Answer & Explanation:Hello Please assist me with writing the below paper. 800 – 1000 words. Thanks!Contemplate the comment, “Targeted reading helps you to
practice in an evidence-informed way” (Rousseau & Barends, 2011, p. 228).
Before you begin to write your paper, do the following: Formulate an answerable question: Before
conducting your directed research, begin with a focused question based on
a practical HR-related issue or problem. Then, formulate a targeted
question, giving consideration to “the kind of setting (professional,
government, non-governmental organization, for-profit) in which you’re
interested, the values and preferences of the targeted group, and the
kinds of outcomes that matter” (Rousseau & Barends, 2011, p. 228).Search for the evidence: Once you have
formulated your question, locate and read a systematic review or
meta-analysis offering scientific evidence answering your question.
Write an 800- to 1000-word paper guided by the
following requirements: Introduction: Write a brief introduction to the paper.Article Summary: Provide a brief summary of the
Rousseau and Barends (2011) article.Focused, Answerable Question: Identify your focused,
answerable question, explaining the bases for its selection.Critical Appraisal of the Evidence: Critically
appraise the evidence (i.e., the systematic review or a meta-analysis),
using the following criteria:What is the study’s methodology? Is it valid?Does the study appear to have a high or low level of evidence?
Factually support your response.Is there potential bias in the study? Explain.Integration: Evidence, Experience, and Expertise:
Integrate the evidence with your own experience and expertise, as well as
the context and stakeholder concerns.Is the evidence informative? Explain.Briefly, what scientific evidence appears applicable
to your situation?Briefly, what scientific evidence appears
inapplicable to your situation?After combining the best available scientific
evidence, the business information, and your own experience and
expertise, what evidence-based decision(s) would you suggest?Conclusion: Provide a brief conclusion.In your paper:Use appropriate headings for each of the items a-f in
Step 4.Include a cover page and a reference page in addition
to the 800-1000 words required for the assignment.Thoroughly review your completed paper for APA
formatting and mechanics. Check the instructions of this workshop
document and the rubric for this assignment to be sure that your paper has
met all requirements.
document.pdf
Unformatted Attachment Preview
doi: 10.1111/j.1748-8583.2011.00173.x
PROVOCATION SERIES PAPERS: HRM IN THE 21ST CENTURY
Becoming an evidence-based HR practitioner
Denise M. Rousseau, Carnegie Mellon University
Eric G. R. Barends, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
Human Resource Management Journal, Vol 21, no 3, 2011, pages 221–235
Evidence-based HR (EBHR) is a decision-making process combining critical thinking with use of the best
available scientific evidence and business information. We describe how to get started as an evidencebased HR practitioner. Actively managing professional decisions is a key aspect of EBHR. Doing so
involves making decisions, especially consequential or recurring ones, using practices supported by
high-quality research. We present a step-by-step set of approaches to becoming an evidence-based HR
practitioner: from getting started, through everyday practices and continuous learning to integrating
EBHR into your organisation. In offering guidance for evidence-based practice, this article underscores
the connection between effective practice and organisational research.
Contact: Denise M. Rousseau, Carnegie Mellon University, 5000 Forbes Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA
15213-3890, USA. Email: denise@cmu.edu
hrmj_173
221..235
INTRODUCTION
T
he complexity and fast pace of today’s organisations often lead to knee-jerk business
decisions, fad chasing and guesswork regarding ‘what works’. Busy HR managers may
put on autopilot critical choices affecting the future of their firms, their employees and
the public. The HR practitioner does have a way to learn how to make better-quality decisions
and use HR practices that actually work – becoming an evidence-based HR (EBHR) practitioner.
This article is a primer on the what, why and how of evidence-based HR practice. It is written
with the HR practitioner in mind as well as the HR student and consultant. In celebration of
HRMJ’s 21 years of publishing academic research which pays particular attention to policy and
practice, we describe how practitioners can use research in their day-to-day management
activities. The issues we address can also apply to HRM scholars seeking to make their research
more accessible to practitioners.
EBHR is motivated by a basic fact: faulty practices and decision making abound in HR.
Companies persist in using unstructured interviews to try to assess a job candidate’s fit, even
though there is little evidence that typical interviews can do that (Stevens, 2009). HR
departments often pursue one-size-fits-all standardisation in their policies, despite considerable
evidence that programmes promoting flexibility benefit people and firms (Rousseau, 2005). In
all honesty, can you answer ‘yes’ to the question, ‘Do you know the scientific evidence for ANY
of the HR practices your company uses?’ Recent surveys of HR practitioners lead us to suspect
that the frank response from many readers is ‘no’.
