The Effects of the Consistency of Situation on the Advantages of the Candidates in Evaluation Centers

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Ph.D. candidate of OR at University of Tehran

2 Faculty member of Imam Sadiq University

3 MA Student of Business Management at Imam Sadiq University

Abstract

Evaluation centers are among the most frequent and valid devices of ​​measurement and evaluation, whose usage provides the most predictive validity for organizations. Consistency of job opportunity is a core issue in planning assessment centers. The question of how much the tools must be similar to the actual field of the target job has always been raised. This issue is very important because the increase or decrease of this consistency can affect the advantages of the candidates at the assessment centers. This research is intended to investigate this point. Tools with differences in the consistency of situations in the assessment centers were employed and the results of their impact on the final results were analyzed. The results indicated that the use of tools of high-level consistency among simulations can increase "practice effect", in the one hand, and, on the other hand, increase the possibility of explaining the evaluated competencies. Finally, the results also suggests that planning assessment centers using tools with different levels of situational consistency can lead to a more accurate assessment of competencies in the evaluation center.

Keywords

References

اکبری، مهناز؛ فیاضی، مرجان و جمشیدی، حمزه (1395)، شناسایی و اولویت‌بندی عارضه‌های کانون‌های ارزیابی و توسعه در ایران، پژوهش‌های مدیریت منابع انسانی، 8(1): 103 ـ 130.
پورعابدی، محمدرضا؛ ضرابی، وحید؛ سجادی نائینی، حنان و رضی، زهرا (1395)، طراحی مدل شایستگی چندبُعدی مدیران و کارکنان، پژوهش‌های مدیریت منابع انسانی، 8(2): 27 ـ 52.
تیموری، نازنین؛ رنگریز، حسن؛ عبداللهی، بیژن و زین‌آبادی، حسن‌رضا (1397)، اولویت‌بندی عوامل موثر بر جذب نیروی انسانی و ارائه الگوی مناسب مبتنی‌بر نظام شایستگی، پژوهش‌های مدیریت منابع انسانی، 10(2): 1 ـ 25.
جوانمرد، حبیب‌الله و محمدیان، فاطمه (1388)، شاخص‌های مؤثر در سنجش سرمایۀ انسانی، پژوهش‌های مدیریت منابع انسانی، 2(1): 67 ـ 86.
خشوعی، مهدیه‌سادات؛ عریضی، حمیدرضا و نوری، ابوالقاسم (1393)، طراحی و اجرای کانون ارزیابی ارتقایی مدیران، پژوهش‌های مدیریت منابع انسانی، 6(3):27 ـ 47.
شاکری، ایمان (1395)، روایی‌سنجی ارزیابی عملکرد سنتی و ارزیابی چندوجهی شایستگی‌ها ازطریق کانون ارزیابی، مطالعات روان‌شناسی صنعتی و سازمانی، 3(1): 57 ـ 70.
قربانی، داریوش (1396)، تأملی بر ایجاد مراکز ارزیابی به‌عنوان رویکرد نوین نظام جانشین‌پروری در نظام بانکی، مطالعات مدیریت و کارآفرینی، 3(2/1): 44 ـ 54.
مطهری‌نژاد، حسین (1396)، جذب منابع انسانی برمبنای شایستگی، پژوهش‌های مدیریت منابع انسانی، 9(1): 21 ـ 50.
British Psychological Society (Division of Occupational Psychology). (2015). The design and delivery of assessment centres.Leicester، UK: British Psychological Society.
Chan, D., & Schmitt, N. (1997). Video-based versus paper-and-pencil method of assessment in situational judgment tests: Subgroup differences in test performance and face validity perceptions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82: 143 - 159.
Chen, H.-C., & Naquin, S. S. (2006). An integrative model of competency development, training design, assessment center, and multi-rater assessment. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 8(2), 265 - 282.
Collins, J. M., Schmidt, F. L., Sanchez-Ku, M., Thomas, L., McDaniel, M. A., & Le, H. (2003). Can basic individual differences shed light on the construct meaning of assessment center evaluations? International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 11(1), 17 - 29.
De Kock, F. S., Lievens, F., & Born, M. P. (2018). The profile of the ‘Good Judge’ in HRM: A systematic review and agenda for future research. Human Resource Management Review. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2018.09.003
Dewberry, C., & Jackson, D. J. R. (2016). The Perceived Nature and Incidence of Dysfunctional Assessment Center Features and Processes: Dysfunctional Elements of Assessment Centers. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 24(2), 189 - 196. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijsa.12140
Fan, Y., & Lance, C. E. (2017). A Reformulated Correlated Trait-Correlated Method Model for Multitrait-Multimethod Data Effectively Increases Convergence and Admissibility Rates. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 77(6), 1048 - 1063. https://doi.org/ 10.1177/0013164416677144
Folger, R. G., & Cropanzano, R. (1998). Organizational justice and human resource management (Vol. 7). Sage.
Gatewood, R., Field, H. S., & Barrick, M. (2015). Human resource selection. Nelson Education.
