tanggapan dari 151 perusahaan. (Piotrowski, 2006). Temuan menunjukkan bahwa sebagian besar perusahaan mengandalkan tradisional rekrutmen dan seleksi tenaga teknik daripada penggunaan online tes. Tes kepribadian populer di sekitar 20% dari perusahaan dan seperlima dari responden berencana untuk menerapkan secara online pengujian di masa depan. Selain itu, skrining untuk kejujuran integritas (28,5%) dan potensi kekerasan (22%) ditemukan menjadi agak populer. Ini akan sangat membantu jika penelitian masa depan bisa menentukan pemesanan yang perusahaan memiliki sekitar tes pra-kerja online. Tes psikologi dan instrumen penilaian yang ketuk calon kepribadian karyawan, gaya interpersonal, dan respon terhadap stres situasi telah menerima peningkatan perhatian dari kedua manusia profesional sumber daya dan peneliti di I / O psikologi selama masa 20 tahun lalu. (Piotrowski, 2006).Dalam proses seleksi ada juga yang disebut dengan rekrutmen, yaitu penarikan tenaja kerja bedasarkan kebutuhan dan proses bisnis perusahaan tersebut. Di bawah ini adalah skema Rekrutmen & Seleksi.

Test

Cek ReferensiPenawaran PekerjaanPemeriksaan KesehatanMenilai STARMengumpulkan STARIdentifikasi Kompetensi JabatanWawancara PanelWawancara BiasaPenutupan WawancaraPokok WawancaraMembuka WawancaraPersiapan WawancaraTahap-tahapWawancaraMetode Wawancara PerilakuJenis WawancaraWawancaraAssesment CenterWork Sample TestPersonality TestAptitude TestSeleksi Daftar Riwayat Hidup

Gambar 4.1 Skema Rekrutmen & Seleksi.Sumber : Pedoman Lengkap Profesional SDM Indonesia. Jakarta: PPM. Hal : 266

5. Pusat-pusat Penaksiran (Assessment Centers)

Metode Pusat Penaksiran merupakan prosedur yang komprehensif dan baku dimana banyak teknik-teknik assessment digunakan dalam kombinasi untuk menilai orang-orang dengan berbagai tujuan. (Munandar, 2001)Metode Pusat Penaksiran pada awalnya dilaksanakan dengan dasar penuh waktu (full time) di satu lokasi khusus. Sekarang istilah pusat penaksiran digunakan untuk menguraikan satu situasi dimana metodologi assessment yang sama digunakan tanpa memperhatikan dari pusat derajat pelaksanaan atau lokasi dari proses. (Bender, 1973)Tujuan-tujuan dari pusat penaksiran menurut Kraut (1976) adalah sebagai berikut :a) Seleksi dari tenaga kerja dengan kecakapan yang baik untuk dipromosikan ke kedudukan manajeral.b) Penemukenalan (identification) dari tenaga kerja yang memiliki potensi manajemen pada permulaan dini dari karier mereka.c) Penempatan diri para tenaga kerja ke dalam kedudukan yang akan menggunakan bakat-bakat mereka, dan untuk pengembangan para tenaga kerja selanjutnya.d) Pengembangan pribadi agar membantu orang/tenaga kerja mengenali kemampuan-kemampuan mereka dan untuk membantu mereka untuk meningkatkan kemampuan-kemampuan tersebut.

