[IPAC-List] Measurement education

[Ronald Clare]

I suggest that you closely review (perception and analysis) the basic understanding of what/who exactly is "BEST" and why. Folks are giving great input re selection tools but I have often found there to be a disconnect between the characteristics we are "told" are needed to be best and those actually possessed by those thought to be best.

Sent from my iPad

On Oct 25, 2012, at 8:42 AM, Fred Rafilson <fred at iosolutions.org> wrote:


> I understand your frustration but don't necessarily agree that a good promotional process won't produce a valid rank- ordered list of candidates. I do agree however, that a less than adequate process will not suffice. Certainly any type of written exam, job knowledge or situational judgment alone is not enough. Are you using an assessment center that was designed specifically for your agency and position?  Are the rating scales based on observable behaviors?  If not, you might consider doing so. 

> 

> Fred Rafilson, Ph. D,

> I/O Solutions, Inc.

> 

> Sent from my iPhone

> 

> On Oct 24, 2012, at 6:54 PM, "Partain, Steven C." <Steven.Partain at tvfr.com> wrote:

> 

>> Folks, I am facing a bit of a crisis of understanding related to measurement in promotional exams.  Every-so-often we have a promotional exam in which the names and ranking of eligibles on the list don't match what our folks know about those candidates.  We've had several recently with the "best" people failing the exams.  As you might imagine, HR is to blame, and we are under great pressure to change our approach to exams to ensure the "best" people pass and are appropriately ranked.  I won't go through all the practices we use to ensure validity, reliability, standardization, etc.  We certainly are always looking at those factors and have room to improve.  But the underlying message is to make our exams "more successful," which means that the resulting eligible list matches the perceptions of our workforce about their true ability.

>> 

>> So, here's my question.  I feel pretty well-versed in the folly of holistic assessments, the relatively low validity of others "sizing up" candidates intuitively, etc.  I have attempted-and obviously failed-to convey some of the science underlying this.  How have others successfully overcome this challenge?  Are there metaphors that have worked?  A written piece published that captures the issue in laymen's terms?

>> 

>> Any help is appreciated.  Otherwise, I fear we will head down the road of having the workforce rank candidates-kind of a popularity contest.

>> 

>> Thanks,

>> 

>> Steven Partain

>> HR Manager

>> Human Resources

>> Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue

>> 11945 SW 70th Avenue, Tigard, Oregon 97223

>> www.tvfr.com<http://www.tvfr.com/>

>> Ph. 503-259-1292

>> 

>> _______________________________________________________

>> IPAC-List

>> IPAC-List at ipacweb.org

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

> _______________________________________________________

> IPAC-List

> IPAC-List at ipacweb.org

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