Blind faith has no place in professional practice. The fundamental problem is not so much
that a practitioner lacks scientific knowledge (though that is an issue). Rather, the key problem
is the absence of a questioning mindset. Thinking critically is what good professionals do.
Wondering what works, what does not and why is the first step towards improving practice.
Critical thinking means actively exploring alternatives, seeking understanding and testing
assumptions about the effectiveness of one’s own professional decisions and activities.
HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, VOL 21 NO 3, 2011
221
© 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Please cite this article in press as: Rousseau, D.M. and Barends, E.G.R. (2011) ‘Becoming an evidence-based HR practitioner’. Human Resource
Management Journal 21: 3, 221–235.
Evidence-based HR practitioner
The opposite of critical thinking is imitation, reliance on copycat practices from other
companies, while ignoring widely available scientific findings regarding what works and what
does not. Most insights from HR research do not reach the practitioner – despite the existence
of evidence-based guides written with practice in mind (Latham, 2009; Locke, 2009).
Here’s a quick ‘what do you know’ test to check your knowledge of well-established
scientific findings in HR. True or false?
1. Combining managerial judgement with validated test results is optimal for selecting
successful new employees.
2. Incompetent people benefit more from feedback than highly competent people.
3. Task conflict improves work group performance while relational conflict harms it.
4. Being intelligent is a disadvantage for performing low-skilled jobs.
5. Integrity tests do not work because people lie on them.
Are you surprised to learn that all these statements are false? Each has been disproved by large
bodies of studies, 30 in the case of Statement 3, regarding task and relational conflict (DeDreu
and Weingart, 2003) and more than 200 in the case of the effects of intelligence (Statement 4;
Salgado et al., 2003; Hülsheger et al., 2007). Adding managerial judgement into hiring decisions
(Statement 1) actually leads to poorer selection decisions than does the use of validated
selection tests and indicators alone (Highhouse, 2008). Incompetent people have great difficulty
understanding feedback and tend to use it less effectively than their more savvy counterparts
(Statement 2; Ehrlinger et al., 2008). Statement 3 might be considered a bit of a trick: Both task
and relational conflicts reduce work group performance (DeDreu and Weingart, 2003). Contrary
to Statement 4, intelligent people have a widely established advantage in performing all classes
of work (Stevens, 2009). The more intelligent worker is likely to perform better overall,
regardless of whether the job is designing a hotel or cleaning its rooms. Finally, even if people
do distort their answers, integrity tests remain highly predictive of dysfunctional work
behaviours such as theft (Statement 5; Ones et al., 1993). It turns out that impression
management really does not detract from the predictability of these tests (Barrick and Mount,
2009).
If you got most of the answers wrong, you are not alone. The HR community tends to be
poorly informed about what the evidence tells us in such fundamental areas as selection,
training, feedback and HR strategy (Rynes et al., 2002). HR professionals actually fare no better
on average than college undergraduates on an HR knowledge test, although MBAs are slightly
better informed (Timmerman, 2010).
If you got most answers right, you are well informed and may already use evidence in your
HR practice. And, you might already know that the HR department’s capacity to help firms
confront contemporary challenges lies in effectively deploying scientific knowledge regarding
what works. Building this capacity requires evidence-informed practitioners. This article is an
invitation for HR practitioners to participate in their own development and that of the HR field
itself by becoming evidence-informed practitioners.
THE CALL FOR EBHR
Evidence-based practice is a radical change from management and HR ‘as usual’. It entails
redoubling our efforts to do what we know works and to develop critical judgement in making
decisions that impact the well-being of our organisations and employees. EBHR means making
decisions, promoting practices and advising the organisation’s leadership through the
222
HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, VOL 21 NO 3, 2011
© 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Denise M. Rousseau and Eric G. R. Barends
conscientious combination of four sources of information: the best available scientific evidence;
reliable and valid organisational facts, metrics and assessments; practitioner reflection and
judgement; and the concerns of affected stakeholders.
The call for greater scientific underpinning of interventions and decisions in practice has met
with wide acceptance in such fields as medicine (Sackett et al., 2000), education (Ambrose et al.,
2010), criminal justice (Sherman, 2002) and advertising (Armstrong, 2010). At the outset, EBHR
has a huge advantage over other fields, especially in business. HR research is well developed,
with bodies of evidence related to many ongoing organisational challenges. HR domains in
which the science is quite informative include motivation, group processes, task coordination,
individual and organisational learning and development, adaptation, innovation and change
management, conflict and its resolution. In fact, out of all of management’s many subfields, HR
has the richest, most expansive base of scientific evidence to date (Locke, 2009; Charlier et al.,
2011).
