Transcript Slide 1
Behavioral Scientists in Action
[email protected]
CCMC
Corporate Comprehensive Management
Consultants
File-1
“People Drive the Process of
Excellence”
© CCMC Method Engineers Training Manual 1996 (2010 update)
1
Behavioral Scientists in Action
[email protected]
Workshop on Method Engineering for
Assessment Centers
at the Pre-conference workshop of the
Annual Conference of ACSG, Stellenbosch- South Africa
Dr. S. Pandey
Corporate Comprehensive Management Consultants
© CCMC Method Engineers Training Manual 1996 (2010 update)
India, Bombay
16th March, 2011
2
Behavioral Scientists in Action
[email protected]
Objective
To provide familiarity with relevant
concepts, techniques and skills
pertaining to Method Engineering for
Assessment center (AC) design.
© CCMC Method Engineers Training Manual 1996 (2010 update)
3
Behavioral Scientists in Action
[email protected]
Goals (expectation)
An appreciation program to acquire new AC-community
member and refresher to existing members (members
include both buyers and suppliers of AC)
Participants should be able to make informed decision
while selecting or designing a set of methods for an
Assessment center. This implies being able to differentiate
good methods from bad methods for a given
implementation context. Getting out of the myth that there
are good methods irrespective of implementation context
Participants should be able to identify needs for
customization and some ideas to customize a method
Ultimately, some participants may chose method
engineering as a profession and commit personal energy to
advance research and design of AC-Methods, thereby
contribute to the community
© CCMC Method Engineers Training Manual 1996 (2010 update)
4
Behavioral Scientists in Action
[email protected]
Most essential element of the goal to me
today is
Your inquisitiveness (literally, the state
of active curiosity)
Our assumption is that for Adult
learner “if inquisitiveness is there
everything else can be arranged”
© CCMC Method Engineers Training Manual 1996 (2010 update)
5
Behavioral Scientists in Action
[email protected]
Session-1
AS practitioner you know the fundamental strength of ACapproach; reduction of error in human attribute
measurement.
Concepts of errors in the context of Human attribute
measurement:
Sources of errors and controls of errors
Method related errors; when your Method is imperfect
your measurement data is contaminated by
measurement variance and not the construct variance.
Essence of reliability (specially, inter-rater reliability)
validity (specially, content and predictive validity)
Measurement of deterministic vs. probabilistic
(stochastic) entities – single data point vs. expectancy
of a distribution - limits of error tolerance.
© CCMC Method Engineers Training Manual 1996 (2010 update)
6
Behavioral Scientists in Action
[email protected]
Session-1: Role of methods in AC
Role of methods in AC
(Methods) Stimulus-Response
(behavior)
Concept of behavior variance
Introduction to relevant concepts
of experimental design and
naturally occurring experiments
© CCMC Method Engineers Training Manual 1996 (2010 update)
7
Behavioral Scientists in Action
[email protected]
Who is Method Engineer?
For a detail understanding of Method Engineer’s role refer to
‘Method Engineer’s task flow chart elsewhere in this workshop.
For the timebeing let us note the following.
Method Engineer has the responsibility of design & development
of Methods, and also the entire implementation of the AC/DC
design. They convert scientific principles into pragmatic/ field
application.
Methods & Processes are their domain that mediate between
AC-design and AC-goals
Like any other Engineers they often conduct field tests of
prototype of Methods & processes of a design to validate
earlier laboratory tests and to obtain broader feedback for
refinement
© CCMC Method Engineers Training Manual 1996 (2010 update)
8
Sources of Errors in Human Assessment
Behavioral Scientists in Action
[email protected]
Assessment Error =
ƒ (Assessor x Assessment methods x Assessment Factors)
Trained Assessors (ORCE, Factor & Method familiarity)
Accredited (for both Knowledge & skills) for Quality
Standardized methods
Adequate Quality in data generation. [A Method
Engineer by design can compensate Assessor’s skill
deficiency]
Standard administration process with approved
flexibility for customization
Simple in structure but profound in eliciting behavior
Unbiased to Assessees irrelevant background e.g., age,
race, gender.