Assessment Center mengukur kompetensi peserta dengan menggunakan alat-alat tertentu yaitu, analisis kasus, diskusi kelompok, role play, in basket, presentasi, pengumpulan fakta, penilaian dan wawancara. Dibawah ini beberapa penjelasan tentang alat ukur Assessment Center menurut (Aprinto & Jacob, 2013) :a) Diskusi Kelompok : Cara diskusi kelompok adalah menggumpulkan peserta untuk membuat kelompok yang terdiri dari 5-7 orang. Sebelum memulai diskusi para asesor memberi waku para peserta untuk membaca lembaran bahan diskusi yang telah diberikan. Mereka berdiskusi untuk memecahkan masalah, asesor mengamati dan mencatat perilaku para peserta sebagai bukti penilaian kompetensi.b) Wawancara : Wawancara yang digunakan adalah wawancara perilaku, wawancara ini disebut juga wawancara terstruktur yang digunakan untuk mengumpulkan informasi di masa lalu. Maksudnya adalah wawancara yang pernah dihadapi , tugas yang pernah dikerjakan serta tindakan yang diambil terhadap situasi/tugas tersebut beserta hasilnya. Teknik yang digunakan adalah teknik STAR (situation, talk, action, result).c) Bermain Peran (role play) : Biasanya antara peserta dan asesor bermain peran dan asesor ikut dalam peran tersebut dan dalam saat yang bersamaan asesor mewawancarai, mengamati, dan membuat catatan tentang prerilaku selama dialog itu berlangsung sebagai bukti penilaian kompetensi.d) In Basket : Peserta diminta untuk mengerjakan/mengolah satu set dokumen dalam waktu yang telah ditentukan. Kemudian peserta merumuskan,membuat rencan yang telah di intruksikan dalam dokumen-dokumen tersebut. Dan asesor menilai tindakan yangsesuai dengan perilaku kompetensi.e) Analisis Kasus : Peserta diberikan sejumlah informasi tertentu dan kemudian dimintya membuat jadwal sesuai tugas. Peserta diberi kesempatan untuk memeperlihatkan kemampuan perencanaan, mengorganisasi, pemecahan masalah dan perhatian pada hal-hal mendetail.f) Pengumpulan Fakta : Peserta diminta untuk mengajukan pertanyaan kepada seseorang yang memiliki informasi yang dibutuhkan.g) Presentasi : Penyampaian informasi kepada lebih dari satu orang dan menilai isi dari bahan presentasinya sehingga dapat menghasilkan penilaian perilaku yang menyeluruh.h) Penilaian : Penilaian level kompetensi dinilai sesuai hasil pengamatan dan catatan penilaian bukti perilaku disetiap alat tes.KesimpulanSeleksi dan penempatan pada suatu instansi atau perusahaan sangat penting karena jika hanya menerima pegawai saja tanpa ada ada seleksi yang ketat dan penempatan yang tepat menurut bakat dan minat akan berdampak buruk bagi suatu perusahaan. Bakat dan ilmu yang tepat akan membantu memajukan perusahaan yang bersangkutan. Tentu seleksi dan penempatan harus pada tahap-tahap dan syarat-syarat yang sesuai dengan kebijakan perusahaan tersebut. Metode dan proses seleksi juga sangat penting untuk menyaring para calon pekerja.

Daftar pustaka

Aprinto, B., & Jacob, F. A. (2013). Pedoman Lengkap Profesional SDM Indonesia. Jakarta: PPM.

Engle, N. U. (2007). The Nature of Individual Differences in Working Memory Capacity:Active Maintenance in Primary Memory and Controlled Search From. Psychological Review , 104132.

Munandar, A. S. (2001). Psikologi Industri dan Organisasi. jakarta: Penerbit Universitas Indonesia (UI-Press).

Piotrowski, C. (2006). Current Recruitment and Selection Practices:A National Survey of Fortune 1000 Firms. North American Journal of Psychology , 8, 489-496.

