[IPAC-List] Minimum vs Preferred Qualifications

Lance Seberhagen sebe at erols.com
Thu Jan 2 18:41:02 EST 2014

Bryan, I share your frustration, but let's not be so quick to throw out
all MQs. Yes, MQs are often misused. But, as with any other employee
selection procedure, when MQs are developed, administered, and used
properly, they can improve the efficiency and effectiveness (validity)
of the employee selection process. As noted by Ron, MQs are best used
to screen out applicants who are obviously unfit or ineligible for the
job in question. For example, MQs are especially useful for providing a
realistic job preview (e.g., Are you willing to work rotating shifts?
Are you willing to work on weekends?), when jobs have unusual demands.
MQs can also be used to assess KSAsup to a point. The key is to do it
right. The same goes for "actual tests."

Lance Seberhagen, Ph.D.

Seberhagen & Associates

9021 Trailridge Court

Vienna, VA 22182


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

On 1/2/2014 5:58 PM, Bryan Baldwin wrote:


> This is probably not an incredibly insightful comment, but does it

> strike anyone else that MQs---an extremely common screening tool in

> the public sector---are supported by, I would wager, questionable

> evidence as to the relationship between an increased amount of

> education/training and job performance? Particularly at the fine-grain

> level we use it? (e.g., must be exactly two years of experience)


> Combine this with the other frequently used initial tool---the

> resume/application---and it's a recipe for an incredible loss of

> utility on the front end. It's enough to make me want just a giant

> pool of candidates that have been through actual tests (unproctored or

> not) and throw the MQs and resumes out the window.


> Bryan Baldwin


> Personnel Officer


> California Department of Justice


> Division of Administrative Support


> (916) 322-5446


> *From:*ipac-list-bounces at ipacweb.org

> [mailto:ipac-list-bounces at ipacweb.org] *On Behalf Of *Ronald Clare

> *Sent:* Thursday, January 02, 2014 2:44 PM

> *To:* Graham, Erin

> *Cc:* ipac-list at ipacweb.org

> *Subject:* Re: [IPAC-List] Minimum vs Preferred Qualifications


> MQ,s are minimum qualification and are best utilized in screening out

> candidates who ( theoretically) can't do the job. If we are "testing"

> all candidates who meet MQs and relying on the test to sort

> candidates, the no consideration is usually given for quals above the

> minimum (e.g. 100% written test). However, this strategy is usually

> used only for entry level positions. For most positions we give

> additional credit for E&E above the minimum either in quantity ( more

> Ed or exper) or quality (more specialized Ed or targeted experience).

> On a " pure" T&E rating, someone who just meets the minimum qual would

> receive a 70 (minimum passing score) folks who have additional

> credentials would receive additional credit. E.G. A liberal arts BA

> might give a 70 but a BA in Hr might get an 80 and an Ma in HR might

> get a 90; 3 yrs exper in customer service might be 70 but 3 yrs HR

> help desk might be an 80. Each consideration should. Be job driven and

> all considerations should be framed in advance so we don't create

> grading systems that are candidate driven. Sometimes more Ed or exper

> does not add value to success in the job and should not be considered.


> Sent from my iPad



> On Jan 2, 2014, at 2:04 PM, "Graham, Erin" <Erin.Graham at das.ohio.gov

> <mailto:Erin.Graham at das.ohio.gov>> wrote:


> I would like to find out how most public sector agencies address

> preferred qualifications when they have established minimum

> qualifications. Specifically, if you have an established level of

> education and experience in your minimum qualifications, would you

> be able to have a preferred qualification above and beyond the MQs

> (e.g., MQ = Bachelor's in Business Administration, Preferred qual

> = MBA)? Or, do you reserve preferred qualifications for a

> particular skill set (e.g., experience with a specific software)?


> We currently are seeing a mixture of both in our postings, but are

> leaning toward preferred qualifications for a particular skill set.


> Thank you in advance for sharing.


> _______________________________________________________

> IPAC-List

> IPAC-List at ipacweb.org <mailto:IPAC-List at ipacweb.org>

> http://nine.pairlist.net/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://nine.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/ipac-list

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://nine.pairlist.net/pipermail/ipac-list/attachments/20140102/4c178400/attachment.htm

More information about the IPAC-List mailing list