Brief Assessment Center History Used by Germans in 1 st World War to select officers Used by U.S. to select spies (OSS) In Private Industry, 1st used by AT&T to predict performance of managers (Management Progress Study)

AT&T Manager Progress Study 1 st application of AC method in US industry (Douglas Bray) Longitudinal study of 400+ recently hired managers Inbasket, LGD, manufacturing game, interview, personal history, p&p tests (g & personality) Predicted progress over a 15 year period Implemented throughout the whole Bell system

From then to now… 1960s: AT&T shared… –IBM, Sears, Standard Oil, GE, J.C. Penny 1966: Bray & Grant: Psych Monographs Paper 1969: Conferences being held on AC Method 1970: Byham article in Harvard Business Review 1973: 1 st International Conference on Assessment Center Methods (ICACM ) Meeting; DDI Established 1975: AC Guidelines Published Today: Hundreds of studies, Thousands of ACs conducted, Millions Assessed!

Selection and PromotionSelection and Promotion Diagnosis –Identification of training & developmental needs Development –Skill enhancement through simulations –Not the same as diagnosis (Carrick & Williams, 1999) Uses of the Assessment Center Method

Assessment Center Defined An assessment center consists of a standardized evaluation of behavior based on multiple inputs. Multiple trained observers and techniques are used. Judgments about behaviors are made, in major part, from specifically developed assessment simulations. These judgments are pooled in a meeting among the assessors or by a statistical integration process. - International Taskforce, 2009

The AC Big “10”… 1.Job analysis (behaviors) 2.Behavioral classification (dimensions) 3.Links: behaviors  dimensions  exercises 4.Multiple assessments 5.Simulations 6.Multiple assessors 7.Assessor training 8.Recording behavior 9.Reports 10.Data integration Observation Rating Judgment

Assessor Training Orientation to the method Frame of reference training on the dimensions (Schleicher, 2002) Training on common rating errors (Thornton & Rupp, 2005) Role player training (International Taskforce, 2009) Familiarity with stimuli materials and rating process (Leivens, 2001) Practice! (International Taskforce, 2009)

SMTWTRF Assessors and Candidates Arrive; Review AC Schedule AC Day; Exercises Conducted Evening Assessors Review Notes and Score Assigned Candidates Group Discussion of Assigned Candidates Evening Assessors Review Notes and Score Assigned Candidates Group Discussion of Assigned Candidates Evening Assessors Review Notes and Score Assigned Candidates Group Discussion of Assigned Candidates Evening Write Summary Report on Assigned Candidates Submit Final Summary Reports Sample of a “Full-Blown” Assessment Center

Sample Individual Exercises Interview Simulation Scheduling Exercise In-Basket Assessment Center Exercises Sample Group Exercises Leaderless Group Discussion Business Game

Interview Simulation Scheduling Exercise Business Game Leaderless Group Discussion 1. DecisivenessX(X) 2. Leadership(X) 3. Management Control XXX 4. Oral Communication (X)X 5. Planning and Organization X(X)X 6. Problem Analysis/Judgment (X) X 7. Resilience (X) XX 8. Sensitivity (X)XXX 9.  Written Communication (Reaction Forms) XXXX Dimensions By Exercise Grid  To be measured in four Participant Reaction Forms X Quality typically measurable in this particular exercise ( ) Parentheses indicate an exercise that is a particularly strong measure of that quality

Assessor Report Form Interview Simulation 1 – Very little or none of the quality was shown. 2 – A less than satisfactory degree was shown. 3 – A satisfactory amount was shown. 4 – A greater than satisfactory amount was shown. 5 – A great deal of the quality was shown. (1) Decisiveness: ______ (Readiness to make decisions, render judgments, take action or commit oneself.) (2) Judgment: ______ (Ability to develop alternative solutions to problems, to evaluate courses of action and reach logical decisions.) Participant:______________ (Name) Assessor: ______________ (Name) Date: ____________

Decisiveness: Readiness to make decisions, render judgments, take action or commit oneself. Assessor Your Business Game_____ _____ Interview Simulation _____ _____ Leaderless Group Discussion _____ _____ _____ _____ Overall _________ Initiative: Actively influencing events rather than passively accepting; self-starting. Takes action beyond what is necessarily called for. Originates actions rather than just responding. A ssessor Your Business Game_____ _____ Leaderless Group Discussion_____ _____ Overall _________ Assessors: _____________________________ Participant:_______________________ _____________________________ Date: ______________ _____________________________ Assessor Discussion Form

DimensionAssessor #1Assessor #2Assessor #3Final Rating Decisiveness Initiative Judgment Leadership Management Control Oral Communication Planning & Organization Problem Analysis Resilience Sensitivity Written Communication Overall Score Assessment Center --- Sample Final Rating Form

Data Integration Options Group Discussion –Administrator role is critical –Leads to higher-quality assessor evidence—peer pressure –Beware of process losses! Statistical/Mechanical –May be more or less acceptable to organizational decision makers, depending on particular circumstances –Can be more effective than “clinical” model –Requires research base to develop formula Combination of both –Example: consensus on dimension profile, statistical rule to determine overall assessment rating

Assessment Center Pros and Cons Male-Female Differences Source: Dean, Bobko, & Roth (2008). JAP, 93, ProsCons Multiple exercises and raters Behavioral Focus Legal compliance Less adverse impact than cognitive ability Liked by candidates Time and money involved (Cascio & Ramos, 1984, N > 600 managers = $688.00/person. Inflation adjusted = over $1,500.00/person) Potential biases during group discussion Better predictor of progression within organizations than specific performance scores (Policy Capturing Device?)

~ Assessment Center ~ International Application Issues Relevance and generalization of situational exercises Scoring of candidate behaviors Linkage between behaviors and a given construct (dimensions) Example: Disagreeing with supervisor and defending one’s position in a meeting with others present (assertiveness vs. impolite) Criterion-related validity across cultures