[IPAC-List] Mistakes in selection

[Patrick McCoy]

Agree with you René.  The honest person could be disadvantaged for
responding honestly.
 
Unless of course, the developer didn't assume that  higher scores are
better.  For example, they could select those who scored high but not
too high on tests of integrity or other constructs like that.  But in
the federal public  service it would  probably be necessary to be
transparent and tell candidates that top scores are not necessarily
preferred. Right? Hey and then there is the potential issue of cross
cultural differences in modesty....
 
Pat McCoy
Ottawa 


>>> "Shekerjian, Rene" <Rene.Shekerjian at cs.state.ny.us> 2011/11/22 9:26

AM >>>
The following excerpt from Mike's post seems to back up the blogger's
post that was recently shared here.

"A graduate student told me how an integrity test was used to screen
applicants at a jewelry store where she worked. The store staff resented
the integrity test rejecting applicants who the staff had already
identified as acceptable for employment. To undermine the testing
process, the store staff coached the applicants prior to the taking of
the integrity test by telling them to answer consistent with this: 'You
have never stolen anything. None of your friends or family members have
ever stolen anything. You believe that stealing anything, no matter how
small, is very bad behavior. You believe that if someone steals anything
at work, no matter how small, the person should be fired and criminally
prosecuted.' No one who received this coaching ever failed the integrity
test."


>From my naïve perspective I can only think, if the above is true, that

a truly honest person would be doomed by such testing. For example, I
was brought up to be honest to a fault. It was considered immoral in my
family to deviate at all from the truth. I would be compelled to deviate
from the above advice, and here is why.

When I was four years old I stole some gum from the drug store. 
I believe that if your family is starving it may be okay to steal some
food. Maybe not, but not absolutely not. 
If someone stole 3 paper clips at work, I would let it slide.
I had a friend in grade school who walked out of a store once (to my
knowledge) without paying for some merchandise.

Of course I recognize that the above excerpt may simply be another case
of misinformation. But if it is not, it raises some concerns.

René 

René Shekerjian | Testing Services Division | NYS Department of Civil
Service 
======================================================================


-----Original Message-----
From: Michael McDaniel (WSF) [mailto:McDaniel at WorkSkillsFirst.com] 
Sent: Monday, November 21, 2011 6:44 PM
To: Dennis Doverspike
Cc: ipac-list at ipacweb.org
Subject: Re: [IPAC-List] Mistakes in selection

Dennis said that I had some faking stories.  I found the link for some
I
sent to TIP in 2000
http://www.siop.org/tip/backissues/tipapril00/4McDaniel.aspx

Best wishes,

Mike McDaniel

On Sun, Aug 7, 2011 at 10:31 AM, Dennis Doverspike <
dennisdoverspike at gmail.com> wrote:


> And speaking of hiring mistakes. Of course the public relations

problem for

> the public sector is not only why were these individuals hired, but

why

> cant

> we get rid of them.

>

> The whole article is at:

>

>

>

http://news.bostonherald.com/news/regional/view/2011_0803sacked_t_punks_back_on_the_job/

>

> First few lines:

>

> The MBTA has been forced to rehire seven drivers and other key

employees

> after they were fired for offenses ranging from dozing at the wheel

due to

> drug use, child rape, and assaulting and making bizarre threats of

violence

> against co-workers - after bureaucratic arbitrators overturned their

> dismissals on technicalities, a Herald review has found.

>

> If you are in the public sector, how do you explain this type of

result at

> a

> time when the public sector is under attack.

>

> Dennis Doverspike

>

> On Sat, Aug 6, 2011 at 5:21 PM, Mark Hammer

<Mark.Hammer at psc-cfp.gc.ca

> >wrote:

>

> > I was responding to a thread on another site, and it occurred to me

that

> > I've never seen any research on "mistakes" in selection that

examnes

> > such mistakes as subject matter.  We discuss tests and other tools

here

> > under the presumption that mistakes in selection are more likely

when

> > suitable validated tools are not used or used properly, but I

don't

> > think we look at those mistakes themselves very closely.

> >

> > And by "mistake", I don't mean someone who is simply not as strong

a

> > performer as you'd hope for, but someone that makes you regret not

> > hiring a different person.  What sorts of clusters are there? 

(e.g.,

> > nutbar/trouble?  all hat no cattle?  s**t disturber?  not a team

player?

