0
Verifiable business results
in HR consultancy
Prepared for “Zilele Biz” [2013-11-13]

1

© SHL 2012
November 19, 2013
Making HR measurement strategic
• It does not require claims, but actions
• Requires a melange of Financial and Technical ...
Established HR measurement models on ...
• e.g. Cascio & Boudreau (2008)
• We can now measure very well Cost & Gain for:
◦...
An example: Efficiency of personnel selection
• What methods can and will be efficient?
• When are tests useful?

• Can I ...
Terminology
• Base Rate (success rate)
◦ The proportion of current job incumbents recruited without the use
of tests who p...
Terminology clarified in an example
• 100 applicants for 20 customer service positions
◦ (Selection ratio is 0.20)

• 60 o...
The Taylor Russell table
Estimated ratio of applicants hired who can be expected to be successful on the job.
This table i...
Quality of selection measures (Robertson and Smith, 2001)

+1

PERFECT PREDICTION

.63

Ability and Structured Interview

...
How can I improve?

•

Validity

HIGH

•

Current success rate

LOW

•

Selection ratio

LOW

9

© SHL 2012
November 19, 2...
When can I not improve (or it’s not worth it)
• There are very small numbers of applicants
• Current success rates are hig...
Questions?

11

© SHL 2012
November 19, 2013
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Shl dragos iliescu biz (2013 11-13)

151

Published on

Published in: Technology, Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
151
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
4
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Transcript of "Shl dragos iliescu biz (2013 11-13)"

  1. 1. Verifiable business results in HR consultancy Prepared for “Zilele Biz” [2013-11-13] 1 © SHL 2012 November 19, 2013
  2. 2. Making HR measurement strategic • It does not require claims, but actions • Requires a melange of Financial and Technical reasoning and expertise ◦ Financial: because any strategic metric finally should be resolved to a cost-benefit analysis ◦ Technical: because measurement is impossible without understanding the construct measured 2 © SHL 2012 November 19, 2013
  3. 3. Established HR measurement models on ... • e.g. Cascio & Boudreau (2008) • We can now measure very well Cost & Gain for: ◦ Absenteeism ◦ Employee separations ◦ Employee Health & Welfare ◦ Employee Attitudes, e.g. Engagement ◦ Talent Investment ◦ Development programs ◦ Selection & Staffing 3 © SHL 2012 November 19, 2013
  4. 4. An example: Efficiency of personnel selection • What methods can and will be efficient? • When are tests useful? • Can I assess how many misdecisions (mishires) I will do with a specific selection array? • Can I improve on this? When is it worth it? 4 © SHL 2012 November 19, 2013
  5. 5. Terminology • Base Rate (success rate) ◦ The proportion of current job incumbents recruited without the use of tests who perform well in the position • Selection Ratio ◦ Proportion of applicants who are selected • Test Validity ◦ Relationship between test scores and job performance 5 © SHL 2012 November 19, 2013
  6. 6. Terminology clarified in an example • 100 applicants for 20 customer service positions ◦ (Selection ratio is 0.20) • 60 out of these 100 applicants (60%) are likely to perform well ◦ (Base rate of 0.60) • If applicants were selected at random we would expect: ◦ 12 are likely to be successful in the job (60% of 20 selected) ◦ 8 are likely to be unsuccessful (40% of 20 selected) 6 © SHL 2012 November 19, 2013
  7. 7. The Taylor Russell table Estimated ratio of applicants hired who can be expected to be successful on the job. This table is based on a current random selection success rate of 60% LOW HIGH SELECTION RATIO .40 .60 .05 .20 .5 .6 .60 .68 .75 .82 .88 .93 .96 .60 .65 .71 .76 .81 .86 .90 .60 .64 .67 .71 .75 .79 .83 .7 .8 .9 1.00 .99 1.00 1.00 1.00 .94 .98 1.00 1.00 .87 .92 .97 1.00 VALIDITY .0 .1 .2 .3 .4 7 .80 .95 .60 .63 .65 .68 .70 .73 .76 .60 .61 .66 .64 .66 .67 .69 .60 .60 .61 .61 .62 .62 .63 .80 .83 .88 1.00 .71 .72 .74 .75 .63 .63 .63 .63 © SHL 2012 November 19, 2013
  8. 8. Quality of selection measures (Robertson and Smith, 2001) +1 PERFECT PREDICTION .63 Ability and Structured Interview .60 Ability and Work sample .54 Work Sample Tests .51 Structured Interviews .51 Ability Tests .41 Job knowledge Tests .40 Personality Tests .35 Biodata .26 References .18 Years Job Experience .10 Years Education .02 Graphology 0 -0.01 RANDOM PREDICTION Age 8 © SHL 2012 November 19, 2013
  9. 9. How can I improve? • Validity HIGH • Current success rate LOW • Selection ratio LOW 9 © SHL 2012 November 19, 2013
  10. 10. When can I not improve (or it’s not worth it) • There are very small numbers of applicants • Current success rates are high • Individual differences in job performance are small • Job success is not critical, failures can be tolerated • Anybody can prove successful 10 © SHL 2012 November 19, 2013
  11. 11. Questions? 11 © SHL 2012 November 19, 2013
  1. A particular slide catching your eye?

    Clipping is a handy way to collect important slides you want to go back to later.

×