Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
HRCKK Profiling Services
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×

Introducing the official SlideShare app

Stunning, full-screen experience for iPhone and Android

Text the download link to your phone

Standard text messaging rates apply

HRCKK Profiling Services

581
views

Published on

Selecting and Developing Top Performance

Selecting and Developing Top Performance


0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
581
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. SELECTING AND DEVELOPING TOP PERFORMANCE presented by HR Central K.K. www.hrcentral.co.jp © 2002 - 2009 Harrison Assessments, Intl' Ltd. - All Rights Reserved.
  • 2. Suitability & Eligibility SUITABILITY ELIGIBILITY Behavioural Experience, Tendencies Training & Education Eligibility – can the person perform. Suitability – will the person perform. © 2002 - 2009 Harrison Assessments, Intl' Ltd. - All Rights Reserved.
  • 3. An ideal assessment method should: • Accurately measure and predict behaviors that impact on success • Be easily customisable for each specific job • Be reliable and revealing - Prevent deception - Reveal self-deception • Provide an overall prediction of success based on eligibility, suitability, and interview results • Be easy to implement and interpret © 2002 - 2009 Harrison Assessments, Intl' Ltd. - All Rights Reserved.
  • 4. Traditional Attempts to Predict Behaviour Interviewing - Limitations • Behavior is very difficult to quantify • Deception is difficult to detect • Interviewers are biased toward their own behavioral tendencies • Good interviewees are not necessarily good performers • Good performers are not necessarily good interviewees © 2002 - 2009 Harrison Assessments, Intl' Ltd. - All Rights Reserved.
  • 5. Traditional Attempts to Predict Behaviour Personality Assessment - Limitations • Easy to deceive • Not job specific • Have an insufficient number of dimensions (usually 4 to 20) © 2002 - 2009 Harrison Assessments, Intl' Ltd. - All Rights Reserved.
  • 6. Personality Assessment Click to edit Master subtitle style Limited dimensions = unclear picture 4 – 20 dimensions provides only a general view of personality. This is insufficient to compare to complex behavioral requirements. © 2002 - 2009 Harrison Assessments, Intl' Ltd. - All Rights Reserved.
  • 7. Personality Assessment with Partial Suitability Assessment By increasing the personality factors and including work environment preferences (total of 30-40 dimensions), clarity is improved but it is still insufficient. © 2002 - 2009 Harrison Assessments, Intl' Ltd. - All Rights Reserved.
  • 8. Enhanced Suitability Assessment By increasing the personality factors further and including work environment preferences and interests (total of 60-70 dimensions), the image is sharpened. However, there is still considerable room for improvement. © 2002 - 2009 Harrison Assessments, Intl' Ltd. - All Rights Reserved.
  • 9. Comprehensive Suitability Assessment By further increasing the personality factors and including work environment preferences, interests, and task preferences (to a total of 100 dimensions) some clarity is achieved. However, it could still be improved. © 2002 - 2009 Harrison Assessments, Intl' Ltd. - All Rights Reserved.
  • 10. Comprehensive Suitability Assessment with Inconsistency Detection By increasing the personality factors further and including a complete spectrum of work environment preferences, interests, and task preferences (a total of 155 dimensions) as well as an effective inconsistency detection technology, a very clear view of behavior can be achieved. © 2002 - 2009 Harrison Assessments, Intl' Ltd. - All Rights Reserved.
  • 11. High Tech Questionnaire Items are ranked in groups of 8. Each item appears twice Equal to a full day of multiple choice testing… in only 30 minutes The computer cross-referencing technology provides 8103 comparisons - equivalent to 2701 multiple choice questions. © 2002 - 2009 Harrison Assessments, Intl' Ltd. - All Rights Reserved.
