Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1982-11-30 Info Packetr i REPRINT What is an assessment center? The answer is not simple, and it depends on who you ask! Cabot L. Jaffee and Joseph T. Sefcik, Jr. ssessment centers are gaining in popular- ity more.rapidly than perhaps any other human resources tool and Ihev are by no means a standardized tech- nology. More and more people are having their lives touched by the method- ology and often the methodology is different, dkhough called an assessment center. This is both exciting and disturbing. For many years, the unfilled assessment center seminar rooms demonstrated the hostility cen. tered around the protection of the more Tradi- tional selection procedures and the overwhelm. Ing feelings concerning the unrealistic time de. mands and the general cost of the process. The passage of time and the government have taken care of many of these issues and the rooms are now filled with people wanting to hear about assessment centers. Traditional testing proce. dures have fallen in the wake of validity require. ments. The seemingly unrealistic time and money costs have paled in comparison to the costs of lawsuits, the payment of reparations and the heightened concern for the welfare and fair treatment of every individual. They can be used any place in which information is lacking, based on the person's past behavior, or In any critical skill areas. Assessment centers would be equally useful for entry-level police of. ficers, teachers, salespeople, or a variety of differ. ent kinds of managers. The major determinant of usefulness is economics. An analysis of how many people would be moved into the target position over a defined period of time and the cost of an error In the selection process are the major economic barometers. Any person who has read even superficially In the area has seen the statement: "An assessment center is not a place but rather a process." This statement needed to be made because the first assessment centers were places rather than a standardized process. The use of work samples or their combination with other types of instru. ments have been the critical characteristics of what is now accepted as the assessment center method. It is from this point that the definition of an assessment center needs to be addressed. What is an Assessment Center? It is a process in which individuals have an oppor- tunity to pardcipale In a series of situations which resemble what they might be called upon to do in the real world. They are tested by situational or simulation exercises and multiple -trained asses. sors process Information In a fair and impartial manner. Where can Assessment Centers be Used? The questions stlll remain: what is described by the term "assessment center" and why and how is ft different from other processes used In the selec- tion and development of people7 our views are presented here with apologies to professional col. leagues who honestly and with cause disagree, and with no apologies to the ever-increasing number of people who are now "selling" this product with no more understanding of the con- cept than the first-time user. t MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB I DEDAR RAPIDS • DES M0196 i Dr. Cabot L Jaffee is President and Founder of Assessment Designs, Inc. He has designed assessment centers for the government and hundreds of organizations. Jaffee holds a BA in Psychology from New York University, an MA from Columbia University and a PhD in psychology from Florida State University. Joseph T. Sefclk Jr. is Manager of Assessment Center Services for Assessment Designs Inc He holds a BS in psychology from Florida Southern College with on emphasis in business and an MS in psychology from the University of Central Florida with an emphasis ht Industrial psychology. a.0,3S J WN r ASSESSMENT CENTERS C How Do You Know What People Will Be Called Upon To Do in the Real World? The only way to know is by studying the position. This can be accomplished in a number of ways. all of which include some type of job analysis. The job analysis defines critical tasks and skills neces- sary for success in the job. What Makes a Good Situational or Simulation Exercise? It is determined by the degree to which there is overlap or agreement between the test situation and the real situation. The more the test situation reflects the job demands and calls for the exhibi- tion of skills that will be required on the job, the better the ability of the tests to predict later job behavior. Why Do Most Assessment Centers Measure the Same Skills? They don't! Even though most assessmentcen- ter's design had "organizing and planning" as a necessary skill, every assessment center has not been the same. The description of the skill in terms of breaking a task down to make work easier is not the real definition of the skill. The real definition is the situational exercise used to mea- sure the skill. For example, a first-line supervisor organizes and plans as does a chief executive officer. The situationally relevant lest to assess planning for one would not likely be relevant for the other. They are all called Organizing and Planning because our language is not precise enough to differentiate, but they are probably totally different operations. The skills are not the same, therefore. because the measures need to be totally different. How Many Skills Can You Measure? The more skills you have, the greater chance of overlap between them and the greater chance that one piece of behavior will contribute signifi- cantly to many skills. The more this may happen, the more unreliable the assessment center. It is my experience that approximately 10 skills, depend- ing upon the complexity of the job, may be reabs- tic — 20 or more are not Should You Use Personality Tests or Intelligence Tests in Order to Learn More About a Person? When you do this, you run the risk of misusing the information from those tests. For example, if somebody organizes and plans extremely well in an exercise which resembles the job, what have you learned if they appear unorganized on a per- sonality test? If someone perceives the critical elements of a business-related problem, why is it important to know whether or not they can un- derstand the correct