JurnalActive Maintenance in Primary Memory and Controlled Search From Secondary MemoryNash Unsworth and Randall W. EngleGeorgia Institute of TechnologyStudies examining individual differences in working memory capacity have suggested that individuals with low working memory capacities demonstrate impaired performance on a variety of attention and memory tasks compared with individuals with high working memory capacities. This working memory limitation can be conceived of as arising from 2 components: a dynamic attention component (primarymemory) and a probabilistic cue-dependent search component (secondary memory). This framework is used to examine previous individual differences studies of working memory capacity, and new evidenceis examined on the basis of predictions of the framework to performance on immediate free recall. It is suggested that individual differences in working memory capacity are partially due to the ability to maintain information accessible in primary memory and the ability to search for information from secondary memory. Researchers have long been interested in the scientific study ofmemory processes (Ebbinghaus, 1885/1964) as well as individual differences in memory abilities (e.g., Jacobs, 1887; see also Blankenship, 1938). Although these two research areas have flourished over the past 100 years, there have been few attempts to integrate experimental and differential approaches as has been advocated by several researchers in both fields (Cohen, 1994; Cronbach, 1957; Underwood, 1975). One research area that has embraced the combining of what Cronbach (1957) called the two disciplines of scientific psychology is that of individual differences in working memory capacity (WMC). In this article, we continue this integrative approach by examining individual differences in WMC in terms of a general framework of memory that combines a flexible attentional component with a cue-dependent search mechanism (e.g., Davelaar, Goshen-Gottstein, Ashkenazi, Haarmann, & Usher, 2005; Raaijmakers & Shiffrin, 1980, 1981). We combine our previous work arguing for a link between active maintenance and WMC (Engle & Kane, 2004) with newer work arguing for a link between controlled cue-dependent search and WMC (Unsworth & Engle, in press). Below, we review the importance of individual differences in WMC and present a general framework within which to interpret individual differences in WMC. Finally, we present evidence from a new experiment supporting such a view.Individual Differences in WMCGiven the need to keep information accessible over brief intervals, several memory theorists have given considerable thought to how a system might go about maintaining information and in what tasks such a system would be needed. Atkinson and Shiffrin (1971) and Baddeley and Hitch (1974), among others, argued for a dynamic memory system where the function of immediate memory was to carry out cognitive operations important for a wide variety of tasks. Specifically, Baddeley and Hitch (1974) argued for a memory system that could simultaneously manipulate the current contents of memory as well as update information in memory to accomplish task goals. The functional nature of this system is apparent when one needs to maintain information over the short term in such diverse tasks as reading comprehension and matrix reasoning. Given the need for such a system for higher order cognitive processes like reasoning and reading, researchers began to hypothesize that individual variation in the system should be related to performance on other cognitive tasks. Beginning with the work of Daneman and Carpenter (1980), researchers have attempted to examine aspects of the working memory model by examining individual differences in working memory and their relation to higher order cognition. Daneman and Carpenter created a complex memory span task known as reading span in which participants were required to read a series of sentences and try to remember the last word of each sentence for later recall. Thus, the task required participants to store information (words) over a short time span while at the same time engaging in a processing activity (reading). The idea was that this task measured the working memory system that gives rise to complex behavior better than a simple memory span task in which. Participants are required to remember items without a secondary processing task (e.g., word span). Daneman and Carpenter showed that the complex reading span task did a better job of predicting reading comprehension scores than did the simple memory span task. Accordingly, Daneman and Carpenter argued that working memory was a better predictor of complex cognitive activities than simple short-term memory. Following the lead of Daneman and Carpenter (1980), additional work has shown that these complex memory span tasks predict performance on a number of higher order cognitive tasks. These included demonstrations that variation in WMC is related to variation in vocabulary learning (Daneman & Green, 1986), computer language learning (Kyllonen & Stephens, 1990; Shute, 1991), as well as performance on standardized aptitude tests such as the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT; Turner & Engle, 1989). Furthermore, a large body of literature has been devoted to examining the link between measures of WMC and measures of fluid abilities (Ackerman, Beier, & Boyle, 2002; Conway, Cowan, Bunting, Therriault, & Minkoff, 2002; Engle, Tuholski, Laughlin,& Conway, 1999; Kane et al., 2004; Kyllonen & Christal, 1990; Unsworth & Engle, 2005). Each of these studies has shown that variation in WMC is important in a host of higher order cognitive tasks.The Working Memory ProblemAlthough the previous review suggests that WMC is important in a number of domains, working memory as a system is not needed in all cognitive operations. For instance, many cognitive operations that people engage in on a daily basis can be carried out in a fairly automatic fashion with little or no reliance on a working memory system (e.g., James, 1890; Posner & Snyder, 1975; Schneider & Shiffrin, 1977). Take, for instance, the simple example of driving to work. Chances are that one generally takes the same route nearly every day to work. After many days, weeks, months, and even years, driving to work becomes fairly automatized. One does not need to think about what lane to get in or where to turn and so forth. These basic routines can be retrieved almost effortlessly from memory and allow one to talk on a cell phone, fiddle with the radio, or adjust the levels of heat while driving. A general working memory system is needed, however, when current task goals conflict with these automatic tendencies. For example, assume that today one is supposed to drive to the dentist office before going to work. In such a case, it is critically important to keep the task goal actively maintained in order to override the automatic response of driving to work. If one loses maintenance to the task goal of driving to the dentist while captured by a song on the radio, it is likely that one will find oneself halfway to work. In a broad sense then, working memory is engaged when control is needed to overcome automatic tendencies. In particular, working memory is needed to maintain new and novel information in a heightened state of activity. This is particularly needed when there is considerable external (e.g., music on the radio, child in the backseat crying, etc.) and internal (e.g., ruminations about a fight with ones spouse last night, what to have for dinner tonight, etc.) distraction and interference. Additionally, given that it is unlikely that people can maintain a great deal of information indefinitely, working memory will also be needed to retrieve information that could not be maintained. In particular, this information will likely have to be retrieved in the presence of irrelevant information that interferes proactively with the relevant information. For instance, in the above example, information associated with driving to work is not relevant for driving to the dentist office, but because it usually is relevant, it competes for access with the currently relevant information of driving to the dentist. Thus, what is critical is the ability to correctly discriminate between relevant (e.g., routines associated with driving to the dentist) and irrelevant (e.g., routines associated with driving to work) information in regard to a current task goal. This discrimination process likely relies on contextual cues to determine what is relevant versus irrelevant (e.g., Capaldi & Neath, 1995). On most days, driving to work is the correct response; however, in the current context of needing to drive to the dentist, information associated with driving to work becomes the irrelevant information. Thus, the current context defines what is relevant versus irrelevant. In such a situation, it is critically important that the contextual cues activate only that information that is currently relevant. Any noise in the contextual cues increases the probability that the relevant information is not found and instead irrelevant information is retrieved. Working memory limitations arise, then, from the inability to actively maintain information and the inability to retrieve task relevant information in the presence of highly interfering competitors.