  • 12. Lie Prevention • Forced ranking (rather than rating) forces the profilee to reveal priorities and prevents exaggerated ratings. • The items are equally attractive and thus the ranking given is based on actual priorities. • Counter-productive tendencies are determined through the paradox methodology which is completely “blind” to the profilee. © 2002 - 2009 Harrison Assessments, Intl' Ltd. - All Rights Reserved.
  • 13. Built-In Technological Consistency Detector Tens of thousands of cross-references identify contradictory rankings and verify that the answers are honest. Traditional personality lie detection is less than 10% effective. © 2002 - 2009 Harrison Assessments, Intl' Ltd. - All Rights Reserved.
  • 14. The Consistency Score • 100 = perfectly consistent • Greater than 50 = reliable results • Greater than 0 = reliable results for lower level positions • Below 0 = repeat the questionnaire • -450 = random answers • -900 = perfectly inconsistent The consistency score is so sensitive that even slight attempts to deceive are detected and located. The consistency score ranges from 100 to -900. © 2002 - 2009 Harrison Assessments, Intl' Ltd. - All Rights Reserved.
  • 15. Reasons for Low Consistency • Intention to deceive or provide the “expected” answer (most common) • Lack of concentration (secondary factor) • Trying to complete questionnaire too quickly • Poor Literacy © 2002 - 2009 Harrison Assessments, Intl' Ltd. - All Rights Reserved.
  • 16. Position Analysis Fit ? With only a general impression of the position (no formal job description), it is very difficult to determine if a person fits the position. © 2002 - 2009 Harrison Assessments, Intl' Ltd. - All Rights Reserved.
  • 17. Position Analysis Fit ? A formal job description helps to determine the fit, but is usually only sufficient to provide a general idea of the required behaviour. © 2002 - 2009 Harrison Assessments, Intl' Ltd. - All Rights Reserved.
  • 18. Position Analysis Fit? Job descriptions that include major responsibilities help to clarify the issues of fit, but still leave some questions. © 2002 - 2009 Harrison Assessments, Intl' Ltd. - All Rights Reserved.
  • 19. Position Analysis Fit? Clear performance expectations help clarify the behaviour needs required for the position. © 2002 - 2009 Harrison Assessments, Intl' Ltd. - All Rights Reserved.
  • 20. Position Analysis Fit? By weighting the performance factors, more of the questions about person/position fit are resolved. © 2002 - 2009 Harrison Assessments, Intl' Ltd. - All Rights Reserved.
  • 21. Position Analysis Fit ? The HA Position Analysis Wizard enables you to transform the position requirements into weighted traits. © 2002 - 2009 Harrison Assessments, Intl' Ltd. - All Rights Reserved.
  • 22. Position Analysis Fit HA research has determined the traits that relate to success for different position types. This data combined with your job information will create accurate custom position templates. © 2002 - 2009 Harrison Assessments, Intl' Ltd. - All Rights Reserved.
  • 23. Missing the Target Fit ? Using only a personality assessment combined with a basic job description provides a very unclear determination of the fit which is typically only about 10% better than a guess. © 2002 - 2009 Harrison Assessments, Intl' Ltd. - All Rights Reserved.
  • 24. Accuracy Fit The HA integrated assessment combined with the Position Analysis Wizard provides a prediction of success with greater than 80% accuracy. © 2002 - 2009 Harrison Assessments, Intl' Ltd. - All Rights Reserved.
  • 25. Validation • HA behavioural assessment has more than 30 validation studies, each showing a predictive accuracy of greater than 80%. • It is generally more accurate than assessment centers that cost thousands of dollars per person. • Test re-test is greater than 0.8 for each scale. • High construct validity correlations with standard personality methods. © 2002 - 2009 Harrison Assessments, Intl' Ltd. - All Rights Reserved.
  • 26. Enjoyment Performance Theory Enjoy Activity Receive Do it More Recognition If you enjoy an activity, you tend to do it more. By doing it more, you tend to learn and improve the related skills. As a result, you tend to gain recognition Learn More – (including self recognition) Improve Skills which helps you to enjoy the activity more. © 2002 - 2009 Harrison Assessments, Intl' Ltd. - All Rights Reserved.
