Manipulation eller social kompetens? ? Rekryterares upplevelser av impression management i anställningsintervjuer
RekryteringImpression managementIntrycksstyrningAttribueringSjälvbeskrivandeRecruitmentAttributionsSelf-descriptive
Introduction: A job interview is for both the candidate and the company involved, an importantsituation. It might be tempting for the candidate to adjust the answers to the job in question or what heor she thinks the recruiter wants to hear. This behaviour is a part of what socialpsychology would callimpression management. This term means that you try to control the impressions you send out andaccordingly adjust your behaviour for the current situation.Purpose: Candidates usage of impression management is a widely debated subject where theresearch mainly has focused on the candidates, their strategies and the efficiency of impressionmanagement. Our purpose with this thesis is therefore to see how recruiters experience candidatesimpression management in a job interview, how they handle it and what level of acceptance they havefor it.Theoretical perspectives: The theories and previous research used as models for explanation andbasis for discussion is mainly Erving Goffman´s (1974) dramaturgical perspective and thoughts aboutimpression management and Mark R Leary´s (1995) theories concerning impression managementtactics. In addition to these we also used more specific research concerning attribution, selfdescriptionand problems with applicants use of impression management.Methodology: We carried out six qualitative semistructured interviews with recruiters from twomarketleading Swedish companies. The empirical foundation was analyzed through the methodconcentration of meaning and thereafter put in relation to relevant theories and previous research.Finally the empirical foundation was discussed on the basis of the thesis purpose.Empirical foundation: The empirical foundation is mainly a description of the recruiters experiencesof different impression management tactics and their coping strategies. The result shows that there ismany different experiences of the various tactics and whether they are seen positive or negative isdependent on which job it is and the candidates impression in general. The empirical foundation alsodescribes the recruiters thoughts about how a candidate carries out a successful interview and whattheir interviewsituation looks like. The chapter ends with a description of which importance therecruiters ascribe candidates usage of impression management.Conclusions: Our main conclusion is that even if the recruiters on direct questions concerningdifferent impression management tactics describe it as negative, the result shows that it often is seenas a relevant social skill and something that is expected of a good candidate. We also think that therecruiters are ?unconciously aware? of the different impression management tactics. At first they showno awarness concerning the tactics but after further discussions we found that they had several copingstrategies for them.