To validate selection procedures for hiring, review them against seven topics, from job analysis to recordkeeping.
How to validate selection procedures for hiring compliance
Assessment procedures can be a cost-effective tool in narrowing down large applicant pools, according to U.S. Office of Personnel Management.
Map your current selection tests to the specific job performance factors identified in your latest job analysis.
Key takeaways for how to validate selection procedures for hiring compliance
- Use the 4/5ths rule of thumb as a practical and easy-to-administer measure to determine if differences in selection rates are substantial, rather than relying primarily on a test of statistical significance, according to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
- Recognize that small sample sizes can prevent a determination of adverse impact; for instance, if the number of selections is too small, the Guidelines indicate that the difference in selection rates may not warrant a finding of adverse impact, according to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
- Apply the 4/5ths rule to check if the selection rate for any group is less than 80% of the selection rate for the most favored group, according to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
- Understand that additional validity studies need not be performed for a particular selection procedure once validity has been shown in accord with the guidelines, until the validity study is subject to review as provided in section 3B, according to the Legal Information Institute.
Defining job performance factors through analysis
Before selecting applicants, you must identify the specific skills and abilities that lead to success in the role. The U.S. Office of Personnel Management states that factors contributing to successful job performance, such as oral communication and problem solving, are identified using a process called job analysis, according to U.S. Office of Personnel Management. This process isolates the measurable elements of the work rather than relying on general assumptions about what an applicant should know. By focusing on these identified factors, you create a baseline against which selection tests can be measured.
When setting specific performance standards, such as typing speed, the legal requirement to prove that a standard is "essential" may not apply in all contexts. Job Accommodation Network notes that if an employer requires typists to accurately type 75 words a minute, the employer is not required to show that such speed and accuracy are "essential" to a job or that less accuracy or speed would not be adequate, according to Job Accommodation Network. This distinction highlights that while job analysis identifies the factors, the specific thresholds you set must still align with the actual demands of the position to remain defensible.
Use the job analysis to list every factor that contributes to performance. For each factor, determine whether it is a knowledge, skill, or ability requirement. Then, match your selection method to that specific factor. If your test measures problem solving, ensure the job analysis explicitly identifies problem solving as a contributing factor to success. This direct link between the identified factor and the test content is the foundation for validity. If a factor is not identified in the job analysis, do not include it in your selection criteria. This prevents the inclusion of irrelevant measures that could introduce bias or adverse impact. For related interview checks, see structured interview checks.
A filled reference table of validity standards
The table below maps seven review topics to the specific standards defined by federal sources. Each row links a topic to the publisher that defines it, the standard or definition, and the supporting source quote. Use this table to review selection procedures against the cited standards.
| Topic | Publisher | Standard or Definition | Source Quote |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Job Analysis Factors | U.S. Office of Personnel Management | Factors contributing to successful job performance are identified using a process called job analysis. | "Factors contributing to successful job performance (such as oral communication, problem solving) are identified using a process called job analysis." |
| 2. Validity Study Types | Legal Information Institute | Criterion-related, content, and construct validity studies call for data showing predictive power, representativeness, or characteristic measurement. | "Evidence of the validity of a test or other selection procedure by a criterion-related validity study should consist of empirical data demonstrating that the selection procedure is predictive of or significantly correlated with important elements of job performance." |
| 3. Adverse Impact Threshold | U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission | The 4/5ths rule of thumb serves as a practical measure of whether differences in selection rates are substantial. | "For this reason, the Guidelines do not rely primarily upon a test of statistical significance, but use the 4/5ths rule of thumb as a practical and easy-to-administer measure of whether differences in selection rates are substantial." |
| 4. Sample Size Limits | U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission | Small numbers of selections may be too small to warrant a determination of adverse impact despite rate differences. | "For example, if the employer selected three males and one female from an applicant pool of 20 males and 10 females, the 4/5ths rule would indicate adverse impact (selection rate for women is 10%; for men 15%; 10/15 or 66 2/3% is less than 80%), yet the number of selections is too small to warrant a determination of adverse impact." |
| 5. Recordkeeping Groups | Legal Information Institute | Applicable race, sex, and ethnic groups are defined for recordkeeping purposes. | "Applicable race, sex, and ethnic groups for recordkeeping." |
| 6. Affirmative Action Review | Legal Information Institute | Federal enforcement agencies consider the provisions, goals, timetables, and progress of adopted affirmative action programs. | "Where a user has adopted an affirmative action program, the Federal enforcement agencies will consider the provisions of that program, including the goals and timetables which the user has adopted and the progress which the user has made in carrying out that program and in meeting the goals and timetables." |
| 7. Selection Method Utility | U.S. Office of Personnel Management | Assessment procedures can be a cost-effective tool in narrowing down large applicant pools based on research findings. | "Assessment procedures can be a cost-effective tool in narrowing down large applicant pools." |
Calculating adverse impact using the 4/5ths rule
To apply the 4/5ths rule, you calculate the selection rate for the group with the lowest selection rate and compare it to the selection rate for the group with the highest selection rate. If the lower rate is less than 80% of the higher rate, the 4/5ths rule indicates potential adverse impact.
