The recent article by Rich Tonowski certainly brought to the surface some of the thoughts I have had when reading and hearing about public safety departments all over the United States getting into large scale legal battles in regard to their selection processes.
Some of these litigation cases are certainly deep and complicated, such as Dukes v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. and Ricci v. DeStefano. However, others like Easterling v. Connecticut Department of Corrections and United States v. New Jersey Civil Service, are lessons in assessment basics that should always be at the forefront of an HR or assessment professional’s mind. Basics like ensuring that job analysis of a target position includes opinions and ratings from a diverse group of personnel and making sure to test candidates in areas that are directly related to job tasks.
During the month of January the ASR will focus on establishing standards you should keep in mind to ensure your department doesn’t end up as the lead story on tomorrow’s evening news. Our coverage kicks off with the next series from Robert Burd, on the topic of issues that might arise during test administration. Specifically he will discuss using successive hurdles, weighing different parts of the selection process and certification rules for eligibility lists. You can also look forward to a piece on the importance of Test Response Data, both to IPMA-HR and your agency as a whole. We will also be highlighting outside professional resources that are important for you and your staff to review and understand. Concluding the month long theme, we will bring you an in-depth look into non-cognitive testing, and how it can be implemented within your assessment process.