• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Standard deviation and ranking applicants

Axoliien

Senior member
I am examining our current process of ranking applicants where I work so we can replicate this in our new HR software system. The calculation is as follows:

Applicants may take several exams. These exams have raw scores and are weighted. Once the applications are completed, we calculate our standardized score using a z-score as follows:

Sscore = 6*((raw score - avg score) / std deviation) + 76

This is then added back to the raw scores and then rankings are taken. What I don't get is why the (6*) and the (+76) in this calculation? This could be the only score given to an applicant, so what good does this do other than raise the minimum final total and expand the bell curve? No one from HR knows why it's there either and it's completely undocumented. Any thoughts?

Also, if you know how your rankings are done in a metered and ranked hiring process, let me know because I would be interested to hear. No need to say "we just hire the best person" because our company requires these scores to prove equal hiring practices.
 
it looks like the 6* and +76 are there because whoever designed the ranking system wanted to base the # off of a 0-100 scale, but thats just me 😛
 
I thought they wanted it on a 0-100 scale, but when they add the raw scores, they get things in any range from 0 to N, and it doesn't have to end at 100. If an applicant gets an oral score of 90 and a written of 65, they start with a score of 155 and then add the standardized score on top...
 
Originally posted by: Turkish
I hated statistics in college. This reminds me, I still do.

Only thing my statistics class taught me is never trust them. They are too easily manipulated.
 
Originally posted by: ryan256
Originally posted by: Turkish
I hated statistics in college. This reminds me, I still do.

Only thing my statistics class taught me is never trust them. They are too easily manipulated.

Statistics is the study of how well data can be manipulated to suit your own purposes.
 
Originally posted by: bonkers325
it looks like the 6* and +76 are there because whoever designed the ranking system wanted to base the # off of a 0-100 scale, but thats just me 😛

Agreed.

People might be confused by the z-scores...

 
Ranking, for any reason, is Management's abdication of responsibility. If you are ranked at work, you're cheating yourself.
 
What kind of work is this? I can think of many "smart" people that you couldn't make me work with regardless of them getting a "high" score. I think there is a lot more to hiring someone than just their technical knowledge, but it depends to a certain degree on the line of work.
 
Back
Top