Summary
After several months of utilizing an assessment based recruitment process designed by Profiles Asia Pacific, the client company decided to evaluate the actual performance of its management trainees and compare this evaluation against the initial test scores.
The analysis was truly revealing. The predictive success of the assessment instruments used during the recruitment process is strongly indicated. The assessments can thus be a basis for future selection of considerably more top performers, which over the next two or three years, will have a considerable impact on the company.
Introduction to the Study:
After several year of utilizing (old) pen and paper assessments the HR department undertook a survey of available technologies and instruments in order to speed and improve their recruitment process, specifically for the recruitment of management trainees.
The company selected assessments from Profiles Asia Pacific, Inc and this was implemented third quarter 2010.
Some six months later the performance of the trainees was evaluated and the seven top and lowest eight performing trainees selected for the study.
The Assessments:
The on-line assessments involved covered:
- Abilities – involving several sub-tests;
- Selected behavioral traits;
- Supervisory Skills – an un-timed seven dimension largely “knowledge” test.
The Results:
Ability: The graph below shows the results for the ability assessment. Four of the six dimensions significantly differentiate the two groups; these are:
On the other hand there was no detectible difference in Form Perception and comparatively little (although statistically significant) difference in Clerical Perception. For this reason the overall score shown included only the first four scores.
The overall mean score of the top performers is 59 while that of the low performers is 30. There is no overlap of scores between the two groups.
This assessment alone could be used to reduce the intake of low performers with high reliability.
Score
EQ Profiler: The average overall score of the top performers is 78 and that of the low performers 66. Only one of the top performers falls well into the range of scores of the low performers. One other is borderline. Even the distortion measure tended to be lower for the low performers.
Score
Supervisory Skills Profiler: The graph below shows the results for the Supervisory Skills Profiler. Six of the seven dimensions show significant differentiation. These are:
The seventh dimension ‘Communication’, while statistically significant shows less differentiation of the two groups.
The mean score of the top performers is 61 compared with 45 for the low performers.
There is NO overlap in the overall scores of the top and low performers.
Score
Conclusion:
This assessment battery can be used to give the company clear indications as the likely future performance of its management trainees and therefore to significantly improve the quality of the intake of fresh trainees.
Lowest scores should be established and those falling below the desired score not included in the program!
In a very short period of time, the overall performance/ productivity of the group will be noticeably improved.