answer to the analogy apples are to oranges as pears are to bananas, cherries, or plums? The very constructs measured by per- sonality or intelligence tests can be measured by situational tests in a much more relevant way. What About The Personal Interview? This falls prey to the problem of interpreting the data. Intellectual responses in an interview setting do not necessarily relate to a person's ability to demonstrate the skill in other behavioral ways. A person may do quite well at answering questions concerning what they might do during critical periods in a board room. but be totally unable to effect the behaviors in the applied. job-related setting. In addition, the information appears less reliable and more subject to interpretation, which is what the assessment center attempts to recognize. Can You Fake Performance at an Assessment Center? Can You Play a Role? If someone were given a try -out for a basketball team and they were able to score many points, there would be very little question as to whether the behavior was "real" or not. Whether or not they choose to use these skills, over time, be- comes a question of their interest, motivation or opportunity, more than their skill level. Assess- ment centers do not measure motivation — they measure skill level and potential. But the know- ledge of skill level can and should be of critical importance in job performance. People who do things well are likely to receive rewards from doing these things and are therefore more likely to perform In an effective manner. It then becomes the responsibility of the organization to ensure the availability of rewards for demonstration of effec- tive performance. Perhaps, in many ways, this has been the prob- lem of the "disadvantaged". It is very difficult to demonstrate a relationship between what they do and what will happen to them. This fact is perhaps a major reason why traditional tests of motivation and measurements of job performance have not appeared similar for advantaged and disadvan- taged populations (Myart vs. Motorola, 1964; Lopez,1966; Bartlett and O'Leary, 1969; Hicks vs. Crown Zellerbach, 1970; and Griggs vs. Duke Power Company, 1971). The evidence from the assessment center results indicate that males and females, and minority and majority candidates perform more similarly to each other than theydo on pencil -and -paper test. (Moses and Boehm, 1975; Huck and Bray, 1976; Frank and Drucker, 1977; Schmitt and Hill, 1977 ) This maybe due to a measure of skill that Is present without having it confounded by the motivation of the individual to perform over a period of time. So perhaps moti- vation decreases due to a lack of opportunity for rewards over time in some organizations and the shift level measured at the assessment center may MICROFILMED BY +� JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS •DCS h101AE5 ao3s 1 P1 v r be a clearer picture of potential than actual job performance. Why Have Some Studies Shown Assessment Centers Predict Better for Two Levels Above a Candidate's Position Than One? Because, insonte cases, these assessment centers have probably been better simulations of the job two levels above than one level above. This may mean that more careful job analysis would pro- vide better information for the development of assessment center instruments that would pre- dict performance one level above a candidate's position. How Do You Know Assessment ' Centers Are Valid? Content validity is specified by the new guidelines on employee selection (Federal Register 1978) as an acceptable form of validity and it is to this type of validity particularly that the assessment center methodology lends itself. This type of validity is inherent in the assessment center process when the situational exercises are developed based upon a thorough job analysis. Additionally, assessment centers have demonstrated a strong positive vela. tionship between ratings and future performance on the job. This predictive validity has been observed on many occasions; most no. tably in the AT&T Management Prugress Study (Bray and Grant. 1966), and by other research- ers (Bray and Campbell. 1968: Jaffee. Bender ,end Calvert. 1970; Kraut and Scutt, 1972: Muck. 1973: Moses. 1973; Worbois. 1975; and Hinrichs. 1978). How Well are Assessment Centers Accepted? Accepted by whom? If assessment centers are well-run.and consider the needs of the people in the organization, management, assessors and candidates like them very much. Management likes thein because they provide valuable data upon which selection decisions can be made or training programs developed. Assessors feel that they are better managers as a result of having participated in the process. And candidates like them because they see them as being the basis of a fair evaluation. However, when assessment centers are used by the organization as a "kiss of death" or an irreversible labelling process, it can build up feel- ings of discontent among those who may not immediately obtain a desired position. So the 'kiss of death" has to do wRth how the data are used rather than whether or not the data are yuod. This says that assessment centers must be entered into and developed thoughtfully so that they provide the basis for effective human re. sources utilization. L­� Will Assessment Centers Be Replaced by Some Other Process? The major tenets of the assessment center are built on a logical foundation. The ideas of doing a job analysis, designing work samples to measure those characteristics deemed critical and the train- ing of indviduals to make judgments on those critical skills are unassailable. To what extent any given assessment center meets these steps is quite another issue. However, the use of line managers to ensure acceptance of the program and the conscientious application of the critical steps in the process should guarantee continued accep- tance of the program by all concerned parties. The only replacement for assessment centers, then, is more effective development of simula. tions that better represent the environment and ways of teaching people to be more accurate evaluators of critical behavior. Computers pro- vide a good deal of hope for the more accurate simulation of environments. Do Assessment Centers Need to be