Home2020-02-11T20:56:00-04:00

Improving the Interview Part 1: The Individual Selection Interview

The Interview. No other selection device is as ubiquitous, while at the same time as misunderstood. Like an A-list celebrity, all you have to say is “the interview” and everyone can tell you stories, generate an opinion regarding love it or hate it, and tell you why it has received too much (or too little) notoriety, press, and attention.

In the next two blogs, I will look at the topic of “Improving the Interview.” This month, we will discuss the Individual selection interview, which is conducted in a one-on-one setting between an interviewer and an interviewee. In the next blog, we will investigate improving the board or panel interview.

If Everyone Uses It, What Could Be Wrong? 

Can a technique that every organization uses really be that bad? Well, the problem with the interview is that early studies found that the typical unstructured interview (referred to as “unstructured” because the interviewer was left to conduct and rate the interview as he or she wished) was not very reliable or valid. That is, despite the beliefs of human resource personnel and supervisors, the traditional interview was not a very good indicator of talent, merit, or the best candidate for the job.

The saving grace for the interview was the finding that introducing structure greatly increased the reliability and the validity of the interview. Depending upon the particular study, adding structure to an interview could double its validity as a predictor of job performance, turning it into one of the more valid selection devices.

Structure of Questions and Rating Scales

Structure can be introduced both into the questions asked as well as the way in which interviewee performance is evaluated. In terms of the questions themselves, each candidate should be asked the same questions in the same manner. The questions should present the interviewee with a situation and ask how he or she would respond, or a candidate may be asked to describe how they may have handled a problem situation in a past job. (more…)

By |April 13th, 2016|Categories: Assessment, Interviews|Tags: , |4 Comments

Get Your Organization Involved in a Research Study!

The Research Department at IPMA-HR is gearing up for a new research study and we need your organization’s help.  Participation in the study is free!

Study’s Objective:

The online survey will be conducted with public sector employees from all generations.  The study’s main objective is to determine similarities and differences that exist across the generations related to employment values.  Most importantly, results from the study will provide for our members information on what is key to recruit and retain different generations of public sector staff.

Organization’s Profile:

Our aim is to have participants in this study whose organizations have a workforce comprised of close to 10% millennials (Born 1981-1997; ages 19 to 35) or more.

Your Reward for Participating:

  • You will receive a free copy of the report of findings.
  • You will also receive a free copy of your organization’s results
  • In addition, for free, you can add a custom question to the survey.

Please, contact Melissa Paluch at mpaluch@ipma-hr.org by April 11th if you are interested in participating. Don’t hesitate, as slots are filling up quickly!

By |April 5th, 2016|Categories: Announcements|Comments Off on Get Your Organization Involved in a Research Study!

IPMA-HR Consortium Testing …Save Time and Money

Do you want to save money and time administering IPMA-HR’s entry-level and promotional tests?

As the demand for online testing increases, we want to stay ahead of the curve and offer you the most cost and time efficient options available.  IPMA-HR is considering the development of consortium testing and would like your feedback on the process.

Consortium testing is, in essence, a centralized test center located within a region that can administer IPMA-HR tests to large groups. The results are then offered to several departments for review. The advantage of a consortium is twofold: candidates only need to take one test, and departments find cost savings while still maintaining high standards in finding the right people for open positions.

Consortium testing . . .

Is an alternative for administrative and budget-conscious departments, gathering together a large group of candidates across multiple departments for testing purposes.

  • Is done at a local community college or other IPMA-HR approved test site.
  • Is administered by an approved IPMA-HR representative.
  • Handles test administration for multiple departments at the same time, saving money and time for candidates and administrators.

Check out the FAQs for additional information.

Please take the quick Consortium Testing Interest Survey so we can gauge interest in this new administration service.

Thank you!

By |February 17th, 2016|Categories: Announcements, News, Products & Services, Survey|Comments Off on IPMA-HR Consortium Testing …Save Time and Money

Should I Provide Assessment Feedback?

The topic of my blog for this month deals with employers providing developmental feedback to candidates based upon the results of employment test or assessment.  Although the feedback of results from employment tests is common in many other countries, it is less frequently the case that such feedback is provided in the United States.

My topic this month deals with using assessment or test results in order to provide developmental feedback and suggestions to employees.  Although I will be dealing with feedback from tests in general, I will pay special attention to assessments that allow for a more in-depth, comprehensive view of the individuals, such as offered by the use of assessment centers.

[For more information on assessment centers, see Public Safety Assessment Center System (PSACS) and Assessment Center Educational Materials (ACEM)]

Some Findings from a Quick Literature Search

I had a graduate student perform a quick search of the current literature. Our findings regarding policies toward providing developmental feedback by employers in the United States were that it is rare for organizations to provide scores or give feedback to job applicants for pre-employment tests.  It is more common for promotional candidates, but even there the exact type of feedback may skew toward simply providing results or scores.  Providing expansive or detailed feedback is most likely to occur where the tests are used specifically for training or developmental purposes.

As for assessments centers, The International Congress on Assessment Center Methods has a document entitled The 2014 Guidelines and Ethical Considerations for Assessment Center Operations (6th Edition).  According to their guidelines, feedback should be provided and if the assesses are members of the organization than the employee has the right to “read any formal, summary, written reports concerning their own performance and recommendations that are prepared and made available to management.” (more…)

By |January 20th, 2016|Categories: Assessment, Assessment Centers, Assessment Feedback, Uncategorized|Tags: , |Comments Off on Should I Provide Assessment Feedback?

New 2016 Reading Lists for Police Promotional Tests

The reading lists for the PSUP 301, 302 and 303 Police Corporal/Sergeant, PDET 201 and 202 Police Detective and PL 301 Police Lieutenant test have been updated to reflect new editions released of books that appear on the list.

Request a reading list. (more…)

By |January 19th, 2016|Categories: Reading List Update|Tags: , , , |Comments Off on New 2016 Reading Lists for Police Promotional Tests

Pricing Updates for 2016

Please note the following price changes that have taken effect immediately related to IPMA-HR’s Assessment Products:

  • While we continue to offer free shipping via UPS Ground, our rush shipping fee has increased from $20 plus 10% of the order total to $20 plus 15% of the order total.
  • If you utilize our scoring service through the University of Maryland, the base fee for that service has increased from $40 to $50. The $0.50 per candidate fee remains the same.

All other pricing from 2015 remains the same. If you have any concerns or questions, please feel free to contact us.

By |January 13th, 2016|Categories: Announcements|Comments Off on Pricing Updates for 2016