Illustrative example: comparing two selection rates
Suppose 50 applicants from one group produce 15 selections, a 30% selection rate. Suppose 20 applicants from another group produce 10 selections, a 50% selection rate. The lower rate, 30%, is less than 80% of the higher rate, 50%, so the 4/5ths rule indicates potential adverse impact.
Small sample sizes limit this calculation. In cases with a small number of applicants, the difference in selection rates may be too small to constitute adverse impact in the absence of other information, according to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. A small applicant pool therefore does not automatically trigger adverse impact findings; the statistical difference must be meaningful given the sample size. You should treat the 4/5ths rule as an initial screening tool. If the rule indicates a potential issue, investigate further by examining the total number of selections and the size of the applicant pool. Do not rely solely on the percentage difference without considering the context of the sample size. For more on this, see adverse impact in selection procedures.
Documenting validity studies and recordkeeping
A recommended review step is to document the specific type of validity study supporting each selection procedure. The Legal Information Institute outlines distinct data requirements for criterion-related, content, and construct validity studies under 29 CFR § 1607.5. For criterion-related validity, the evidence must consist of empirical data demonstrating that the selection procedure is predictive of or significantly correlated with important elements of job performance, according to Legal Information Institute. This requires linking test scores directly to measured job outcomes.
Content validity relies on different evidence. The data must show that the content of the selection procedure is representative of important aspects of performance on the job for which the applicants are to be evaluated, according to Legal Information Institute. This approach focuses on whether the test items mirror the actual tasks performed in the role. Construct validity requires data showing that the procedure measures the degree to which applicants have identifiable characteristics which have been determined to be important in successful performance in the job, according to Legal Information Institute. This method checks the underlying psychological or cognitive traits being assessed.
Once validity is established, you do not need to repeat the study immediately. The Legal Information Institute states that whenever validity has been shown in accord with these guidelines for the use of a particular selection procedure for a job or group of jobs, additional studies need not be performed until such time as the validity study is subject to review as provided in section 3B above, according to Legal Information Institute. This provision allows you to rely on existing data until the study is subject to review under section 3B.
Recordkeeping requirements are separate from validity study documentation. The recordkeeping guidance names applicable race, sex, and ethnic groups, according to Legal Information Institute. This data collection supports the monitoring of selection outcomes for potential adverse impact.
Action step: Review your current validity files to confirm which specific study type (criterion, content, or construct) supports each hiring test, and verify that your recordkeeping system captures the applicable race, sex, and ethnic groups named in 29 CFR § 1607.4.
Affirmative action review and agency posture
Federal enforcement agencies consider the general posture of the user with respect to equal employment opportunity for the specific job or group of jobs in question, according to Legal Information Institute. This assessment focuses on how the organization approaches EEO obligations within the scope of the relevant positions.
Where a user has adopted an affirmative action program, the Federal enforcement agencies will consider the provisions of that program, according to Legal Information Institute. This review includes the specific goals and timetables which the user has adopted. Agencies also examine the progress which the user has made in carrying out that program and in meeting the goals and timetables, according to Legal Information Institute.
Next step today: list each selection test beside the validity study type that supports it.
Related guides: Verify substance testing compliance: 9 state rules to check.
FAQ: How to validate selection procedures for hiring compliance
What is the 4/5ths rule for adverse impact?
The Guidelines do not rely primarily upon a test of statistical significance, but use the 4/5ths rule of thumb as a practical and easy-to-administer measure of whether differences in selection rates are substantial, according to U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. It serves as a standard method for evaluating if selection rate disparities are significant enough to warrant further review.
Does a small applicant pool trigger adverse impact findings?
No: a small applicant pool does not automatically trigger adverse impact findings, because the number of selections may be too small to warrant one, according to U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. In such cases, the difference in selection rates may be too small, given the small number of applicants, to constitute adverse impact in the absence of other information, according to U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
What data is required for a criterion-related validity study?
Evidence of the validity of a test or other selection procedure by a criterion-related validity study should consist of empirical data demonstrating that the selection procedure is predictive of or significantly correlated with important elements of job performance, according to Legal Information Institute. This requirement ensures that the selection method is directly linked to actual job outcomes.
How does job analysis identify performance factors?
Factors contributing to successful job performance, such as oral communication or problem solving, are identified using a process called job analysis, according to U.S. Office of Personnel Management. This gives you the factors to match with selection methods.
Do I need new validity studies if I already have one?
Not necessarily: whenever validity has been shown in accord with these guidelines for the use of a particular selection procedure for a job or group of jobs, additional studies need not be performed until such time as the validity study is subject to review as provided in section 3B above, according to Legal Information Institute. You should retain the original study until a formal review triggers the need for new data.