JurnalCurrent Recruitment and Selection Practices:A National Survey of Fortune 1000 FirmsChris PiotrowskiUniversity of West Florida, USAThis study reports the findings of survey data on recruitment and preemployment selection methods in use by human resources departments in, major companies in the USA. In addition, data on use of online preemployment tests, currently and in the near term future, were also collected. The analysis is based on responses from 151 firms. The findings indicate that the majority of companies rely on traditional recruitment and personnel selection techniques over the use of online assessment instruments. Personality testing is popular in about 20% of the firms and one-fifth of the respondents plan to implement online testing in the future. Furthermore, screening for honesty-integrity (28.5%) and violence potential (22%) was found to be somewhat popular. It would be helpful if future research could pinpoint the reservations that companies have about online preemployment tests. Psychological tests and assessment instruments that tap prospective employees' personality, interpersonal style, and response to stress situations have received increased attention from both human resource professionals and researchers in I/O psychology over the past 20 years (e.g., Gatewood & Feild, 1998; Ryan & Sackett, 1987). Indeed, the nexus between personality factors and personnel selection and placement has spawned major investigatory efforts, conceptual reformulations, and pragmatic applications in both research and practice (Hogan, 2001; Landy et al., 1997). Moreover, to enhance the chances for successful recruitment and long-term benefits for employers, a plethora ofresearch studies has investigated and endorsed the utility of the 'person-fit' paradigm (Anderson et al., 2004; Chan, 2005; Hollenbeck et al., 2002). However, there has been recent concern and thoughtful discussion on the potential threat of unscientific claims about personnel selection methods that include personality testing on the Internet and the use.490 NORTH AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGYonline testing for selection purposes specifically (see Anderson et al., 2004, for a discussion). At the same time, and largely based on the public's acceptance of the Internet and related technological applications, both public and private companies, including governmental agencies, are re-thinking traditional personnel selection processes and recruiting methods (e.g., Mooney, 2002). Yet several feature articles in human resource publications, while touting the benefits of online testing of job applicants, caution that online selection firms are not regulated. Moreover, most person job-fit tests have not been standardized, lack norms, and developers have not presented predictive validity data on their selection measures (Barbian, 2001; Bates, 2002). Undoubtedly, these concems about personnel testing on the World Wide Web have attracted the attention of rigorous research efforts by scholars worldwide and the findings are receiving coverage in peer-reviewed journals (e.g.,Bartram, 2004; Ployhart, Weekley, Holtz, & Kemp, 2003). However, in the contemporary business environment, companies are faced with a critical challenge to recruit and retain qualified employees (Langan, 2000). Thus, it appears that companies now have at their disposal a conceptually sound framework (person job-fit) and a cost-effective, speedy, and convenient system (online testing) to meet their personnel selection needs in a highly competitive environment. However, recent reviews of the literature report that employers continue to rely on traditional (i.e., general IQ, integrity, structured interviews, wbrksamples, references, official transcripts) methods for personnel selecition (see Schmidt & Hunter, 1998; Wilk & Cappelli, 2003). To obtain a clearer perspective on these issues, the current study was designed to obtain empirical data from major companies in the U.S.A. on the extent of their use of traditional selection techniques and use (if any) of online personality testing for selection and hiring purposes. Since companies tend to be guarded on sharing information about practices and policy regarding personnel selection, our intent was to keep queries short and direct. Accordingly, our results, by design, are conceptually limited and the findings should be considered exploratory in nature.1