UNSW MGMT5907 ASSESSMENT: ARTICLE REVIEW 1

Instructions:

• Please download and read the following article:
  Turban, D. B., Eyring, A. R., & Campion, J. E. (1993). Job attributes: Preferences compared with reasons given for accepting and rejecting job offers. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 66(1), 71-81.

  The article can be downloaded via the online catalogue of the UNSW library.

• Once you have read the article, please write a review which is structured around the following three sections (the percentages in brackets indicate the approximate weighting given to each section):

  1. Provide a summary of the purpose, methods and findings of the study (33%). Your summary

     should cover the following points:

     1. Briefly describe the purpose of the study (i.e., what issues were investigated)? (5%)

     2. Describe the methods used by the researchers to conduct the study (i.e., what type of

        data/information did they collect and how did they collect it). (10%)

     3. In bullet-point form, outline and briefly describe the main findings of the research. You

        should not need more than about 4 or 5 bullet points. (18%)

  2. Evaluate the potential limitations of the study. You need to structure your discussion of the

     limitations using the concepts of internal validity and external validity. (33%)

  3. Read the Case Study “Graduate Recruitment at Bullwinkle Engineering” that appears on the next

     page. Based on the evidence presented in the Turban, Eyring, and Campion article (1993), how effective are each of the strategies suggested by the four HR managers (in the case study) likely to be? Outline one other strategy that Bullwinkle could use to increase the number of candidates that accept their job offers. Make sure to link your evaluations of the HR manager strategies and your own suggested strategy to findings from the Turban et al (1993) study. (33%)

• The review should be a maximum of three double-spaced A4 pages long (Times New Roman, 12- point font with 2.5cm margins). Please stick to the page limit as it will be strictly enforced.

• In completing the assignment you do not need to refer to any other research papers, other than the Turban, Eyring, and Campion article (1993) cited above.

• Article Review 1 will comprise 15% of your overall mark for the course (i.e., 15 of the 100 marks). You will be marked based on how precisely and accurately you respond to each section and how clearly you communicate your responses. Sections 1, 2 and 3 are each weighted approximately 33%. Section 1 is further broken down into parts A, B, and C, which are weighted 5%, 10% and 18%, respectively.

• Note that it is important that you answer the questions in your own words rather than using phrases from the article. Also note that this is not a group activity, so you should complete your reviews individually.

• Due Date: The review is due by 6pm on Friday 11th October (i.e., Friday of Week 4). Please make sure to submit a softcopy via turnitin by that day in order to avoid late penalties (see course outline). Important information about using turnitin appears below, following the case study.

Case Study: Graduate Recruitment at Bullwinkle Engineering

Bullwinkle is a prominent U.S. based engineering company with various locations around the country. Each year the company conducts a graduate recruitment program with the aim of recruiting 20 new university graduates to fill its challenging yet interesting graduate roles. In order to attract the best candidates, Bullwinkle typically starts their recruitment process early in the year and continues recruiting until all 20 positions have been filled. The recruitment process starts with advertisements that are placed on noticeboards in the careers advisory centres of universities and emailed to graduating students in the Engineering and Science Faculties via the careers centres. Bullwinkle also participates in university job fairs in order to meet and have one-on-one conversations with potential candidates. Finally, Bullwinkle conducts a comprehensive recruitment process that involves campus interviews followed by site visit invitations for shortlisted candidates.

As part of its strategy to try to attract the best candidates, Bullwinkle places emphasis on communicating to applicants about the many advancement opportunities within the organisation and the very high level of pay. The company signals these attributes to candidates as part of the initial advertisements and then throughout the recruitment process. For example, company representatives are instructed to highlight these attributes as part of dialogues with potential recruits during university fairs and campus interviews; and these attributes are also emphasised when candidates meet with various organisational constituents (including senior managers) as part of site visits.

Based on the large number of graduates who apply for their recruitment program each year and attend site visits, Bullwinkle’s approach has evidently been successful in attracting candidates. Nevertheless, Bullwinkle feels that it could do better in terms of the recruitment process as many of the candidates who are ultimately offered positions do not accept and instead accept positions from Bullwinkle’s competitors. Furthermore, subsequent conversations with these candidates indicate that they were not dissatisfied with Bullwinkle, and had not eliminated them from consideration, but rather were more attracted by what the competitors had to offer. In response to this, four HR managers at Bullwinkle brainstorm strategies that they hope will increase the number of candidates that accept Bullwinkle’s offer (rather than going to a competitor):

• HR manager 1 suggests that Bullwinkle should place more emphasis on communicating to candidates about the diversity of work locations around the country that successful candidates can choose to work at.

• HR manager 2 argues that they should instead focus on providing more information to candidates about the company and its great company culture.

• HR manager 3 argues that it would be better to focus on emphasising the positive attributes of co- workers rather than the attributes of the company because co-worker attributes are perceived as more important than the company attributes when it comes to graduate preferences.

• HR manager 4 takes a slightly different approach. He believes that Bullwinkle should focus more ontrying to target female engineers. The manager argues that one of Bullwinkle’s main weaknesses has traditionally been its low level of job security and that targeting female engineers will make this less of a problem because females generally care less about job security than do males.

Turnitin Submission Instructions

A Turnitin link will be added on moodle for submitting Article Review 1. The review is due no later than6pm on Friday 11th October. You should make sure to submit a softcopy of your review via Turnitin. Please only include your student id (not your name or other personal details) on the softcopy.

There are a few important things to remember about Turnitin:

• Turnitin is used to detect plagiarism. The software compares your assignment against published material and other submitted work (e.g., other students’ assignments) to identify overlap.

• After uploading, you should check the originality report. If there is more than 20-25% overlap between your final submitted assignment and other material as determined by Turnitin then I may be asking you to explain why this is the case. As such, if you have excessive overlap you should correct this on your original copy and upload again. Turnitin only allows you to check the originality report once every 24 hours, so it’s a good idea to upload your assignment early so as to have adequate time to address any issues well before the due date.

• Note that your assignment will remain in the Turnitin database for an unknown period, during which time it may be used to determine whether other individuals have engaged in academic misconduct. Turnitin stores the document both in its original form and in an "electronic fingerprint" form. The original form of the document is only available to the original author and the lecturer of the course to which the document was submitted. Neither UNSW nor Turnitin administration staff are able to view assignments submitted through Turnitin. If another document is subsequently submitted to Turnitin and matches text in your paper, the lecturer responsible for the new document will only be provided with the following information: (a) the name of the institution from which the matching assignment originated, (b) the name of the course to which the matching assignment was submitted, (c) the name and email address of the lecturer responsible for that course, (d) the file name of the matching assignment, and (e) the date the matching assignment was submitted.

• If you would like more information on turnitin, including instructions on how to submit your work, visit: https://student.unsw.edu.au/turnitin-support

• For more information on plagiarism and how to avoid it, visit:https://student.unsw.edu.au/plagiarism