[IPAC-List] Job Qualifications

[Bryan Baldwin]

Excellent points, well taken.  I suppose my main problem is instead of
going back to basics (what does the job analysis say, what would be the
best way to test given the required KSAs, what are the current best
practices in selection), they seem to be running headlong backwards
(technology-wise).  Would love to see more discussion of (proctored and
unproctored) Internet-based tests.  Seems to me that's the direction
cutting-edge employers are going and it's a way to maximize validity as
well as speed (again, where it's appropriate).  Just don't want to have
them throw the baby out with the bath water.
 
Part of my reaction might (95% probability) have to do with the fact
that this is the type of movement I saw in the state of Washington and
what's going on with the state of California.  Perhaps, as you point
out, this is an opportunity for us all to speak up loud and clear about
the right (and wrong) ways to modernize.
 
BB


>>> "Mueller, Lorin" <LMueller at air.org> 5/12/2010 12:58 PM >>>

Some thoughts from 9 or so years of peering over the shoulders of
federal hiring managers.

1) Even is KSA statements are more valid than résumé -based decisions,
it doesn't matter much if they discourage applicants or if applicants
select-out before decisions can be made. The most common complaints
among my federal clients is that they get a certificate of eligibles,
start calling to arrange interviews, and everyone withdraws because they
have already found other jobs. And these are folks who filled out the
application in the first place. 

2) I don't think it's a foregone conclusion that KSA statements are
more valid than point-based T&Es. I think the problem with point-based
T&Es is that we don't have a way to score them that is consistent with
reality. These things aren’t additive, they are configural. Early in the
federal hiring process, we just want to know whether someone has the
basic qualifications to perform the work successfully. That typically
requires one of many combinations of education and experience that we
believe confer KSAs. In our SIOP workshop, Steve Ferrara and I presented
(in brief) a potential method for matrix-based resume scoring that I
think is more reliable, valid, and legally defensible than other
approaches. It still may not be the equal to the validity of KSA
statements in a lab setting, but it lowers the time investment for
highly qualified applicants. In short, I think there are valid ways to
score résumés that are valid for making basic qualifications decisions,
but it’s not exactly a sexy research area (just try to do a lit review
on the topic).   

3) All of the above presumes that KSA statements are completed by the
applicant. A common complaint among hiring managers is that they get
applicants who were obviously coached on what to write in their KSA
statements. Not surprisingly, this is a common complaint among
applicants as well - that KSA statements are coached or the questions
are slanted to a particular candidate. 

I am not saying this is what I would have done (agencies who have
flirted with résumé based hiring have had their won problems), but it
does address some common complaints regarding the federal hiring
process. I see our role as I/O psychologists and HR professionals is to
propose and promote best practices to maximize the reliability,
validity, fairness, and legal defensibility of the new processes.  

Lorin Mueller, PhD, SPHR
Principal Research Scientist
American Institutes for Research


________________________________________
From: ipac-list-bounces at ipacweb.org [ipac-list-bounces at ipacweb.org] On
Behalf Of Bryan Baldwin [Bryan.Baldwin at doj.ca.gov] 
Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 2010 9:31 AM
To: ipac-list at ipacweb.org; Mark.Hammer at psc-cfp.gc.ca 
Subject: Re: [IPAC-List] Job Qualifications

Not to sound overly cynical, but why does it seem like when
organizations use a valid selection method (e.g, behavioral consistency
T&Es) but implement it poorly (e.g., using said instrument for 
thousands
of applicants), the solution is to replace it with something much less
valid (e.g., resumes/applications, point-based T&Es)?  Or is this just
one more example of the rush to make the selection process as fast as
possible, regardless of the impact on utility (supported by their
suggested, highly suspect, metric of time-to-fill)?

On a related point, how exactly do they intend to get managers and
supervisors "more fully involved in the hiring process, including
planning current and future workforce requirements, identifying the
skills required for the job, and engaging actively in the recruitment
and, when applicable, the interviewing process"?  I mean more power to
them, but I gotta think this is something many of have been struggling
with for years.

Kudos for trying to modernize the federal hiring system, but I wonder
if there is an appreciation for the enormity of what is being suggested
and the resources it will require.

End rant.

Bryan Baldwin
Staff Services Manager II
California Department of Justice
Division of Administrative Support
Personnel Programs
(916) 322-5446

>>> Mark Hammer <Mark.Hammer at psc-cfp.gc.ca> 05/12/10 6:16 AM >>>

Addendum

Here is the link to the White House memorandum -
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/presidential-memorandum-improving-federal-recruitment-and-hiring-process
 Makes for interesting reading.

Mark

_______________________________________________________
IPAC-List
IPAC-List at ipacweb.org 
http://www.ipacweb.org/mailman/listinfo/ipac-list 


CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This communication with its contents may
contain confidential and/or legally privileged information. It is solely
for the use of the intended recipient(s). Unauthorized interception,
review, use or disclosure is prohibited and may violate applicable laws
including the Electronic Communications Privacy Act. If you are not the
intended recipient, please contact the sender and destroy all copies of
the communication.
_______________________________________________________
IPAC-List
IPAC-List at ipacweb.org 
http://www.ipacweb.org/mailman/listinfo/ipac-list


CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This communication with its contents may contain
confidential and/or legally privileged information. It is solely for the
use of the intended recipient(s). Unauthorized interception, review, use
or disclosure is prohibited and may violate applicable laws including
the Electronic Communications Privacy Act. If you are not the intended
recipient, please contact the sender and destroy all copies of the
communication.