Management
Student4Sure
ASPresentation.pptxDE
DEVELOPMENT ASSESMENT PROCESS AND ASSESMENT CENTRE PROPOSAL
Presented by Emma, Ana, Michelle & Evans
1
What will be covered today?
Our understanding of your requirements
Project Plan
First steps prior screening and assessment
Screening method
Assessment methods
Assessment Centre
Development Programme
2
What?
Design a development assessment process and assessment centre
Who?
High-potential talent
Why?
12-months intensive development programme
Our understanding of your requirements:
3
Project Plan
| wc 04/03 | wc 11/03 | wc 18/03 | wc 25/03 | wc 01/04 | wc 08/04 | wc 15/04 | wc 22/04 | wc 29/04 | wc 06/05 | wc 13/05 | wc 20/05 | wc 27/05 | wc 03/06 | wc 10/06 | wc 17/06 | wx 24/06 | wc 01/07 | wc 08/07 | wc 15/07 | wc 22/07 | AUGUST | SEPT | |
| Define job analysis participants and schedule job analysis | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Conduct job analysis (3 days) | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Competency framework design / scoring criteria design | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Realistic job preview and motivational fit inventory (system build) | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Assessment tools - evaluation | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Presentation to client - timetable; tool evaluation; process | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Assessment tools - purchase or design | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Realistic job preview and motivational fit inventory (online for applicant review) | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| AC design (6 days) | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| AC materials - briefing documents; scoring criteria; venue booking | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| GMA/Yellow Hook Reef online (Arctic Shores) test | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| GMA test results review | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| GMA drop out candidate review/ready now discussion | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Personality NEO online test | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Personality NEO individual report review | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Candidate reports? Immediate automated feedback- check? | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Client check in | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Client check in (with GMA and Personality results and recommendations) | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Assessor training - design and delivery (group exercise & multi assessor structured interview) | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| ACs commence June | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| AC wash up -onsite on day | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Client check in - post AC and wash up - applicant review | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Offer management | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Non-successful candidate management - career chat - other development routes/options | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Mobility support (visa, cultural sensitivity training; bank account; accommodation; buddy; maps; insurance etc) | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Monthly coaching timetable - diarise with individuals and coaches | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Start Date |
What is going to happen in the next few months?
4
First steps prior screening and assessment
1. Job Analysis
We will identify knowledge, skills, and abilities required for high performance in the job.
2. Define a competency framework
Based on the results of the job analysis, we will determine the essential and desired competencies to assess candidates against.
What great looks like/success factors
Design assessment framework – realistic scenarios (face validity) on brand and behaviourally anchored scoring guidelines
Wording of what they are looking for
Specific areas to address
Design an assessment framework:
Realistic Preview
SJT
Gamification
Mention:
Blueprint threshold
Minimum criteria that needs to meet
5
Leadership Blueprint
Foundational measured by GMA and Personality phase of assessment process
Growth some of personality questionnaire but validated by Assessment Centre – group exercise, multi assessor structured interview and EI questionnaire (so some of growth dimensions and career dimensions are malleable and can form part of development programme to help them fulfil their potential)
6
High level timeline
July & Aug
(July) Offer & candidate management
(Aug) Mobility support
Sept
Programme launch
Timings
Process
Feedback
Realistic Preview - 1st (SJT format) – motivational fit
Games – they can do it from anywhere, inclusive (adverse impact) – Cognitive
Personality – NEO (15 min)
Emotional Intelligence (
Those who are not suitable for this scheme, we will direct them
April 1, May (2+3), June ( Assessment Centre, Group Exc, Interview)
Assessment Centre
EISDI – Emotional Intelligence based on MSC..
Group Exercise
Multi-assessor Interview
4-6 different assessors
Wash-up
July – Candidate management/offers
September –Start
Continue Development
7
April
Application
Realistic Preview
May
Online assessment (GMA & Personality)
June
Assessment centre
(Group Ex, EI, interview)
DE
SCREENING AND ASSESMENT METHODS
Realistic Job Preview
Motivational Factor of Cultural Intelligence (CQ)
NEO FFI (Personality)
Yellow Hook Reef (Cognitive Ability)
8
Screening
Realistic Job Preview
Manages job expectations, increases self-selection, job satisfaction, performance and decreases turnover.