Designed by Psychologists? They need to be designed by people who know not only how to direct or perform the steps of job analysis, exercise development and staff training, but also individuals who can ensure the process fits within an existing system which may consider issues like career palhing, development, counsel. ling and selection. Obviously, these people do not need to be psychologists; they do need experi- ence with Human Resource Management Sys- tems. However, sensitivity to administrative and possibly research method issues as they relate to equal opportunities and fairness in test administra- tion are important for the success of assessment center programs. Individuals with prescribed training in research design, like psychologists. might be helpful. But certainlyissues such as exercise order, time limits, daily schedules, exercise/candidate level match, etc. are things of which these people should be aware (Cohen, 1978). What Should People Be Told Before They Attend an Assessment Center? They should be told what the assessment center is evaluating, the kinds of exercises they will be going through and the use of the information obtained in the assessment center. As clear a pic- ture as possible should be painled for the candi- dates. They should be made as comfortable as possible so that their behavior is both natural and consistentwith what Is being demanded of them. Are Assessment Centers Related to Sensitivity Training? No. Assessment centers measure work-related skills and do not in any way attempt to create the MICRON1.111D B1' JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES The more the test situation reflects the job demands and calls for the exhibition of skills that will be required on the job, the better the ability of the tests to predict later job behavior. 2;L6 3S J J r ASSESSMENT CENTERS kinds of situations or the way of interpreting those situations which would be true of most types of sensitivity training programs. What Then Is an Assessment Center? An assessment center, for whatever purpose it is to be used, is the application of a specific methodology to the development of information about a person's job-related strengths and weak- nesses. The methodology considers what the per- son must do to succeed in the real world (Job analysis), the development of instruments to measure in a job related way the critical skills needed to succeed and the training of a panel of individuals to process the information in a fair and impartial manner. An assessment center is a sample of job be- havior and, as such, is only as good as the sample resembles the job, the length of time an individual is observed and the ability of the processors of the information to be fair and accurate. What Then Is An Assessment Center Not? An assessment center is not personality and intel- ligence tests. It is not a personal interview con- ducted by relatively untrained managers. It is not two leaderless group discussion exercises, an in -basket and a business game. An assessment center is not pre-packaged exercises, unless you can demonstrate the relationship to the job analysis. Assessment center technology describes the system by which information. gathered under controlled conditions - in which people are re - 1 cluired to perform job related tasks - is used to select, develop, counsel, career plan and any other activity which would enhance the fit of the person and the position and the overall effec- tiveness of the organization. References Barrett. C.J. & O'Leary. B. S. "A ddfeientail predanon model to moderate the effects of heterogeneous groups in personnel selection and chssilicanmi', Personnel Psychology, 1969.22:118 Bray, 0. W & Campbell. R.J. "Selection of salesmen by means of an assessment center". Journal of Appried Psychology, 1968,52.36.41. Bray, D. W & Grant. D, L. "The assessment center in the meawrementof potential for business management'. Psychological Monogmphs, 1966,80.117, Whole No. 6251. Cohen, S.L. '5nndardization of assessment center technology: some cndeal concerns', Journal of Assessment Center Technology, 1978, 1f31. 1.10. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Chit I service Commission, Department of labor. Department of Justice. Uniform guidelines on employee selection procedures. Federal Register. Vol. 43. No. 166. Auguu 25, 1978. Frank. F. & Drucker. J. "The influence of evaluatee's see and evaluation of it response on a managerial selection msmumenl".sex Roles: A Joumal of Research 3. 1977. Griggs vs. Duke PowerCmrgmny, 3 FEP 175119711. Hicks vs. Crnwrr Zellerbach,'L FEP 1059119701. Hindchs,.1. R. -An eight year Olnwup of a management assessment center". Journal of Applied Psychologv, 1978. 63,151596601 Huck, J. R. "A;sessmenl centersa review of the external and internal validities", Persc rmelPsychology. 1973.26, 191.212. Huck, J.R. & Bny, D.W. "Managernenl assessment center evaluatinns and sub..gmmt Inb performance of white and black Iemsles". Personnel Psy010Irn3y. 1976, 29. 1330. .Iallee, C. L.. Bender. J. & Calwn. O L. "the usses.ment center technique: a validation smdv'. Management of Persannd Quanedv. 1970.90.9-14 Kraut. A 1. Scon. G.J. " Valldlty of an operational manegemenl assessment prMJntn" Joymnlnf Applied Psychology. 1972. Vol. 56, No. 2. 124.129. Lopez. F. M. "Current problems In test performance ul loh applicant -, Personnel Psychology. 196b. 19. 10 19 binws, J.I. 'Tho devvinpmant of an assessment center for the idennheVion of agwmarn! potvnlwl".Persannd Psyncc1Nv. 1973.26.56959I1 Moses..H.&Btcehm.VE."Relationshipofaswssmenl renter pmtotmance In management progress of.umen '. Jnnmalnf Applied P.rychology. 1975.60 527529. hlyan vs Motorola, HOCong. Record 566264119641 Schmie. N, & Hill. T E. "Sex and race composition of assessment center groups as a determinant of peer and assessor ratings". Jounml ofApphed Psychology. 1977, 62.261-264 1Vmbois. G.M. "Validation of externally developed assessment procedures for identification of supervisory potential". Personnel Psychology. 1975. 28. 77-91 Reprinted with permission from the February issue of Personnel Administrator 4. 1980, The American Society for Personnel Administration. 30 Park Drive. Berea, OH 44017, 111CROEIU4ED BY JORM MICR6LAB CEDAR RAPIDS DES 10L•IES 9635 J N