In the late 80’s and early 90’s Biodata was a popular, cost effective method for short
listing applicants especially when dealing with large numbers of candidates. However
in the most recent CIPD (2008) survey on selection techniques Biodata did not even
make the list as a technique regularly used by UK companies. So what happened to
this promising technique which at the time demonstrated good correlations with future
job performance.
Biodata works on the basis that past performance is the best predictor of future
performance. It uses the profile of successful employees to develop an application
form by essentially looking for patterns in their past experience that can be shown to
link to successful job performance. For example, linking college study patterns to how
a person deals with work tasks. These items are then combined to produce a
‘scorable’ application form. The scoring systems for Biodata are quite complex but
can be divided into 2 main scoring systems
- Non compensatory – this is where each item on the Biodata questionnaire is
treated as a separate item. The method most frequently used was based on
England (1971) where the response pattern on the Biodata item was compared
for high and low job performers and where there was a significant difference
in the percentage distribution a weighted score was given to the item. The
overall Biodata score is calculated by adding these scores together.
- Compensatory – based on a criticism of the above approach Drakelely (1985),
Strebler (1991) and others indicated that items in the Biodata should not be
treated as independent items and that a more rational method for developing
the Biodata score should be used which took into account the interaction of
the items. This involved higher level statistical modelling using for example
regression analysis.
Once developed the Biodata form is then used to shortlist applicants for further
selection processes such as interviews. For example a financial services organisation
was able to use Biodata to shortlist from over 23,000 applicants to just under 4,000 for
interview within a 3 week time frame.
Where companies successfully deployed Biodata it was able to demonstrate better
predictive validity, i.e. correlation with job performance than many other techniques,
was cost effective, reduced time to hire and also had other benefits - for example, it
was able to control for adverse impact more effectively than other techniques.
Research has shown that compensatory methods were more effective than noncompensatory
methods and produced more stable Biodata scores over time (author’s
unpublished PhD thesis research).
While Biodata does still exist, for example, one large Global IT organisation has used it
in selection in the past 2 years, it has generally been in decline for a number of
reasons.
Firstly organisations tended to follow non-compensatory methods for developing Biodata
which resulted in poor statistical construction (e.g. just because a correlation exists
between say having cornflakes for breakfast and higher performance scores does not
mean there is a ‘casual’ relationship between the two events) and this resulted in the loss
of the predictive promise of Biodata.
Secondly, a lower number of job applicants to jobs meant that employers did not need to
invest as much time on high volume pre-screening techniques. In fact in some instances in
recent years employers could not get enough applicants to apply.
Thirdly, it is most successfully deployed where jobs are homogeneous, exist in large
enough numbers to construct the Biodata and there is a clear understanding of the
competencies required in the roles – examples might include retail staff, customer service
staff, call centres etc. Particularly in light of the previous observation, organisations
were not investing research time and effort in developing Biodata solutions.
As this ratio of applicants to jobs increases the need for more effective methods of short
listing candidates that are valid, reliable and not least defensible becomes more
important. Another factor which could suggest Biodata is worthy of review is the change
in technology since the early 1990’s has been phenomenal and represents new
opportunities for Biodata development and application. Some organisations are seeking,
inadvisably, to use Web 2.0 technology in recruitment, e.g. Facebook hunting is becoming
a popular pastime as a replacement for references! A much more effective method for
candidate short listing is offered by a well researched, well developed and properly
implemented Biodata making maximum use of web technology to capture applicants’
information in an efficient manner. It is now time to take the dust covers off Biodata and
bring it into the 21st Century
Footnote:
If you are currently using Biodata or are interested in this area please contact the author.
The author would also be interested in hearing from anyone currently doing research in
this field.