The need to rethink conventional HR practice is urgent. Recent events add further
complexity to challenges that by themselves would test the acumen of any expert or
practitioner: economic meltdowns, failed business models and deteriorating organisational
capacities to forecast and manage risk and adapt effectively to market changes. If the globalised
environment is less predictable and stable than in the past, managers need to be realistic about
what can and cannot be learned from past practice. Managers must learn how to respond better
to uncertainty (Taleb, 2010) by pursuing greater flexibility in the face of unpredictable events
(Weick and Sutcliffe, 2007).
At the same time, this environment contains a powerful means for building capacity to
address its highly demanding conditions. The explosion of knowledge accessible via the
Internet includes the broad accumulation of scientific research on management and HR issues.
We are the beneficiaries of over 65 years of post-World War II management and social science
research – a deep and broad body of evidence. Lots of information (and knowledgeable people
who can point practitioners to it) is accessible, ranging from evidence summaries (Locke, 2009)
to Internet-enabled communities of practice (http://www.evidencebased-management.com).
Note that although scholars, educators and consultants provide essential support, EBHR
remains something only practitioners actually do. If you are an HR practitioner, your
willingness to become involved, innovate and share what you learn in becoming an EBHR
practitioner is a key stepping stone in this initiative.
THE PRACTICE OF EVIDENCE-BASED HR
The basic steps for becoming an evidence-based manager fall into three phases: (a) getting
started, (b) everyday practice and learning, and (c) integrating EBHR in the organisation. These
steps reflect the critical activities today’s evidence-informed practitioners are engaged in and
form the basis of training programmes and courses in evidence-based management.
It starts with your mind
A practitioner interested in the idea of EBHR has lots of options for what he or she could do
differently as a result of adopting it as a standard practice. Some people are drawn to an idea
they have read about, like the people who started holding their group meetings standing up
after Pfeffer and Sutton (2006) reported that Chevron used this ‘evidence-based practice’ to
make meetings shorter and more efficient. Picking up a new idea and trying it out, however,
is not in itself evidence-based practice. It is more like a ‘flavour of the month’ approach
because the decision making behind the use of the new practice does not take into account
HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, VOL 21 NO 3, 2011
© 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
223
Evidence-based HR practitioner
what is likely to work in that particular organisation. This kind of faddish adoption is not
what we consider to be EBHR practice. It is more like an old wine in a new bottle. Instead,
a more mindfully engaged way to get started is to first come to understand what evidencebased practice really is; then, do the critical thinking – with a questioning mindset – that acting
on evidence requires.
Understanding what EBHR means At its core, EBHR combines four fundamental features
into everyday management practice and decision making (Rousseau, 2006, 2012):
1. Use of the best available scientific evidence from peer-reviewed sources.
2. Systematic gathering of organisational facts, indicators and metrics to better act on the
evidence
3. Practitioner judgement assisted by procedures, practices and frameworks that reduce bias,
improve decision quality and create more valid learning over time.
4. Ethical considerations weighing the short- and long-term impacts of decisions on
stakeholders and society.
The best available research evidence When referring to the best available evidence, we
generally mean findings from published scientific research. Research in scientific journals is
vetted according to evidentiary criteria including standards for measurement reliability and
internal validity. The vetting process is known as ‘peer review’ (Werner, 2012). Measurement
reliability means that indicators are low in error, a concern with all data, from telephone
numbers to profit measures and survey questions. Internal validity indicates how likely it is
that results may be biased. Bias exists where alternative explanations for a study’s results are
not controlled or ruled out. For instance, let us say the research question is whether selfmanaging teams improve labour productivity. Better-quality evidence uses control groups
(conventional teams) or longitudinal designs (comparing the base rate of productivity before
the teams became self-managing to productivity rates measured a long enough time after the
change to see if any initial gains are maintained). In contrast, lower-quality evidence uses
cross-sectional (single-time) surveys or case studies. Sometimes, the best available evidence
may be cross-sectional surveys that control for some biases but not all. In that case, some
evidence is still far better than no evidence at all, and can help improve practitioners’ decisions
– but it is important to know what kind of evidence is being used and what the advantages
and drawbacks of relying on that evidence could be.
Organisational facts, metrics and assessments An HR manager who seeks to make good use
of evidence must take into account the facts of the situation in order to identify what kinds of
research findings are likely to be useful. For example, when exit interviews are used to figure
out what’s causing recent job turnover, leavers who report a high incidence of job stress can
direct the practitioner’s attention to evidence connecting stress with turnover. Knowing the
facts of the situation makes it easier to seek and use appropriate evidence to identify plausible
explanations for a problem, potentially useful interventions and how best to carry them out.
