This document discusses individual assessment programs which assess candidates one at a time. It describes the general practice of individual assessments where one assessor is responsible for integrating information from various sources and reporting to the client. It also discusses two main approaches to individual assessments - one with a psychometric emphasis using tests and another using clinical interviews. The document outlines some criticisms of individual assessments, such as a lack of validation, unreliability between assessors, influence from only one or two assessment parts, and concerns about seeking non-job relevant personal information.

1. 1
MULTIPLE ASSESSMENT
PROCEDURES
Lecture 11
DR. CHUA BEE SEOK

2. 2
MULTIPEL ASSESSMENT
PROCEDURES
 Most personnel decision are based on multiple
assessment.
 Two systematic approaches to multiple
assessment:
1. Individual assessment program
2. Group assessment center program

3. 3
INDIVIDUAL ASSESSMENT
PROGRAMS
Lecture 11
DR. CHUA BEE SEOK

4. 4
INDIVIDUAL ASSESSMENT
PROGRAMS
General Practice in Individual Assessment
A General Pattern of Practice
 It assesses one person at a time.
 Ryan and Sackett (1987) – one psychologist conducts a final,
integrating interview and one psychologist (maybe the same
one) writes the assessment report.
 The assessor may call on various resource people for parts of
the assessment process, but one assessor is finally responsible
for integrating all information and reporting to the client
(typically decision maker).

5. 5
 Ryan and Sackett (1987) – those doing individual assessment
are likely to be full-time, licensed consultants and to be one
of several in the organization who do such assessment.
 Assessment purposes – selection and promotion (including
planning for succession) and placement.
 Assessment tools included personal history data, ability tests,
personality and interest inventories and interview.
 Content of assessments are varied to fit the position.
 Information about organizations and positions was typically
gathered through conversations and interviews, not from
more systematic organizational and job analysis.

6. 6
 Information sought included tasks and responsibilities, KSAs
(knowledge, skills and ability requirements) and critical
incidents involving prior successes and failures.
 Individual assessments were needed a wider variety of
information than is common in job analysis: interpersonal
relationships, supervisory expectations and broad statement
of functions.
 Written reports of individual assessment were usually
followed by telephone or face to face discussions with the
client (decision maker).
 Reports included strengths and weakness and suggestion for
personal development. It rarely included actual test scores.

7. 7
Special Emphases in Position and Situation Analysis
 Most assessees are in management or sales, occasionally in
relatively high-level technical positions.
 Typical task analysis is less appropriate than a broad
understanding of the situation.
 The assessments emphases in understanding of :
a. Is the person to fill essentially the same functions filled by a
predecessor, or will functions be shifted around?
b. Is the vacancy created or influenced by new technology or by
division of existing duties?
c. How is the position defined relative to others?

8. 8
d. What must be done right away and what can wait for
some training or qualifications would be nice to have?
e. What specifications are essential; what qualifications
would be nice to have?
f. How much freedom (or constraint) does the position
offer? What will be permitted, encouraged, or frowned
upon by superiors and coworkers?
 The questions arise not only from concern about future
performance but about how the assessee will “fit” into the
organization.

9. 9
Varieties of Individual Assessment Programs
 A Psychometric Emphasis
 In the 1950s, a research and consulting group at Western
Reserve University developed an assessment program for
“high level” sales and managerial personnel.
 The basic program included:
1. A staff member visited clients to learn about the job to be filled,
the organization, and the social environment; information gained
was used to tailor the assessment program.
2. Two psychologists together interviewed candidates, independently
rating them on several scales. They did not have access to test data.

10. 10
3. Projective test responses were analyzed by a clinical
psychologist who rated the candidate on the same scales
without seeing the candidate personally and without
knowledge of other test results.
4. A test battery was developed specifically for the job in
question; the battery minimally included two personality
inventories, an interest inventory and tests of abilities
considered important to the job.
5. One psychologist-interviewer wrote a report describing
social skills, intelligence functioning, drive and ambition,
personal adjustment, and a judgment of probable
effectiveness.
 The program emphasized the battery of psychometric tests
which were generally the most valid components of the
program (Guion, 1998).

11. 11
 A Clinical Oriented Program
 The interview was conducted by a clinically oriented
consulting psychologist, and included a personal
history form, traditional mental ability tests,
projective tests and human relation problem test.
 The interviewer prepared the report with final
ratings.

12. 12
 A Content-Oriented Approach
 Robinson (1981) – an approach beginning with detailed job
analysis, identifying important job objectives or dimension,
the behavior required to meet them and critical tasks.
 Critical tasks were content samples from a broader job
universe.
 Major assessment procedures were work sample tests
specifically sampling job content, but a structured interview
was also part of the procedure.

13. 13
Criticisms of Individual Assessment
 Some major criticisms of individual
assessment:
1. Individual assessment is rarely subjected to serious
validation efforts.
2. Assessment conclusion are often unreliable.
Different assessors evaluate candidates differently,
perhaps because they rely on different information
and perhaps because they have no standard basis
for consistency.
3. Assessment summaries are often influenced by one
or two parts of the assessment program.

14. 14
4. Great emphasis is placed on personality
assessment without matching evidence of the
relevance of the trait assessed.
5. Individual assessments, limited to one person,
cannot assess interpersonal skills from actual
interpersonal behavior.
6. It may be ethically and legally questionable to seek
information not explicitly relevant to the work to
be done. Individual assessment typically include
intellectual and personality exploration, gathering
general and diverse data about a person.

15. 15
Thank You