The document summarizes the author's experience participating in an assessment center as both an assessor and assessee. It describes the activities conducted, which included a role-play and group exercise to evaluate competencies like teamwork and influencing skills. Assessors observed and took notes on candidates' performances. They later met to compare ratings and feedback was provided. The author reflects on lessons learned, such as the importance of preparation and technology like video recording for validity. Room layout and concentrating on multiple competencies at once also impacted the assessment experience.

1. Maha Abutalib, 2013.
Assessment and Development Centre: in class experience
At first an invitation was send to candidates to attend an assessment center it
included details of the day and an overview of what to expect, to avoid
unnecessary stress and to give them the chance of approaching the exercises
with a fresh mind (Woodruff, 2000). This included an itinerary, timetables, and
address etc. one-day assessment centre.
Two activities were held by the Centre, both activities were made short, to the
point and based on a neutral context, which is believed to help in achieving
better evidence and reliability (Taylor, I., 2007).
First activity, was a role-play, the second was a group exercise. First activity,
roles were assigned previously in the briefing ‘. To give them equal opportunity
to get ready.
Second exercise was a problem solving group activity consisted of the candidates
working from the same point without giving any specific role.
Universal or generic types of competencies were measured as it is seen to be
related to performance in just about any job ’team work’, influencing skills
(Woodruffee, 2000).
We also aimed to keep competencies few, as information overload may be a
result of using many competencies, and hence could influence or decrease the
accuracy, which leads to biased judgments.
To avoid the risk of biased, assessors wrote the definition of each competency as
it is sought to exclude or reduce the exercise effect, to have a full and common
understanding about what is being measured and to make use of it in giving
feedback.
To assure fairness, all four Assessors observed, recorded by writing comments
for each candidate ‘ as evidence’ (Povah & Thornton, 2011; Woodruffee, 2000).
In addition, Assessors have judged performance of candidates at the same
standards, same assessment criteria, which was beneficial in the wash-up
session to compare notes to
Assessors were neutral and the interaction was only on a formal basis ex. By
announcing the start, end and time left. To insure there is no leniency to avoid
biased.
After the assessment Centre, an electronic letter were sent to candidates to thank
them for their participation, and were asked to fill a reflective form, as an

2. Maha Abutalib, 2013.
opportunity for them to have a voice and opinion and to make improvements in
the future.
Before giving feedback to participants, assessors met in a wash-up meeting. At
the meeting ratings were shared as an attempt to reach a mutual and collective
view of candidates on each competency by using recorded evidence.
The feedback notes used briefly summarized strengths and weaknesses of the
participant’s performance, and made brief practical suggestions for enhancing
performance through a suitable range of development activities.
Criteria Candidate name
Influencing skills
Assertiveness -
displays confidence
in putting views
forward. Gives direct
answers and stands
ones ground when
making an
argument. Does not
display
aggressiveness when
making a point
Contribution -
voluntarily
contributes to the
discussion without
dominating or
speaking over
others. Contributes
relevant information
and points.
Contributions are
equally unique ideas
and building on
ideas raised.
Active listening -
communicates
objectively. Receives
information and
gives feedback,
which shows
understanding of the
meaning of the
point. Encourages

3. Maha Abutalib, 2013.
contribution from
others and listens to
full explanation of
point before
responding.
Reactive/thinking
on feet - responds to
points of others. Acts
quickly and
responds to
questions from
others whilst staying
on topic and
building on ones
topic/point of
argument
Structure and
delivery of point -
builds argument in a
logical and
structured manner.
Backs up point with
evidence and can
provide further
evidence/examples
on request. Point has
a background or
meaning. Each
contribution is
adding weight to the
argument.
Team working
Working
cooperatively.
Liaises with others,
builds rapport. May
emerge as natural
leader without
taking over task and
decision making
process.