Motivational Factor of Cultural Intelligence (CQ)
Better adjustment to work, life and social demands in foreign assignments
Templer, Tay & Chandrasekar, 2006
Motivational CQ refers to an individuals’ extent of interest and drive to adapt to new cultural surroundings (Ang et al., 2004).
Work adjustment involves the adaptation to new job tasks, work roles, responsibilities, and the new work environment in a new cultural setting (Black, 1988).
Hom, Griffeth, Palich, and Bracker (1999) found that RJP promotes accurate initial expectations, causes newcomers to develop coping mechanisms to manage workplace strain, and increases their perception of employer concern and honesty. Meta-analyses on the effects of RJP on work adjustment in domestic contexts have reported positive effects, such as lowered initial expectations, job satisfaction, job performance, and lower turnover (McEvoy & Cascio, 1985; Phillips, 1998; Premack & Wanous, 1985).
Global employees who were more interested and motivated to explore and experience diverse cultures, and who were more self-confident in their abilities to adapt to new cultural environments adjusted better to work, life, and social demands in foreign assignments
our findings also suggest that RJP and RLCP may be useful and important interventions for enhancing adjustment outcomes by managing expectations of work and life in the new cultural environment. J
9
Why Personality?
Results can indicate who will perform well
They also indicate how well an individual will learn
The results are transferable across countries
Ones et al., 2007; Poortinga et al., 2002
One of the benefits of measuring personality is that the scores it produces are indicative of both how well an individual is likely to perform in their given role, as well as how well suited they are to acquire new knowledge through training.
In other words, this test will highlight who is not only likely to produce good results for the company, but also who is best suited to gain the most from this programme.
In addition to this, the scores and conclusions about an individuals aptitude are transferable across countries and cultures, and so are indicative of likely success when placed on the international postings.
10
Why the NEO FFI?
Shorter version that uses Big 5 model
Is a robust and reliable measure
Studies testing for stability across culture use this measure
Costa & McCrea, 2008; Poortinga et al., 2002
There are many theories and tests of personality. However, the research behind the strengths on the last slide typically use what is called the Big 5 model. In order to take advantage of those strengths, we will use the same model. Specifically we will use the NEO short form measure as this is the shortest test available to measure personality that stems from this model.
Importantly, despite being short, this test has been repeatedly found to be robust and an accurate measure of personality.
In addition to this, it was the tool that was used when research investigated the cross-cultural transference. This means that we can recommend this measure to you with a high amount of confidence that it is the most suitable tool to use for this assessment programme.
11
Why cognitive ability (GMA)?
Results can indicate who will perform well
They also indicate how well an individual will learn
To be called “ability to learn and solve problems” during assessment
Bertua et al., 2005; Schmidt & Hunter, 2004; Tews et al., 2011
One of the benefits of measuring cognitive ability is that, like personality, it too can highlight who is likely to both perform well and learn well. Importantly, the practical value of this test works in addition to what personality offers
In other words, this test reveals more information about who will perform and learn best than personality information could indicate on its own.
It should be noted that in order to increase the apparent appropriateness of this test, that it is referred to as an assessment of their “ability to learn and solve problems” rather than an “intelligence”.
This phrasing places an emphasis on the developable skills that relate to the job, and assist candidates in recognising it’s direct relation to the assessment process.
12
Why Yellow Hook Reef?
Gamified format
Appropriate length
Measures 3 core components of GMA
Reportedly robust and ...
… doesn’t produce adversity
https://www.arcticshores.com/yellow-hook-reef/
Out of a variety of different formats available, the gamified version allows candidates to remain engaged in the assessment process.
Of the pool of gamified cognitive ability tests out there, this test assesses three of the fundamental facets of cognitive ability while also remaining concise, taking 17minutes per aptitude, meaning that the whole testing procedure for cognitive ability takes less than an hour.
We have been assured by Arctic Shores that not only are the tests suitable for assessment, but they are robust and that when compared to other alternatives, that this test produces dramatically diminished adversity effects. Allow me to assure you that in addition to this, I will have personally assessed that report before employing Yellow Hook Reef so that we can provide you with an assessment for cognitive ability that we can total confidence in.
13
Development Assessment Centre
Applicant process
Benefits of AC
Inclusive – automated where possible and all global employees
Fair
Robust
Adverse impact
Face validity
Incremental validity
Multi-assessor structured interview panel
Qualitative, meaningful feedback for applicants
Put blueprint graphic in instead of this one??
