2. Your Facilitator Learning | Consulting | Assessment | Search• NarejoHR, • Established 2002 • Service Offerings, Growing Businesses Through People• Rahila Narejo • Chief Executive & Lead HR Consultant, NarejoHR (Pvt.) Ltd. • Psychobiologist, Univ. California, Los Angeles • Psychometrician, British Psychological Society (Levels A + B) • Certified Balanced Scorecard Professional, Palladium Group • Columnist, DAWN Newspaper, Workplace Sanity • Associate Certified Coach (ACC), International Coaching Federation • MSc. NeuroLeadership, Middlesex Univ. & NeuroLeadership Institute !
3. It’s no longer about HEAD COUNTS. Today, what’s inside the HEAD, COUNTS! ~ Very Famous Person Rahila Narejo
4. Competencies• Knowledge• Skills• Abilities/Attitudes… critical for success in each job.
5. MeasuresAchievement – designed to measure how much anindividual has learned. (Past)Ability – measures the maximum performance andthe level of present ability an individual has toperform a current task. (Present)Aptitude – reveals the probable future level of abilityto perform a task. (Future) Past/achievement Present/Ability Future/Aptitude
6. MeasuresReliability – consistent resultsValidity – measuring what it says it measures
7. Example –SAT Scholastic Aptitude Test1. Is the SAT an Achievement or an Aptitude (for college) test?2. Is the SAT valid?3. Is the SAT reliable?
8. Example –SAT Scholastic Aptitude Test• The SAT never proven to predict future college success, numerous studies show grades are superior predictors. The SAT was really an achievement test.• The SAT is not valid because it measures achievement rather than predicting future success (aptitude).• Prep courses dramatically increase scores on the SAT.• The SAT is not reliable because individuals can have inconsistent results from different sittings.• The SAT is, however, a goldmine for the College Board’s ETS, is defended by powerful lobbyists at all levels of government and education.• Psychometrically, a poor test; economically a boon.
9. Aspects of ValidityHigh Scientific Relevance Less Relevant • Concurrent validity: • Face validity: correlation between test score and current on-job the look or feel of the performance assessment tool/item in terms of relevance to • Predictive validity: actual job/role extent test predicts some future or desired outcome • Content validity: • Construct validity: how well the test covers performance on assessment all behavioral aspects of fits theory and research a particular competency (statistical and factor analysis)
10. Predictive Validity
11. Why Assessment Centres? 1.0 Perfect prediction0.66 Assessment Centres ____ Work Sample & 0.54 Work Ability testsSample &0.4 – 0.6 Ability TestsBehavioral Interviews ____ Personality test 0.39 Personality test 0.23 References0.05 – 0.19Traditional Interviews ____ GraphologySource: British Psychological Society
12. SOURCES OF INFORMATION Back-ground Demonstrated Knowledge, Training Skills & Abilities Position Profile Experience Presentation/ Group Disc/ Resume CBI Role Play MBA (major? school?) 2- 3 years relevant experience Male, 28-35 years of age Supervisory Skills Decision Making Skills Drive/energy Information technology skills Organizing Skills Verbal Communication Skills
13. What is an Assessment Centre?¡ Not a location¡ An Assessment Center is an event where a number of candidates take part in a series of exercises and/or tests facilitated by trained assessors.¡ Candidates performance is measured against predetermined competencies.¡ Results used for Talent Management: § Hiring § Promotion § Succession Planning
14. Assessment Tools¡ Group Discussion¡ Role Play¡ Personality Assessment¡ Aptitude/Technical Test¡ In-Tray/Basket Exercise¡ Fact-Finding Exercise¡ Team Exercise¡ Case Analysis¡ Presentation¡ Competency-Based Interview
15. In-Tray Case• An individual exercise• Several pieces of information are provided (customer letter, internal emails, performance data...) and• Must be sorted, prioritised, taken action/decisions on, issues identified and taken action on.
16. Role PlayAn individual exercisein which the participantmust deal with either asubordinate/peer/customer issue.
17. Group Discussion• Participants meet together as a group and need to achieve a specified outcome/objective
18. Competency Assessment Matrix ASSESSMENT EXERCISES/TOOLS Leaderless Discussion Competencies Exercise Exercise In-Tray Group Group CaseCommitted Team Player ! !Innovative Professional ! !Agile Leader ! !Communication Skills ! ! !Organization Skills ! ! 2 x 2 Rule
19. Question Time
20. Thank You!• Rahila Narejo, Linkedin• www.narejohr.com• email@example.com• Download a copy of today’s presentation:www.slideshare.net/narejo