Search results

This study investigated the use of self‐assessments in predicting assessment centre outcome, looking at the difference between raw self‐assessments and self‐assessment accuracy scores. The subjects for the study were 60 engineers who attended a one‐day assessment centre in 1991‐1992 selecting trainers for an automotive manufacturer’s training programme. The measures used in the study were the assessor and candidate global exercise ratings, and it was found that self‐assessment accuracy was a better predictor of assessment centre outcome than the raw self‐assessment scores. It is suggested that if self‐assessments are to be used in assessment centres then they need to be thought of in conjunction with assessor ratings, and that self‐assessments may have a use in delivering feedback to candidates.

As companies grow and evolve, they inevitably face an influx of new personnel and changing responsibilities of existing staff members, often resulting in an increasingly complex organizational design. During periods of rapid organic growth, new layers of management and labor may be created as a reactionary, rather than a planned activity. This often results in redundancy of responsibility and confusing communication channels within the company, ultimately impacting financial performance. The purpose of this paper is to describe a case study of significant organizational change that was accomplished using assessment center philosophy, combined with web‐based technology.

Concurrent Technologies Corporation (CTC), a research and development professional services organization that rapidly grew its workforce to over 1,400 was faced with these challenges, resulting in direct labor billings losses. Upon strategically designing a new organizational structure, CTC was faced with making critically important staffing changes. A modified assessment center approach using web‐based technology was employed to rapidly select the best candidates for these new positions.

It is the authors' contention in this paper and practice in the implementation of this organizational realignment that practicing managers who have extensive experience with middle managers can effectively evaluate them on assessment center dimensions without observing them in assessment center simulations. These enlightened assessments leveraged web‐based technology, while avoiding the costly and time‐intensive simulation and exercise phases of the traditional assessment center.

Based on the authors' experience with CTC, combining this modified assessment center approach (evaluating managers on competencies without using simulations and exercises) with web‐based technology can provide organizations with a powerful tool for implementing fast and effective organizational change. This new and original approach can support executives in evaluating managerial talent and realigning organizational structure.

This research investigated the relationship between job performance ratings for 39 Israeli medical unit managers and two types of performance predictor: ratings from behavior description (BD) interviews and ratings from an assessment center. The BD validity 0.53 compared favorably with the 0.62 obtained by the assessment center. Utility analyses that table the financial return for investing in the more expensive assessment process under different levels of tenure, number of new hires, and selection ratio, reveal the conditions under which assessment centers pay off best.

Assessment Centres are becoming increasingly popular and are being ‘sold’ — both literally and metaphorically — by organizations and individuals on both sides of the Atlantic. It is a matter of concern that none of the companies in the recent IPM Survey had conducted any validation and evidence has, therefore, to be sought from the literature.

Over recent years there has been a growth in the number of British organisations using assessment centres for purposes of selecting staff and providing developmental feedback to employees. This article analyses the importance attached to the ratings of particular managerial characteristics and their inter‐relationships using data from an assessment centre operated for existing staff by a financial institution. The implications of the findings for the processes of assessor decision making and the provision of meaningful developmental feedback are then examined.

THE ASSESSMENT CENTRE IS NOT A PLACE: IT IS A METHOD. It is a formal procedure, incorporating group and individual exercises, for the identification of dimensions of managerial or supervisory success, identified as important for a particular position or level of management.

At a time when many Development Centres do not run as well as they should, strategic advice is provided on the core process of all Centres: assessment, counselling and development planning. Each of these processes is covered in depth and, throughout, the experience of major companies such as Philips and Pilkington is drawn on to support and illustrate its points. The bigger issues, those which have major impacts on the effectiveness of the Centres, are the focus of the article; in many ways important new standards are set for companies using Centres.

Contrasts development centres and assessment centres. Suggests five formats as typical for development centres and reviews their applications. Lists variables in development centre design and highlights trends that are emerging to deal with contemporary organization requirements. Discusses the issues of what capabilities development centres should develop. Suggests transferable but unique capabilities are a paradox that must be resolved. Identifies a shift away from competences as necessary to sustain the commercial credibility of development centres ‐ and the personnel function. Highlights cognitive psychology as the basis for the new design focus. Concludes that development centres can remain the most effective way to create agreed futures for both staff and their organizations only if major changes take place.

Discusses a case where an assessment centre programme played a key role in a process of management change in a county council social services department, responding to the Government’s “Care in the Community” initiatives. “New think” management required a paradigm shift – not just acquiring new “bits” of skill or knowledge – particularly with respect to decision making. Argues from this experience that developmental assessment centres provide an arena in which new roles can be rehearsed and allows for reflection on a person’s competence to manage that role.

Looks at developments in assessment methods and discusses issues likely to affect attempts to use sophisticated tools such as assessment centres. Discusses employee development, ownership and responsibility for development. Suggests ways in which managers and human resource specialists can plan and develop systems to match future needs.