  • 27. Enjoyment Performance Theory Don’t Enjoy Activity Negative Avoid the Feedback Activity If you dislike an activity, you tend to avoid it. Thus, you fail to learn and improve the related skills. Fail to Learn or You may illicit negative feedback as a result (or self-criticism) Improve Skills which contributes to disliking the activity more. © 2002 - 2009 Harrison Assessments, Intl' Ltd. - All Rights Reserved.
  • 28. Traditional Bi-polar Scale Bi-polar Scale FRANK DIPLOMATIC © 2002 - 2009 Harrison Assessments, Intl' Ltd. - All Rights Reserved.
  • 29. Bi-polar Compared to Paradox Bi-polar Scale Paradox Scales FRANK FRANK DIPLOMATIC Paradox: “A seemingly contradictory statement which nonetheless may be true.” DIPLOMATIC © 2002 - 2009 Harrison Assessments, Intl' Ltd. - All Rights Reserved.
  • 30. Paradox Theory Paradox Scales Bi-polar Scale Balanced Good Communicator Poor Communicator FRANK FRANK DIPLOMATIC FRANK DIPLOMATIC Good communicators and poor communicators DIPLOMATIC look the same on a traditional bi-polar scale. © 2002 - 2009 Harrison Assessments, Intl' Ltd. - All Rights Reserved.
  • 31. Paradox Theory Example of the four basic dimensions within a paradox scale Good Poor Blunt Evasive Communicator Communicator FRANK DIPLOMATIC FRANK DIPLOMATIC FRANK DIPLOMATIC FRANK DIPLOMATIC Balanced Balanced Deficiency Aggressive Imbalance Passive Versatility Imbalance © 2002 - 2009 Harrison Assessments, Intl' Ltd. - All Rights Reserved.
  • 32. X-Y Representation of Paradox FRANK DIPLOMATIC The two basic dimensions of a paradox can be more effectively displayed by rotating one of the scales at right angles to make an X- Y plane. © 2002 - 2009 Harrison Assessments, Intl' Ltd. - All Rights Reserved.
  • 33. X-Y Representation of Paradox FRANK The four basic dimensions of a DIPLOMATIC paradox can be more effectively displayed by rotating one of the scales at right angles to make an X- Y plane. © 2002 - 2009 Harrison Assessments, Intl' Ltd. - All Rights Reserved.
  • 34. X-Y Representation of Paradox FRANK The four basic dimensions of a paradox can be more effectively displayed by rotating one of the scales at right angles to make an X - Y plane. DIPLOMATIC © 2002 - 2009 Harrison Assessments, Intl' Ltd. - All Rights Reserved.
  • 35. Balanced Versatility Combination of traits predicting good communication as portrayed in an X -Y plane. Blunt Forthright diplomacy The dark blue circle indicates the normal range of behavior. Avoids Communication Evasive © 2002 - 2008 Harrison Assessments, Intl' Ltd. - All
  • 36. Aggressive Imbalance High frank, low diplomatic indicates bluntness (an aggressive imbalance). FRANK Blunt Forthright Forthright diplomacy diplomacy The grey circle reflects an underlying passive polarity. For example, Poor Avoids bluntness is often used as a means of Communication Communication Evasive evading or a cover for vulnerability. Evasive DIPLOMATIC © 2002 - 2009 Harrison Assessments, Intl' Ltd. - All Rights Reserved.
  • 37. Passive Imbalance The red circle reflects the polarity of a passive imbalance. Under stress, the behavior may “flip” and FRANK become blunt. Blunt Forthright Forthright diplomacy diplomacy Low frank, High diplomatic indicates evasiveness. Poor Avoids Communication Communication Evasive Evasive DIPLOMATIC © 2002 - 2009 Harrison Assessments, Intl' Ltd. - All Rights Reserved.
  • 38. Balanced Deficiency The double polarity indicates the behavior could flip to either polar extreme under stress. FRANK Blunt Forthright Forthright diplomacy diplomacy Low frank, Low diplomatic indicates poor communication. Poor Avoids Communication Communication Evasive Evasive DIPLOMATIC © 2002 - 2009 Harrison Assessments, Intl' Ltd. - All Rights Reserved.
  • 39. 12 HA Paradox Pairs Certain : Open/reflective Frank : Diplomatic Analytical : Intuitive Persistent : Experimenting Risking : Analyses Pitfalls Authoritative : Collaborative Self-Acceptance : Self-Improvement Assertive : Helpful Self-Motivated : Stress Management Organised : Flexible Enforcing : Warmth/Empathy Optimistic : Analyses Pitfalls © 2002 - 2009 Harrison Assessments, Intl' Ltd. - All Rights Reserved.
