Use the informations below to answering the question.

S Part 2 A Template.docx A. Weighted Compensatory Strategy 1. Which of the six factors do you consider the most important in terms of selecting bank tellers? Defend your choice. 2. Based on your answer to the first question, double the points for the four applicants for this factor. Record the answers in the table below. 3. Of the remaining five factors, which two do you see as least important for selecting bank tellers? Defend these choices. 4. Based on your answer to question 3, divide the points in half for the four applicants for these two factors. Record the answers in the table below. 5. For the three factors not mentioned in questions 1 and 3, copy the scores from the previous table into the table below. Total the scores for the four applicants. Maria Lori Steve Jenna Education 60 30 30 [ 100 Work experience Math skills Verification knowledge Interpersonal skills | Work motivation TOTAL a. Who scored the highest? i. Do you think this person is the best applicant? Why or why not? b. Who scored the lowest? c. When you compare your answers using the unweighted to the weighted approach, which approach do you think was better? Why? S Part 2 A Template.docx SHRM Case Part 2A: Selection Strategy A. Unweighted Compensatory Strategy i Maria Lori Steve | Education 60 | 30 30 | Work experience | Math skills Verification knowledge Interpersonal skills | Work motivation [ToTaL a. Who scored the highest? i. Do you think this person is the best applicant? Why or why not? b. Who scored the lowest? A. Weighted Compensatory Strategy 1. Which of the six factors do you consider the most important in terms of selecting bank tellers? Defend your choice. 2. Based on your answer to the first question, double the points for the four applicants for this factor. Record the answers in the table below. 3. Of the remaining five factors, wmg bank Jenna 100 SHRM Case Part 1 C Manuel Nunes SHRM Case Study Part 1 C Score of Applicants: MARIA LORI STEVE JENNA EDUCATION 6 3 3 1o WORK EXPERIENCE 6 3 10 REJECT MATH SKILLS 10 REJECT 3 o VERIFICATION KNOWLEDGE REJECT 6 3 6 INTERPERSONAL SKILLS 10 3 3 3 WORK MOTIVATION 6 6 3 10 a.) Based on your scores, complete the following table, rank ordering the applicants from best (1) to worst (4). If, for any reason you want to eliminate a candidate, put an "x" under the name. MARIA LORI STEVE JENNA Rank order 1-4 1 X 3 2 (1=best) b.) If you eliminated (X'd) an applicant, what led to that decision? Lori was eliminated because her scores were consistently lower across all criteria compared to the other applicants. Her scores in education, work experience, math skills, and interpersonal skills were below the threshold, and her verification knowledge was rated as "Reject,\" indicating she did not meet the required standard for the position. .) What difficulties, if any, did you have applying your scoring system? The main difficulty in applying the scoring system was dealing with subjective criteria such as interpersonal skills and work motivation. These qualities can be harder to quantify and evaluate objectively compared to factors like education and work experience. Additionally, the "Reject\" rating for verification knowledge adds complexity as it suggests a clear disqualification but doesn't provide a specific score. d.) Based on this applicant data, would you make any changes to your rubrics {from Part B)? If ase describe. Based on this applicant data, one potential change to the rubrics could be to provide more specific criteria for the "Reject\" category in verification knowledge. This would offer clarity on why an applicant was deemed unsuitable in that area and provide a clearer basis for decision-making. Additionally, further clarification or additional yes. p criteria could be added to the interpersonal skills and work motivation categories to ensure more consistent evaluation across applicants