[IPAC-List] Test Requirements within Job Progressions

Dennis Doverspike dd1 at uakron.edu
Tue Apr 7 17:07:19 EDT 2009


I agree with what Michael says below 100%. I cannot even think of anything I
would add or delete.

Dennis Doverspike, Ph.D., ABPP
Professor of Psychology
Director, Center for Organizational Research
Senior Fellow of the Institute for Life-Span Development and Gerontology
Psychology Department
University of Akron
Akron, Ohio 44325-4301
330-972-8372 (Office)
330-972-5174 (Office Fax)
ddoverspike at uakron.edu

The information is intended only for the person or entity to which it is
addressed and may contain confidential, privileged and/or a work product for
the sole use of the intended recipient. No confidentiality or privilege is
waived or lost by any errant transmission. If you receive this message in
error, please destroy all copies of it and notify the sender. If the reader
of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that
any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly
prohibited. In the case of E-mail or electronic transmission, immediately
delete it and all copies of it from your system and notify the sender.
E-mail and fax transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free
as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late
or incomplete, or contain viruses.

-----Original Message-----
From: ipac-list-bounces at ipacweb.org [mailto:ipac-list-bounces at ipacweb.org]
On Behalf Of Blair, Michael D[EQ]
Sent: Tuesday, April 07, 2009 3:07 PM
To: Reindl, Kevin; IPAC-List at ipacweb.org
Subject: Re: [IPAC-List] Test Requirements within Job Progressions

Kevin -

Most organizations that I have been involved with (public & private)
typically handle this situation by establishing the progressive jobs as part
a job family and promoting from within the family. The first criteria for
promotion, is effective performance in the current job. This process
inherently resolves the dilemma. Using your example, mechanics are hired
under the "very high" physical demand criteria. Lead mechanics are then
promoted from the ranks of mechanics, mechanic supervisors from lead
mechanics, etc. This also alleviates the need to conduct physical ability
testing for the higher level jobs. If candidates are effectively performing
in the lower level job, by default they are able to do the physical aspects
of the job (in the scenario you've described). An added benefit - costs and
time for the PAT can now be applied to an assessment specific to the higher
level position.

And yes, I believe you would be stepping into a legal quagmire by applying a
higher cut-score to accommodate a job function that may occasionally be
performed, especially if the job function is not critical to successful
performance or safety.

Michael D. Blair
Manager, Recruitment, Selection & Assessment
Voice: 913-345-6334 | Cell: 913-832-6130 | Fax: 913-345-6417
Email: Michael.D.Blair at embarq.com

This e-mail is the property of EMBARQ and may contain confidential and
privileged material for the sole use of the intended
recipient(s). Any review, use, distribution or disclosure by others is
strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended
recipient (or authorized to receive for the recipient), please contact the
sender and delete all copies of the message.

-----Original Message-----
From: ipac-list-bounces at ipacweb.org [mailto:ipac-list-bounces at ipacweb.org]
On Behalf Of Reindl, Kevin
Sent: Tuesday, April 07, 2009 1:22 PM
To: IPAC-List at ipacweb.org
Subject: [IPAC-List] Test Requirements within Job Progressions

Hello IPAC folks,

I have a question that I have encountered many times before, but thought I'd
get some fresh perspectives from the IPAC group:

We have validated a battery of physical ability tests for a number of jobs
in our company. Based on the job analyses, we have grouped the jobs into 3
levels of physical demand ("very high," "high" and "moderate"
physical demand jobs). The same battery validated nicely for all jobs (i.e.,
criterion validity), the difference being that we have established cutoff
scores that correspond to the job group levels. So the very high jobs will
have the highest cutoff score and the moderate jobs will require the lowest
cutoff score.

The problem I'm grappling with is that many of the jobs reside within a
progression (e.g., Assistant Mechanic, Mechanic, and Lead Mechanic),
however, the jobs are not always in the same physical demand group. So, for
example, the Assistant Mechanic and Mechanic jobs may fall within the "very
high" category, while the Lead Mechanic falls within the "high" category.

Operationally, the Lead Mechanics (in addition to their lead role
functions) are expected to "perform the functions of lower level jobs within
the progression as necessary." There is concern from the clients/department
that the Lead Mechanics, if only required to meet the "high" physical demand
cutoff, will not be "qualified" to safely and effectively perform the lower
job level functions when necessary.

>From both a psychometric and legal perspective, I'm struggling with how

to handle this issue. Would it be a legal minefield if we required a higher
cutoff for jobs that MAY OCCASIONALLY perform job functions of other/lower
level jobs?

Anyone have advice, opinions, or similar stories with a happy ending?

Kevin Reindl

Sr. People Research Advisor

San Diego Gas & Electric

Human Resources

8306 Century Park Court, CP41A

San Diego, CA 92123-1530

Tel: 858-654-1823

Fax: 858-654-1515

Email: kreindl at semprautilities.com

"This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to
which it is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged and/or
confidential. Receipt by an unintended recipient does not constitute a
waiver of any applicable privilege. Reading, disclosure, discussion,
dissemination, distribution or copying of this information by anyone other
than the intended recipient or his or her employees or agents is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please
immediately notify the sender."

IPAC-List at ipacweb.org

IPAC-List at ipacweb.org

More information about the IPAC-List mailing list