  • 40. The Secret of Success Success is the result of integrating two seemingly contradictory behaviors. HA is the only assessment method that harnesses the power of paradox. © 2002 - 2009 Harrison Assessments, Intl' Ltd. - All Rights Reserved.
  • 41. Integrating Behavioural Assessment with Eligibility Behavioural Assessment Interview Score Eligibility Score Assessment types are weighted & integrated Final prediction of success for a given position By weighting each assessment type and integrating them into a final score, you gain a complete picture and accurate prediction. © 2002 - 2009 Harrison Assessments, Intl' Ltd. - All Rights Reserved.
  • 42. Unique Reports Generated to Your Specific Requirements Each HA report is unique. It considers: • The Behavioral tendencies of the person • The work preferences of the person • The specific requirements of the position The reports are in layman’s terms and require no professional interpretation. This is achieved by: • Expert system technology • Tailor made assessment integration incorporating eligibility and suitability. © 2002 - 2009 Harrison Assessments, Intl' Ltd. - All Rights Reserved.
  • 43. One of a Kind HA is the only assessment method that: • Uses a full spectrum of suitability factors, including personality, interests, work environment preferences, and task preferences. • Uses a high-tech questionnaire that provides the equivalent of a full day of testing in only 30 minutes. • Uses a technological consistency detector that provides an extremely reliable validation of the authenticity of the answers. • Can be effectively applied without professional interpretation. • Uses the power of paradox to decipher subtleties and complexities of personality related to job performance. • Offers a complete customisation to specific job requirements. • Offers a complete research data base of success traits for different position types. • Delivers a cost effective high correlation with actual job performance. © 2002 - 2009 Harrison Assessments, Intl' Ltd. - All Rights Reserved.
  • 44. How HA is Used • Recruitment and Selection • Coaching, Retaining, and Developing • Team Development • Organizational Development © 2002 - 2009 Harrison Assessments, Intl' Ltd. - All Rights Reserved.
  • 45. Selection and Recruitment • Set the position criteria in the software • Applicants complete HA questionnaire • Generate suitability report and interviewing guide for each applicant • Interview suitable applicants • Rate eligibility and interviews • Enter results in software • Generate final reports • Use the “How to Attract This Candidate” report to convince the candidate to accept employment. © 2002 - 2009 Harrison Assessments, Intl' Ltd. - All Rights Reserved.
  • 46. Coaching, Retaining, and Developing • Use the “Job Comparison” reports to coach performance. • Use the “Paradox” reports to coach individual employees to develop constructive traits. • Use the “How to Manage, Develop & Retain” report to improve supervision and performance. • Use the “Developing Traits” report to implement a development plan © 2002 - 2009 Harrison Assessments, Intl' Ltd. - All Rights Reserved.
  • 47. Team Development Use the “Team Main” graph and/or “Team Paradox” graph to: • Illuminate team dynamics • Facilitate team effectiveness © 2002 - 2009 Harrison Assessments, Intl' Ltd. - All Rights Reserved.
  • 48. Organisational Development Use the HA methodology to: • Formulate position requirements • Implement core values and assess behavioral competencies • Integrate selection and development © 2002 - 2009 Harrison Assessments, Intl' Ltd. - All Rights Reserved.
  • 49. For more info, contact us by: Email: inquiry@hrcentral.co.jp Phone: 080-3434-8665 Mail: HR Central K.K. Shinagawa Intercity Front Bldg. 3F Desk@ MB28 2-14-14, Kounan, Minato-ku, Tokyo 108-0075 Website www.hrcentral.co.jp/harrison_assessments © 2002 - 2009 Harrison Assessments, Intl' Ltd. - All Rights Reserved.