Gaugler, B. B., Rosenthal, D. B., Thornton, G. C., & Bentson, C. (1987). Meta-analysis of assessment center validity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72(3), 493.
Hermelin, E., Lievens, F., & Robertson, I. T. (2007). The validity of assessment centres for the prediction of supervisory performance ratings: A meta‐analysis. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 15(4), 405 - 411.
Ingold, P. V., Kleinmann, M., König, C. J., & Melchers, K. G. (2016). Transparency of Assessment Centers: Lower Criterion‐related Validity but Greater Opportunity to Perform? Personnel Psychology, 69(2), 467 - 497.
Joiner, D. A. (2000). Guidelines and Ethical Considerations for Assessment Center Operations: International task force on assessment center guidelines. Public Personnel Management, 29(3), 315 - 332.
Krause, D. E., & Thornton III, G. C. (2009). A cross‐cultural look at assessment center practices: Survey results from Western Europe and North America. Applied Psychology, 58(4), 557 - 585.
Lee, J., Connelly, B. S., Goff, M., & Hazucha, J. F. (2017). Are assessment center behaviors’ meanings consistent across exercises? A measurement invariance approach. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 25(4), 317 - 332. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijsa.12187
Lievens, F., & Patterson, F. (2011). The validity and incremental validity of knowledge tests, low-fidelity simulations, and high-fidelity simulations for predicting job performance in advanced-level high-stakes selection. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(5), 927.
Lievens, F., & Sackett, P. R. (2006). Video-based versus written situational judgment tests: A comparison in terms of predictive validity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91: 1181-1188.
Lievens, F., & Thornton III, G. C. (2005). Assessment centers: Recent developments in practice and research. In The Blackwell handbook of personnel selection.
Lievens, F., Chasteen, C. S., Day, E. A., & Christiansen, N. D. (2006). Large-scale investigation of the role of trait activation theory for understanding assessment center convergent and discriminant validity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(2), 247.
Lievens, F., De Corte, W., & Westerveld, L. (2012). Understanding the Building Blocks of Selection Procedures: Effects of Response Fidelity on Performance and Validity. Journal of Management, 41(6), 1604 - 1627.
Lievens, F., Tett, R. P., & Schleicher, D. J. (2009). Assessment centers at the crossroads: Toward a reconceptualization of assessment center exercises. In Research in personnel and human resources management (pp. 99 - 152). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
Motowidlo, S. J., Dunnette, M. D., & Carter, G. W. (1990). An alternative selection procedure: The low-fidelity simulation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75(6), 640.
Ployhart, R. E., Schneider, B., & Schmitt, N. (2006). Staffing organizations: Contemporary practice and research. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Richman-Hirsch, W. L., Olson-Buchanan, J. B., & Drasgow, F. (2000). Examining the impact of administration medium on examinee perceptions and attitudes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85: 880 - 887.
Sackett, P. R., & Harris, M. M. (1988). A further examination of the constructs underlying assessment center ratings. Journal of Business and Psychology, 3(2), 214 - 229.
Speer, A. B., Christiansen, N. D., Goffin, R. D., & Goff, M. (2014). Situational bandwidth and the criterion-related validity of assessment center ratings: Is cross-exercise convergence always desirable? Journal of Applied Psychology, 99(2), 282.
Taylor, H. C., & Russell, J. T. (1939). The relationship of validity coefficients to the practical effectiveness of tests in selection: discussion and tables. Journal of Applied Psychology, 23(5), 565.
Thornton III, G. C., & Kedharnath, U. (2013). Work sample tests. In APA Handbook of Testing and Assessment in Psychology. American Psychological Association.
Thornton III, G. C., Mueller-Hanson, R. A., & Rupp, D. E. (2017). Developing organizational simulations: A guide for practitioners, students, and researchers. Routledge.
Thornton III, G., Rupp, D. (2006). Assessment Centers in Human Resource Management. New York: Psychology Press.
Journal of Research in Human Resources Management
Volume 10, Issue 4 - Serial Number 34
serial no.34
February 2019
Pages 1-24

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 18 September 2018
  • Revise Date: 02 December 2018
  • Accept Date: 31 January 2019

Share

How to cite

Statistics