Assessment and Selection - Raising the Standards

Focus of the research

How do organisations assess employees specifically in the process of selection and development? What methods do they use and why? Have they altered their assessment methods recently? If so, for what reason? Why the rise and fall in the popularity of different assessment methods? Can we learn from other organisations in order to raise the standards of all types of assessment?

This research project focused on the following.

• The history, theory and types of assessment method available today.

• The available evidence on the value of each of these methods based on different criteria like corporate acceptability, cost, legality, practicability and validity.

• The attitudes to psychometric tests among various groups including HR professionals, consultants, academics, and test publishers.

• The range of ability and personality tests that various groups know about and use.

• The rationale organisations provide for the particular test methods they use.

What is hot and what is not?

The central question here concerns the development of new assessment methods. Nearly all methods in this area - from the least valid, like graphology, to the most valid, such as assessment centres - have been around for many years.

This report reviews around a dozen assessment techniques. Some remain surprisingly old fashioned. Others are repackaged and updated.

However, within certain areas there have been noticeable developments and trends.

• Most organisations are aware of the limitations of traditional interviews and are making efforts to introduce well-structured, panel interviews.

• Poor validity response rates and litigation issues have meant the traditional reference is being replaced by structured telephone calls asking specific questions of targeted interviewees - and often peers.

• There is now great emphasis on the usefulness of peer and subordinate ratings for assessment purposes. This has been a major consequence of an interest in 360° multi-rater feedback work.

• Ability tests are being used more than ever.

• Organisations are very sensitive to the possibility of bias in these tests - and are also particularly concerned that they have face validity for candidates.

• Psychometric tests continue to be developed in large numbers and put on the market. Some clearly resonate with the spirit of the time like tests of emotional intelligence.

• Biodata, psychomotor tests and tests of job knowledge are not frequently used. They have, however, never disappeared and remain the favourite of particular clients.

• The concept of using work samples and probation periods appears to be gaining more attention.

• Assessment centres remain the basis of many organisations preferred methods. They are very expensive and time consuming but are still recognised as 'the best'.

• There is great interest in assessing 'people with potential' or 'high flyers' but users are not sure how to do this effectively.

• Organisations differ widely as to whether they should bring assessment expertise in-house or outsource all or some of it.

• Much less interest and expertise is devoted to assessment for development purposes.

• Organisations are beginning to realise that they can cost the effectiveness of successful assessment/selection in monetary terms, which can have important implications.

Key assessment questions for organisations

The study attempted to answer these research questions and provide ten recommendations for professionals working in the area.

Research Questions

• What are the most frequently used methods and what are they used for? This depends on who (level) was assessed and whether it was primarily for selection or not. Interviews, psychometric tests, references (peer/subordinate/boss) and assessment centres were the most often used.

• What are the strengths and weaknesses of each method? There was surprising agreement here with the top five being assessment centres, structured interviews, cognitive ability tests, peer ratings and work samples.

• What is new in the area? Various issues were identified, like emotional and other 'social' intelligences; the assessment of high flyers; assessing dark-side (select out) issues; assessing people for working in teams; integrity testing; assessing for diversity; finding the 'international' manager, and assessing self-awareness.

• What guiding principles do employers use in choosing different assessment methods? This is heavily dependent on organisation size, sector, history, use of consultants and reactions of their staff.

• What practical lessons can be learned for good practice in the area? Essentially, that assessment is important and expensive; that organisations should validate their own practice; that spending on assessment is often inappropriate; and that assessment is ongoing and not a one-offbusiness/ procedure.

• How effective are the methods in identifying the right people? There were two interesting findings here. First, as maybe expected, people tended to justify their own choices, and secondly, they tended to agree on the methods which worked well.

• What changes have been made and why? First, the web has made a great difference to assessment, as it has to everything else! Second, candidate reactions to assessment have to be taken more clearly into account, and thirdly, assessing for redundancy is an emerging and sensitive issue.

• What comments do suppliers and consultancies make on current trends? First, assessment and psychometric testing is a growing area, and second, depending on the size, sector and sophistication of the company, very different decisions are made.

Ten lessons

In addition to the above, these ten lessons from experience were discussed.

1. Amateurism will not do: assessment is a technical, professional business, requiring skill, education and training.
2. Learning from the past: organisations need to validate their methods in-house and learn from success and failure.
3. Spend assessment money in proportion to job value for the organisation.
4. Assess for failure as well as success: ie, select out as well as in.
5. Study the job market and be aware of demographic and other changes in job applicants at all levels.
6. Appreciate that assessment is an HR, IR and PR business: whatever method is used, there are both positive and negative consequences for employee relationships.
7. Differentiate between selection and development, which are different processes.
8. Update job analysis and competency profiles regularly as jobs evolve.
9. Know the costs and benefits of good and bad selection.
10. Keep up-to-date on both research and legal issues.

Have your say

This piece is intended to stimulate comment and additional suggestions, based on your experience so send in your thoughts, and we may be able to share them through the website.

Read more

To read the full report, CRF members should visit the CRF website and download the report from the Knowledge Base.

Non-members should contact CRF for further information on how to join.