Such organisational facts can involve relatively ‘soft’ elements such as organisational culture,
employees’ educational level and skills and one’s management style, as well as ‘harder’ figures
such as departmental turnover rates, workload and productivity trends.
Practitioner reflection and judgement Effective use of evidence depends on there being not
only good scientific knowledge informed by organisational facts but also mindful decision
224
HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, VOL 21 NO 3, 2011
© 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Denise M. Rousseau and Eric G. R. Barends
making. All people have cognitive limits and are prone to bias in making decisions (Simon,
1997). Thoughtful judgement and quality decisions are aided by practices that allow deeper
consideration of relevant evidence and facts (Nutt, 2004; Larrick, 2009). In particular, use of
decision frameworks and routines calls attention to particular aspects of decisions that might
otherwise be neglected (e.g. contingencies, diverse goals; Nutt, 1998, 2004; Yates, 2003).
Evidence is not answers. Suppose you are looking to improve the job performance of new hires.
We know that general mental ability (GMA) generally leads to higher performance (Stevens,
2009), but if your firm is already selecting people with good grades from good schools, GMA
may be pretty much covered in your current criteria. Evidence in itself is not answers but needs
to be considered in context. In our example, new hires may need some other specific set of skills
to be successful, or any performance problems might be due to something inherent to the work
setting itself – inadequate supervision, poor work conditions, etc. Careful analysis of the
situation based on critical thinking, supported by a decision framework that calls attention to
assumptions, known facts and goals (see next discussion), can lead to more accurate assessment
of the problem and interpretation of facts.
The consideration of affected stakeholders HR decisions and practices have direct and indirect
consequences for an organisation’s stakeholders. These consequences affect not only the rank
and file but executives and managers too. In some cases, the affected stakeholders are outside
the organisation, such as its suppliers, shareholders or the public at large. For example, a
decision to increase the retention and advancement rates of women is likely to generate push
back from men. Implementing career-building activities in a way that lets all employees benefit
can reduce the turnover of women and minority group members and increase their
advancement, while sending the signal to those traditionally in the majority that this company
supports career development for employees broadly (Cox, 1994). Attending to stakeholder
issues is a key feature of comprehensive, evidence-based decision practices. These decision
practices are designed to reduce unintended consequences by considering relevant issues
upfront (Yates, 2003).
You might develop your understanding of these four features of EBHR by reading a few of
the sources we cite (most of which can be accessed for free at http://www.evidencebasedmanagement.com). Then, you might practice explaining what EBHR is to friends and
colleagues. The questions they raise will help develop your understanding of what it is and
what it is not. Looking back over your reading with these questions in mind will help you
answer them.
Some people think EBHR is just a knock-off from the field of medicine. To the contrary,
EBHR is not randomised control trials for managers. Drugs and people aren’t the same. EBHR
does mean getting evidence about what works, which is a hallmark of drug and other treatment
studies. At the same time, EBHR recognises that HR practitioners often must act regardless of
whether evidence is available to guide their decisions. The essence of EBHR is approaching
decisions, uncertainty and risk in a mindful fashion. Practising EBHR involves a hunger for
knowledge and a questioning mindset.
Developing a questioning mindset Unfreezing old habits of mind is necessary to EBHR
practice. It means questioning assumptions, particularly where someone (including ourselves)
asserts some belief as a fact. This habit-forming approach can inform your conversations and
deliberations. You will begin to ask yourself and others, ‘What’s the evidence for that?’ as
impressions, beliefs and attitudes appear in your conversations about the organisation, its
practices and the decisions being made. This approach has turned many recent MBA graduates
HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, VOL 21 NO 3, 2011
© 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
225
Evidence-based HR practitioner
into the ‘evidence police’, an approach they learn to use over time in a manner that promotes
critical thinking without necessarily criticising.
Concern for the facts and logic behind decisions translates into active questioning and
scepticism. Scientists refer to this critical habit of mind as ‘mindfulness’. It is helpful to know
how to develop mindfulness as a way of thinking about information, decisions and actions.
Mindfulness is a ‘heightened sense of situational awareness and a conscious control over one’s
thoughts and behaviour relative to the situation’ (Langer, 1989). Bei …
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
Order a plagiarism free paper now. We do not use AI. Use the code SAVE15 to get a 15% Discount
Looking for help with your ASSIGNMENT? Our paper writing service can help you achieve higher grades and meet your deadlines.
Why order from us
We offer plagiarism-free content
We don’t use AI
Confidentiality is guaranteed
We guarantee A+ quality
We offer unlimited revisions