Los antecedentes de la gestión por competencias como tópico de recursos humanos tiene su origen las investigaciones de la motivación humana en el siglo pasado. Concretamente, a partir de los estudios realizados por McClelland (1973) en la Universidad de Harvard. La aportación al estudio de las ciencias del comportamiento llevaron a este investigador y a su equipo de trabajo a inferir que el éxito profesional no depende de las credenciales, títulos y de calificaciones sobresalientes. De hecho el centro de su propuesta teórica está basada en afirmar que los tests de inteligencia son discriminatorios contra las minorías y las mujeres. Todo ello en el contexto de los problemas del empleo que prevalecía en la década de 1970. En su estudio concluye que las variables que en realidad influyen en alcanzar la excelencia en las actividades humanas es precisamente las "competencia humanas" como una combinación de conocimientos, motivación, habilidades de las personas.

1. Testing for Competence Rather
Than for “Intelligence”
DAVID C. McCLELLAND
Harvard University
Presented by: Yazmin Almonte
García

2. 1973

3. Testing movement in
the USA.
• Success?
• Intelligence and aptitude tests.
• Intelligence: the ability to acquire and apply
knowledge and skills.
• Aptitude: a natural ability to do something.
• School, colleges, and employers.
• 2,000 people Scholastics aptitude tests.

4. “Qualified” and others “Less
qualified”
• African-Americans
• Spanish-speaking
• Minority applicants for college.
• Admission officers.
• Qualities besides test to grant
admissions.
• Wing and Wallach 1971, show
limitations.

5. Why should intelligence or
aptitude tests have all this
power?
• What justifies the use of
such tests in selecting
applicants for college
entrance or jobs?
• On what assumption is the
success of the movement
based?
• Instruments of power over
the lives of many.

6. Validity
• Skepticism.
• Brain-damaged.
• Retarded people.
• Deficiency in test scores.

7. Tests Predict
Grades in School.
• Aptitude tests are like teachers'
games in classrooms.
• Correlated with grades in school.
• ¿Is it the only validity necessary?
• Grades.
• Behaviors of importance.
• ¿Do they do better in life?
• Success.

8. Testing
standards.
Better grades. Better schools.
No difference
in success.
C-

9. Education and jobs: the great training robbery.
• Amount of education.
• Grades.
• Vocational success.
• Factory worker.
• Bank teller.
• Air traffic controller.

10. Highly intellectual jobs.

11. Why keep the best education
for those who are already
doing well at the games?
• The intelligence is what the
intelligence tests measure.

12. • Best bets.
• Scholastic aptitude tests.
• Poor bets.
• ¿Is that the best for society?

13. Do intelligence tests tap abilities
that are responsible for job success?

14. NO

15. • Actual accomplishments in social
leadership.
• The arts.
• Science.
• Music.
• Writing.
• Speech.

16. The correlation between
intelligence test scores and jjob
success may be an artifact.
• Social status.
• Language.
• Accent.
• Clothing.
• Manner.
• Connections by education or
family.

17. Correlation does not equal
causation, we keep forgeting it.

18. Case

19. Vocabulary.
High-IQ children.
Medical issues.

20. The role of power in controlling
life-outcome criteria.
• Giftedness.
• Occupationally.
• Maritally.
• Socially.
• Less morally deviant forms
of psychopathology.
• Alcoholism.
• Homosexuality.

21. Importance of tests.
Rich and powerful.
Material advantages.
Middle ages.
Latin speakers.

22. Where do we go from here?
• Identification of talents.
• Driving tests.
• Videotapes of teachers.

23. Tests should be
designed to
reflect changes
in what the
individual has
learned.
Training.
Experience.
Specialized.
Modify tests.

24. How to improve on the characteristic tested
should be made public and explicit.
WORLD WAR II. PIANO PLAYERS. PILOTS.

25. Tests should assess competencies involved in
clusters of life outcomes.
Skills. Writers case.

26. Communication skills

27. Patience

28. Moderate goal
setting.

29. Ego development.

30. Tests should involve
operant as well as
respondant behavior.

31. Testing at various points.

32. Thank you for
listening.