Empirical evidence on the practice of latitude of discretion in personnel selection: Basis for an informed intervention

Abstract

This study addresses the notable gap in understanding the application of latitude of discretion in personnel selection. It then adds value to the practice and existing literature in public personnel administration by presenting empirical data on how the latitude of discretion was applied and justified. The qualitative exploratory case study design was adopted due to the limited research on the topic. This study was conducted in a government agency in Baguio City, Philippines. Participants were chosen through purposive sampling using the following criteria: they must be directly involved in the agency’s recruitment process and willing to participate in the study. Document analysis and member checks were also employed to add weight to the accuracy and validity of the findings. Data were treated using the thematic analysis. The findings reveal that despite a rigorous recruitment process comprising vacancy postings, initial screenings, aptitude tests, and panel interviews, most hires were from rank 5 rather than higher-ranked applicants. Additionally, the study highlights that subjective criteria such as “attitude” and “work experience” affected the hiring decisions of the appointing officers. The research contributes to the broader discussion on integrating discretion with merit-based criteria in personnel selection. It provides empirical evidence on the application of discretion, emphasizing the importance of developing detailed guidelines to ensure hiring practices are fair and aligned with organizational goals. This insight is crucial for improving recruitment processes’ transparency and accountability, aligning with Weber’s Bureaucratic Theory and Administrative Control Theory.