> >  not really interested in THIS job?)  Does category of hiring

mistake

> > made show any systematic relationship to kinds of tests/tools used,

or

> > *not* used?  What role do interviews play in generating or

catching

> > mistakes?  What role do referrals play? (a good friend received a

strong

> > reference for someone from a trusted source in a similar

high-powered

> > job to his, and the referral turned out to be a nightmare)

> >

> > How do managers come to the realization that they've made a hiring

> > mistake?  What  How long does it take them to decide that, what

tips

> > them off, and how do they respond?

> >

> > Now, as fascinating as all that might be, and as excited as I am

> > thinking about it, I'll be the first to admit that there are some

> > serious confounds to untangle.  Performance is easily confounded

with

> > disengagement, and disengagement can be precipitated by actions of

the

> > very manager who decides that hire was a mistake.  There are also

> > mistakes that are out of the manager's control for the most part. 

So a

> > manager might be told "You must select from this recruitment pool",

and

> > find the validly-assessed people in the pool are a poor fit for

the

> > particular role and position they have to offer.  I know my wife's

> > micro-agency has but 46 or so positions, including the CEO and

> > receptionist, so folks interested in upward mobility tend not to

stick

> > around very long.  Obviously few policies would permit the hiring

> > manager to ask point blank "Are you REALLY serious about sticking

> > around, or are you basically passing through?"

> >

> > But, failing all those sticky issues, I think there is something

to

> > this.  Has somebody already started looking at it?

> > Finally, I have to once again thank Ilene Gast for introducing me

to the

> > phrase "30 year mistake" some time back (I believe it was SIOP 2000

in

> > New Orleans).  We've all seen them.  I want to know how they got

there,

> > and how we recognize them.

> >

> > Mark Hammer

> > Ottawa

> >

> > >

> > This e-mail message is intended for the named recipient(s) and may

> > contain information that is privileged, confidential and/or exempt

from

> > disclosure under applicable law. Unauthorized disclosure, copying

or

> > re-transmission is prohibited. If you are not a named recipient or

not

> > authorized by the named recipient(s), or if you have received this

> > e-mail in error, then please notify the sender immediately and

delete

> > the message and any copies.

> >  >

> > Ce courriel est destiné exclusivement au destinataire mentionné en

titre

> > et peut contenir de l'information privilégiée, confidentielle ou

> > soustraite à la communication aux termes des lois applicables.

Toute

> > divulgation non autorisée, toute reproduction ou réacheminement

est

> > interdit. Si vous n'êtes pas le destinataire de ce courriel, ou

n'êtes

> > pas autorisé par le destinataire visé, ou encore, si vous l'avez

reçu

> > par erreur, veuillez le mentionner immédiatement à l'expéditeur et

> > supprimer le courriel et les copies.

> >

> > _______________________________________________________

> > IPAC-List

> > IPAC-List at ipacweb.org

> > http://www.ipacweb.org/mailman/listinfo/ipac-list

> >

>

>

>

> --

> Dennis Doverspike, PhD., ABPP

> Licensed Psychologist, #3539 (OHIO)

> Independent Consultant

> Professor of Psychology, University of Akron

> dennisdoverspike at gmail.com

>

> 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.

> _______________________________________________________

> IPAC-List

> IPAC-List at ipacweb.org

> http://www.ipacweb.org/mailman/listinfo/ipac-list

>




-- 
Michael A. McDaniel, Ph.D.
President
Work Skills First, Inc.
12340 Morning Creek Road
Glen Allen, VA 23059-7100
Voice: 804-277-9730
E-Mail: McDaniel at WorkSkillsFirst.com

www.workskillsfirst.com

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


>

This e-mail message is intended for the named recipient(s) and may
contain information that is privileged, confidential and/or exempt from
disclosure under applicable law. Unauthorized disclosure, copying or
re-transmission is prohibited. If you are not a named recipient or not
authorized by the named recipient(s), or if you have received this
e-mail in error, then please notify the sender immediately and delete
the message and any copies.
 >
Ce courriel est destiné exclusivement au destinataire mentionné en titre
et peut contenir de l'information privilégiée, confidentielle ou
soustraite à la communication aux termes des lois applicables. Toute
divulgation non autorisée, toute reproduction ou réacheminement est
interdit. Si vous n'êtes pas le destinataire de ce courriel, ou n'êtes
pas autorisé par le destinataire visé, ou encore, si vous l'avez reçu
par erreur, veuillez le mentionner immédiatement à l'expéditeur et
supprimer le courriel et les copies.