[IPAC-List] Seeking Taylor-Russell formulas

[Dennis Doverspike]

Mark,

Great to hear from our "International" branch. In your retirement, it would
be great to see you reach out to your Canadian assessment colleagues and
encourage them to join IPAC.

As for your point, classic estimates of utility are easily modified to
include discussion of tenure, retention, and costs. However, ever since in
a battle between two of your countrymen, the side that argued that utility
information did more harm than good turned out to be the winner, there
seems to have been a decrease in attention in both research and practice to
the "classic" notion of utility. This seems to have been replaced by the
expanded views offered by experts such as Boudreau, as well as the move
toward dashboarding results. An impression I have is that at least in the
private sector, more attention is paid to turnover, for which the costs are
more easily quantified, and other performance metrics, than is paid to
utility in the Taylor-Brogden-Cronbach-Schmidt tradition. I find Marc
Wenzel of Shaker to be an excellent resource on what the private sector is
actually concerned with when evaluating the usefulness of tests.

That does not mean that Taylor and Russell is still not useful. For
example, I find it very useful in trying to explain and in considering the
value of various approaches to setting cutoffs. Although very useful and
well accepted, the classic Angoff approach can be easily shown to be very
limited when considered in a Taylor-Russell framework.

Dennis




On Wed, Aug 15, 2018 at 1:26 PM <mhammer at 295.ca> wrote:

> Utility analysis is relevant for that period where those who *used* to be
> candidates are now incumbents.  That is not to dismiss its relevance or
> importance, but it tends to ignore retention as a critical aspect of
> evaluating test-utility.  The predictive validity and utility of tests are
> for identifying candidates who will accept your offer AND stick around,
> such that the utility and added value can be realized.
>
> So, without wishing to derail or distract from the thread, I was curious
> as to whether there is research or reports that attempt to integrate
> validity/utility with prediction of retention.  I ask this with the
> understanding that probability of non-retirement voluntary departure often
> decreases with tenure, just as evidence of utility *increases* with
> tenure.
>
> Grosso modo, the ideal is for any pre-employment testing to identify not
> only those who will add value for the employer, but do so for a period
> long enough to justify that investment in assessment and selection.
>
> Feel free to ignore.
>
> Mark Hammer
> Ottawa
> (now retired)
>
> _______________________________________________________
> IPAC-List
> IPAC-List at ipacweb.org
> https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/ipac-list
>


-- 
Dennis Doverspike, PhD., ABPP
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.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist9.pair.net/pipermail/ipac-list/attachments/20180815/b770af39/attachment-0001.html>