|
|
|
|
|
| Message From: somuecom |
Total Posts: 2 |
Rank: Beginner |
| Post Date: 11/05/2010 06:52:25 |
Points: 10 |
 |
|
| An assessment centre will have a standardised process for evaluation of behaviour using multiple inputs. These centres need well-trained process observers and robust techniques are used. Compared to normal interviews, at assessment centres judgements about behaviours are made by not one but many, using specifically developed simulations. Data is pooled by the assessors or by a statistical integration process. Trained assessors observe and evaluate candidates on their relevant managerial qualities, while those candidates are performing a variety of situational exercises. Assessment centre exercises (e.g., role-play, in-basket, fact-finding and group discussions), intend to measure dimensions such as leadership, planning, sensitivity, problem solving, and many others. Assessment centres serve three main human resources functions: Selection and promotion Diagnosis (e.g., identification of training and development needs) Development (i.e., skill enhancement through simulations). The following dimensions are normally assessed in assessment centres: Planning and organising Leadership n Analytical Problem solving Sensitivity Decision-making Creativity Sociability Management control and delegating. For success of the centres, assessors have to demonstrate the capability to observe and record the behaviour of candidates. This is demanding as assessors have to understand the difference between merely looking for concrete verbal and non-verbal behaviours and interpreting these behaviours. They should be able to withhold early judgements. These days video is frequently used to aid assessors in gathering behavioural information. Assessors should be able to organise their behavioural observations by job-related dimensions. This means indicating to which dimension each behaviour belongs. Another skill involves accurate rating of candidates on dimensions. They should have the ability not to make comparative judgements. This is critical. Assessors should demonstrate the ability to integrate information from various exercises and be able to discuss the ratings with fellow assessors. Finally, they have to write formal reports and give feedback. Studies reveal that if assessment techniques are robust, targeted, well-designed and properly implemented, then grouped together this multiple assessment technique can be the most valid and reliable approach when compared to single-method approaches—such as interviews and personality questionnaires. Although setting up an assessment centre can be costly, the cost is worth it if one considers the risk minimisation of recruiting the wrong person. Costs can be higher when organisations spend money in buying expensive off-the-shelf tools which tie them into an additional cost. Often these products are mis-aligned with competency models. Another cost is the time commitment required from internal participants and managers who play assessor roles. The main advantage of assessment centres is that it allows key job success behaviours to be directly observed and measured. Designed and run properly, they provide a window to cross-check or challenge information gained through self report measures such as interviews. For example, someone may outline a ton of experience (e.g. leadership experience) in a behavioural interview, but in a group exercise they are observed to dominate, do not listen to others and ignore the quieter group members. Assessment centres are powerful and are becoming increasingly popular. Organi-sations which have growth plans coupled with the desire to get people to man positions from within, should get started on assessment centres |
| |
|
|
|
|