ACs predictive validities: general .37; job perf .36; managerial potential .53
Adverse impact avoided for gender, age and minatory status
Controlling for common method bias
High face validity
Good predictive validity
Predict potential better than performance
Assumptions:
Pilot year
Opportunity to build framework and assessment process (evaluate and potentially to scale in future when successful or business or investment grows) and for better recruitment tools when looking externally
Approach provides great opportunity to drive engagement and set tone of development culture/investing in people
Realistic preview opportunity for us to share our story and includes motivational fit inventory so candidates can self-select (confidentially)
Biodata – CV/application forms/feedback/performance reviews
Automated cognitive ability and personality test provide “screening” opportunity for us to only progress those that meet our pre-defined selection criteria (threshold) for cog ability (benefit we get to know a lot more about our people and can advise on activities, stretch roles, assignments, secondments, other development interventions that would make more sense – if not this programme) EVERYONE a WINNER i.e. no losers
What we test for at AC can be malleable/developable and becomes part of the initimate knowledge we develop – PDP, coach, stretch assignments, networking opportunity with international colleagues
14
Applicant screening – threshold scores (max to advance to next stage 12)
GMA & Personality online testing (open to all applicants)
Open application, nomination/invitation & realistic preview (open to all applicants)
Assessment centre – group exercise; EISDI & interview (12)
Development AC draft timetable
| Development Assessment Centre Draft Timetable | |||||||||||||||
| 12 candidates | |||||||||||||||
| Morning | 6 assessors | ||||||||||||||
| 09:30 - 10:00 | Welcome and logistics | 2 centre managers | |||||||||||||
| Candidate Group 1 | Candidate Group 2 | ||||||||||||||
| 10:00 - 11:00 | Group Exercise (15 min briefing; 45 min task) | Cand 1 | Cand 7 | ||||||||||||
| Cand 2 | Cand 8 | ||||||||||||||
| Candidate Group 1 (6) | Assessor Group B (3) | Cand 3 | Cand 9 | ||||||||||||
| Cand 4 | Cand 10 | ||||||||||||||
| Candidate Group 2 (6) | Assessor Group A (3) | Cand 5 | Cand 11 | ||||||||||||
| Cand 6 | Cand 12 | ||||||||||||||
| 11:15 - 11:45 | EISDI | ||||||||||||||
| Afternoon | Assessor Group A | Assessor Group B | |||||||||||||
| Candidate Group 1 and Assessor Group A | Candidate Group 2 and Assessor Group B | A | D | ||||||||||||
| 12:00 - 12:45 | Interview 1 | B | E | ||||||||||||
| 13:00 - 13:45 | Interview 2 | C | F | ||||||||||||
| 14:00 - 14:45 | Interview 3 | ||||||||||||||
| 15:00 - 15:45 | Interview 4 | ||||||||||||||
| 16:00 - 16:45 | Interview 5 | ||||||||||||||
| 17:00 - 17:45 | Interview 6 | ||||||||||||||
| 18:00 | Candidates leave | ||||||||||||||
| 18:00 - 19:30 | Assessor wash-up | ||||||||||||||
Notes:
Multi-assessor panel structured interview with International (South America, Asia and UK mix) assessors
Every assessor gets to observe/interview every candidate
Structured interview
Structured rating criteria provided
Objective and fair
Consistent
Assessors fully briefed
Interview questions designed to probe – commercial awareness, strategic thinking, influencing/communication style, flexibility, ability to navigate ambiguity (goal setting)
Experience based questions more strongly predict job performance
Interviews can predict constructs: GMA; Exp: GPA; Big 5; social skills
Reliabilities of .77 (Conway et al 1995 – reviewed 160 empirical studies when observers watched the same interview)
EISDI
Self report but validated by activities in AC GE and interview
Quick (24 item measure and they all use likert scales) allowed 30mins
EI currently most influential model of social intelligence (needed further up org you go)
Malleable and part of PDP
EI and job perf .24-.30
Incremental validity (EI, Big 5 and GMA) 0.2-0.35
Group Exercise designed to capture competencies identified during job analysis/stakeholder interviews/success stories and should represent KSAOs that predict outcomes and anchored in observable behaviours – rating criteria to include observed positive and negative indicators
Problem solving, analytical skills, teamwork, influencing style
15
DE
POST-ASSESSMENT
Offer Management
Candidate Management
Mobility/Cultural Sensitivity Training
Coaching Schedule
60 mins per month/per individual
16
End Slide (Summary maybe?)
17
