Assessment And Development Centers In Employee Selection And Development

assessment center methodology (rather than a place) for a thorough assessment of candidates for posao.Centar development follows similar principles, but rather a choice, its primary purpose is to assist in the development of the current job holder.

Because of the costs associated with the assessment and development centers, they are typically used for higher level jobs. For example, are used as part of graduation exercises for the selection of fast-track programs or executive and managerial development. Also, as a result of cost evaluation and development centers are tools associated with more medium and large organizations, especially multi-nationals.

cost estimates and development centers comes from a thorough process, time and skills needed to be pokrenuti.Centri include many different types of assessments through one, two or even three days.

Candidates will have the opportunity to demonstrate their talents and research in a range of different exercises within each exercise, the number of skills are typically assessed.

The main benefit of the centers that take place in several days, is that it becomes harder for candidates to fake features (such as extroversion, social courage, friendship), which are often faked an interview.

known or job evaluation interview can be a part of the city, but it will be performed in a standardized, structured way. Group discussion, negotiation and teamwork exercises, the presentation tray (simulations of real work) exercises and psychometric assessment of personality and ability are all found within a typical assessment or Development Centre.

Each center that works is unlikely to assess a large number of people in one go. It is typical for an estimated 8-12 persons, and will be a high proportion of assessee-assessor (at least one assessee by the assessor, and often more !).

Exercises are either developed by experienced appraisers in the house, or can be bought from specialist training proizvođača.Kupio exercises can be very expensive, costing many times more than U.S. $ 1000 per exercise. Others will charge a fee per assessee, and even that may amount to the same amount of U.S. $ 1000 per assessee, depending on the exercise.

Another option is to buy computer software that contains a series of exercises validated the ability to schedule and manage the complete logistics center.

where exercises are developed in house, there's always the question of validity. That is, they really consistently evaluate what they are designed and hard to estimate? Of course, most organizations will conduct the necessary studies to support the validity of the charges and / or competence of questions!

Going back to "validate" off-the-shelf training may, however, may not always be wise. While they May have been shown to be valid in the organization using X managers from Department Y, for example, it does not necessarily mean the same exercise (s) will be applicable to your company and sharing!

Given the costs associated with designing the assessment or development center, to run and ensuring that all assessors are properly trained and competent, it is necessary to ensure that the return on investment ... in other words, it's money well spent that will be returned two, three or more times!

In general, business studies, research and common sense show that well-designed and run centers provide a good return on investment.

From a commonsense perspective, if you are over the selection process, it seems they are more likely to select a suitable employee.

From a business case perspective, to follow through. If organizations continue to choose based on your current selection system (such as interviews and personality test), in the best case, we expect them to play the current performance.

However, if the organization has become choosy and opt for a well thought-out assessment center consists of a variety of team exercises, presentations, tests, interviews and so on ... Assuming that the center is a competently designed and run, and exercise to accurately assess the attributes to evaluate ... surely, that the organization will be more accurate in their selection of the right person to do the job!

Now, what if that person is to work on that for a simple statement to say manages assets worth U.S. $ 1 million? Given that the organization has in place a better person through the rigorous selection process, we might expect to see a conservative 3% increase in performance. That would be U.S. $ 30,000 (all else being equal !).

If we continue to assume that these people remain in work longer, say three years (because they are the right person for the job and so happy with it), we multiply the return for 3, having obtained the U.S. $ 90,000!

Suppose we select 3 people from the city and they all perform similarly, we can further multiply by 3 and we get a triple U.S. $ 270,000. This gain is likely to be at least 15 times the initial cost estimates to the center!

Thus, although the assessment centers are expensive and labor intensive, they are likely to provide an excellent return on investment that.

The same can be said of the development centers. Again, we can assume that without the introduction and development center, an employee will develop at its current rate. With the introduction of the center, the development can multiply and bring a massive return to work.

All this of course depends on the level at which the candidate in the organization and the impact that their competence and further development is to succeed.

Research shows that assessment centers are one of the most predictive form of impact assessment work (eg, Robertson & Smith, 2001) and that the incremental validity above the supervisor ratings for predicting promotion (Chan, 1996).

Research shows that assessment centers are one of the most predictive form of impact assessment work (eg, Robertson & Smith, 2001) and that the incremental validity above the supervisor ratings for predicting promotion (Chan, 1996).

Research shows that assessment centers are one of the most predictive form of impact assessment work (eg, Robertson & Smith, 2001) and that the incremental validity above the supervisor ratings for predicting promotion (Chan, 1996).

References:

Robertson, I. T., & Smith, M. (2001). Personnel Selection. Journal of occupational and organizational psychology, 74 (4), 441-472.

Chan, D. (1996). Criterion and construct evaluation assessment center. Journal of occupational and organizational psychology, 69 (2), 167-181.