• Review the Week 3 Learning Resources.
• Think of a time when you were influenced by someone else to make a substantial change in your life (e.g., enroll in your program at Walden; change jobs; move to another city; or address a habit, such as to stop smoking). 
• Recall the details of the situation, including the person who influenced you. 
• Analyze the situation and how you moved through it in terms of the components of the ELM featured in the graphic on page 192 of the text, paying particular attention to the route(s) to persuasion that you used (e.g., when the routes overlapped for you, if they did, or whether you used the same route throughout the situation).
• Consider what informed how you engaged with the person(s) who influenced you and other aspects of the situation. 
• Also, consider the ethics of the method(s) of influence, using the code of ethics you consider most appropriate to the situation.

By Day 7

Submit a 3- to 5-page paper that addresses the following: 

• Describe the situation, the change you were influenced to make, who influenced you, and the nature of the influence.
• Apply the ELM model, and explain the experience for you in terms of the ELM components.
• Explain the ethics of the influence you experienced and how your relationship with the person(s) who influenced you was impacted. 
• Explain insights you gained from analyzing this experience using the ELM model that you would apply the next time you want to make a change in your life or are encouraged to make a change by others.

Review the scenario and answer the questions:

You are still the Director of Staffing (congratulations!) and you have a recruiter who is accustomed to more traditional face-to-face recruiting, shaking hands with many potential applicants, and smiling all the while. She does her prescreening for KSAOs (knowledge, skills, abilities, and other characteristics) while she is talking with the potential applicant, and only invites those who pass her pre-screening to sit for a full interview.  She personally sees 100 candidates a month at various job fairs and recruitment events. Eighty-five percent of her applicants are hired in some position in the company.

You have converted to an online recruiting process, and pulled your recruiter off the street and into her office. You get over 6,000 online applications per month. Ninety percent of your online applications are eliminated at your pre-screening. You manage to get 60 qualified applicants (1%) to be able to sit for an interview, and about 50% of those are hired in some position in the company.

Is this new method better?  If so, how do you convince your traditional recruiter that online recruiting is better at identifying KSAOs in candidates? If not, why do you believe the traditional method is better?

Identify and explain one potential pitfall or challenge you might encounter with this new online recruiting process.

You must cite at least one source in APA format.