Speed Benchmarking Event Summary

Jerilyn Hayward, ServiceMaster

At this year’s LEC Speed Benchmarking event, more than 100 I-Os got together to share their experiences around specific topics.  Attendees were able to benchmark with each other, and conversations were led by our gracious table facilitators (listed below):

Assessments for Coaching and Development  Below are some highlights of what participants at the event discussed:

• Assessments for development require the same rigor of validation as assessments used for selection. 
• There is a trend to offer coaching for lower level leaders as well as executives, and not just when performance issues arise.
• Scalable assessments for development in large companies would be welcomed (but the need for qualified individuals to interpret the information may be a constraint). 
• Assessments are worthless if nothing is done with the results.  Participants have better outcomes if a debrief is offered as part of the assessment.  Keep in mind that assessments are tools to inform development, not the development itself. 
• Understand the unique situation of your organization in order to demonstrate value (culture, level, restructure, etc.) to leaders.

Explaining the Value of Assessments to Stakeholders  

• Boiling the data down to essential components is critical; business stakeholders don’t need the details and they don’t need “psych-speak.” 
• Stakeholders rely on their guts, so explain one data point of the many used in the decision-making process and tie it to their experience.  If they feel that a hiring process is working, they won’t always see why it should change.
• We can’t always count on validity and business results aligning, and this is the chance for I-O’s to exert influence at the level required to be strategic.

Gamification, Games, and Simulations

• The current preference is more toward simulations and gamification (incorporating game elements or features) over true game-based assessments.
• Face validity and job relevance are critical factors in design and implementation. 
• The rationale behind adopting gamified assessments needs to be considered (i.e., candidate experience, improved measurement of KSAOs and constructs); “because leadership wants a gamified assessment” is not acceptable justification.

Development Assessment Centers 

• Companies are seeking more customization of high-fidelity exercises, with organization-specific capabilities/leadership models.
• Development Assessment Centers are not an end in themselves and are being more actively connected to other development methods (e.g., coaching, workshops, assignments, micro-learning).
• Development Assessment Centers are being extended beyond senior leader levels to the full leadership pipeline.

Advances in Measurement Science  

• The business demand for short assessments can cause measurement problems, and no matter what the advances in measurement science are, with no buy-in they won’t be accepted within the business.
• Measurement capability is still challenged by leaders when an individual they know to be doing well on the job fails an assessment.

Innovation in Mobile Assessment

• Be aware of who is using mobile devices; look for ways not to lose lower SES candidates. 
• Will generational differences between texting and typing impact scoring patterns?  How should we use simulations with data entry across device types? 
• Can DIF be used to examine which aspects of assessment performance are related to device type versus true competence?
• Can time-tracking features be loaded into phones in advance so they aren’t reliant on Internet connectivity?   
• What potential do smartphone features provide to unlock video, voice, and even physical examinations when job relevant (NLP, voice capture and analysis, video feature analysis)? 
• What potential exists in virtual reality and augmented reality, for simulations and realistic RJPs? 
• Using mobile is now a necessity to ensure candidate flow and increase diversity. 
• Focus on features of devices, rather than device type (e.g., big screens versus small screen, processing power, etc.) and design down to the smallest device. 
• Changes in design can cause change in completion time and candidate experience; for short screenings, completion rates are high, but for longer leadership assessments, completion drops off. 
• Count on having the need for help desk personnel to resolve issues. 
• Take care to consider reasonable accommodations of disabled individuals.

Please join the SIOP Speed Benchmarking event in Austin, brought to you by the Career and Professional Development for Practitioners Committee!