Competency research based Assessment factors/criteria
© CCMC Method Engineers Training Manual 1996 (2010 update)
9
Behavioral Scientists in Action
[email protected]
Common Assessment Errors: vis-à-vis
Method Engineers responsibility
Assessment errors are To reduce the errors
a function of not
Method Engineer can
knowing the following: do the following:
Not knowing: What to
Observe
Attention to Method
specific Behaviors &
Factors
Not knowing: How to
Observe
Attention to Methods’
process compliance
Not knowing: Who should Attention to Assessors’
Observe
skill specification for each
Method
© CCMC Method Engineers Training Manual 1996 (2010 update)
10
Assessment Errors
Behavioral Scientists in Action
[email protected]
1. Not knowing What to Observe –The
answer is Factors
Assessment Centre approach ensures relevant factors
through:
Analysis of the Job
Deriving a standardized set of Competency Factors to be
assessed
Identifying observable behaviors linked to the factors.
Observing, recording, diagnosing the pattern and rating
of behaviour
© CCMC Method Engineers Training Manual 1996 (2010 update)
11
Behavioral Scientists in Action
[email protected]
Assessment Errors….contd.
2. Not knowing How to Observe- The Methods
Assessment Centre follows rigorously, simple
standardized methods that simulate the job
partially/fully.
3. Not knowing Who should Observe – The
Assessor
Assessment Centre approach helps developing
guidelines for assessor selection and training
© CCMC Method Engineers Training Manual 1996 (2010 update)
12
Behavioral Scientists in Action
[email protected]
Common Assessment Errors
Method
Factor
Assessor
Minimizing errors
Linking to job
Defining
Relating to
observable
behaviors
© CCMC Method Engineers Training Manual 1996 (2010 update)
• Simplification Personal level
capability;
• Rigor (design)
Namely,
• Standardization
Knowledge,
Attitude, Skill
Rating errors
13
Behavioral Scientists in Action
[email protected]
Hi
2. Conscious
3. Conscious
incompetence
competence
Energy
Level
1. Unconscious 4. Unconscious
incompetence
competence
Lo
Lo
Effectiveness / Results
© CCMC Method Engineers Training Manual 1996 (2010 update)
Hi
14
Behavioral Scientists in Action
[email protected]
Session-2
Design elements of a battery of
Methods - Methods taxonomy and
illustration – types of competencies visà-vis fitting Methods – types of AC
outcome and Method fit – brief ideas of
subtler types, as for example, based on
degree of rigor or skill levels of
Assessors and so on.
© CCMC Method Engineers Training Manual 1996 (2010 update)
15
Behavioral Scientists in Action
[email protected]
Session-3
Design elements of Methods – method
specifications elements – Method content
design (lead, casting etc.) - Method process
design (control) – pilot and standardization
(reliability, security, content validity and true
validity etc.) – Method testing
Concepts of single stage vs. multi-stage
Methods - parallel Methods – sequential
supplementary Methods
© CCMC Method Engineers Training Manual 1996 (2010 update)
16
Behavioral Scientists in Action
[email protected]
Hands on exercise
Design of a prototype on the spot
(Any one of the following: case
method/ role play method/ on the spot
exercise method/ advance method/
simple work simulation)
© CCMC Method Engineers Training Manual 1996 (2010 update)
17
Behavioral Scientists in Action
[email protected]
Session-4
Practice tips – Take home assignment
suggestions
Suggestions for applied research –
suggestions for basic research
© CCMC Method Engineers Training Manual 1996 (2010 update)
18
Behavioral Scientists in Action
[email protected]
Simple criteria to improve Content
Validity Exercise
Candidates’ Tasks on the Method should reflect the
critical activities of the job
The choice of Methods batteries should reflect
Organization’s Values, principles and culture
The Format of the Method and the Process in which
participants are asked to respond should match the
reality on the job
The difficulty level and complexity of Methods must
fit the ‘difficulty level and complexity of the job.
The Task on the Method must be aligned to intrinsic
Strengths of the Method (not weakness)
© CCMC Method Engineers Training Manual 1996 (2010 update)
19