4. Maha Abutalib, 2013.
Supporting others -
positive impact on
morale and
motivation. Shares
skills. Actively
supports the overall
aim of the team.
Seeks approval from
all team members
when making
decision.
Agrees/disagrees
with others in a
constructive
manner.
Sharing knowledge
and ideas -
Contributes problem
solving ideas. Will
discuss ideas with
the team and seek
opinion before
implementing. Is
able to adjust own
proposals to reflect
input from others
Reflective evaluation:
Contributing practically in a development centre both as an assessor and assesse
clarified and developed more conscious view about many aspects, issues and
needs.
‘To learn to take action then he needs to take action…and ‘see’ the effect, not of
‘talking’ about action but of ‘taking’ the action itself.
(Revans, 1971).
Preparation is a key for running a reliable and valid center, before the
development center day predation we as a group of assessors had to design it
from start to the end step; it was a long method and need insight depth.
At the day, as we already have sent out the introduction which included the
timetable, roles, etc., we started right away without a second introduction which

5. Maha Abutalib, 2013.
would have been more useful to do so, as some candidates might to simply
require refresh their minds.
In addition, from an assesse perspective I would agree with (Woodruffe, 2000) it
might have been of ease if the centre started the group exercise first, as it is
believed to be as an icebreaker.
Moreover, the layout of an assessor appeared so important, as it really affects
both assessors and assesse (Woodruffe, figure 9,p181) demonstrates how
assessors are placed opposing whom they are assessing, from an assesse view, to
some extent I felt uncomfortable by the layout of the assessors as they were all
standing together in one side. It would me more convenient for both assessors
and assesses if there were distribution in the room.
Despite the significance of assuring fairness observing, recording by writing
comments for each candidate ‘ as evidence’ (Povah & Thornton, 2011;
Woodruffee, 2000), as well as the use of competence wasn’t of a complex nature
as it was a universal and generic type; Rating and making notes at the same time
over three competencies indicators made it difficult at some points,
consequently, I experienced a lack of concentration which occurs when it
becomes a bit difficult to observe or listen continuously (Taylor, 2007 P.65)
Although, it is suggested to rank the behaviour mathematically and come to a
common rate in the decision making session where
A similar case which (Herriot, 1985) where a group of 4 assessors who met to
share their final ratings which they made individually. And found that there were
lots of shifting and that the more powerful assessors were the less likely they
will shift and those who’s rating is an exception is more likely to shift.
It would be more fair and valid if the activity were actually video recorded and
compare the notes afterwards as there were some moments where I lost a bit of
my attention or for example were writing while not observing and due to the DC
is short, it’s important to make advantage of each second.
Technology such as video recording the process will really aid both assessor and
assesse, it would be very beneficial as a to review and check the comments and
rating which had been done, and also to demonstrate or show the assesse to
reach deep understanding as they might not remember exactly why, how or
when, which then will especially enhance face validity. (See British Psychological
Society, P.10)
Finally, feedback was provided at the end of the Centre, in general, giving and
revieving involved both sides were soft but in a constructive manner as being in
both situations both were point out the positives first, but then, will point out
areas of improvement and development.

6. Maha Abutalib, 2013.
References
Woodruff, C. (2000) Development and assessment centers: Identifying and
assessing competence, third Edition
Taylor, Ian. (2007). ‘ A practical guide to assessment centers and selection
methods: measuring competency for recruitment and development
Poach, N. and Thornton, G. C. (2011). ‘Assessment centers and global talent
management’
Woodruffe, C. (2000) Development and assessment centres. London: Identifying
and assessing competence, third Edition. Chartered Institute of Personnel and
Development.
Herriot P., Wingrove J. and Chalmers C. (1985) ‘ Group decision making in an
assessment centre’. Journal of Occupational Psychology. Vol. 58. Pp309-12.
Taylor, Ian . (2007). ‘ A practical guide to assessment centres and selection
methods: measuring competency for recruitment and development
Povah, N. and Thornton, G. C. (2011). ‘Assessment centres and global talent
management’
a new approach to
Developing effective managers:
Revans, R. W. (1971),
business education.
The British Psychological Society, Design, Implementation and Evaluation of
assessment and development centres. 1-31
www.psychtesting.org.uk